where did miko go after she died?

[DarkElfGangsta]

Soon made it sound as if shes going somewhere ok, but since shes not a paladin, and she and her horse are gonna be in diff places, where is she going to? what is her alignment before she died?

[Meg]

Miko didn't die. We gave her to a nice farm family, where there's lots of fresh air, and plenty of room for her to run free.

Sorry. I'd always assumed she went to Lawful Neutral heaven, whatever that is. But that's a good question about the paladins. Do divine casters have a separate, "better" area of the afterlife, or are they just in with the proletariat?

[chiasaur11]

Pittsburg. (Calvin and Hobbes was great, wasn't it?)

[AlphaTheRed]

When Roy was going to Lawful Good heaven, the cleric who died fighting Redcloak during the battle of Azure City was standing in the same line, so it seems that everyone, regardless of spellcasting ability, ends up in the same place.

And, judging from what the celestial clerk told Roy, Miko is probably going straight to the True Neutral bin.

[Surfing HalfOrc]

Ouch! You do realize you're opening a huge bag of worms with this one, right? The is what people argue over at Giantitp.com Forums since they can't argue sex, politics or religion...

Anyways, there are several schools of thought, all of which you should be able to see if you monitor these threads for the next 24 hours to 2 years.

I am of the opinion that Miko remained in the Lawful Good category, but will not be able to climb Mt. Celestia and enter the city at the top level anytime soon. This means that Windstriker will be able to come down from the Celestial Stables and visit her on one of the docks of the Celestial Sea, thus fulfilling the wording of Soon Kim's speech to Miko just before she died.

It's Miko's LACK of a Final Destination that makes me think Rich has something else planned for her. Others will, of course, disagree... :smallamused:

[Solaris]

My vote is the LN afterlife. Mechanus, I believe. She maybe went to Celestia.

[Turkish Delight]

Sorry. I'd always assumed she went to Lawful Neutral heaven, whatever that is.

Mechanus. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mechanus) Where the Deer and the Modrons play.


But that's a good question about the paladins. Do divine casters have a separate, "better" area of the afterlife, or are they just in with the proletariat?

Depends on the DM. I think there may be some fringe benefits to having been a Paladin in life on Mount Celestia in vanilla AD&D, but I can't remember exactly what they are. Usually the variance in eternal reward is more associated what deity you worship, so perhaps their undying faith in the Zodiac-ripoff Gods secures them an eternal free coupon to the buffet at the Celestial Chine-eehh, Azurite restaurant.

[Turkish Delight]

And, judging from what the celestial clerk told Roy, Miko is probably going straight to the True Neutral bin.

Miko? True Neutral? I don't see it. She slipped near the end, when she cleaved her liege lord in two, resisted arrest for it, and escaped from prison under extremely specious logic, but she spent so much time being insanely lawful that I'd guess she'd have had to have spent a lot more effort indulging her chaotic side to slip to neutral. After all, she was trying to be lawful even as she did those things; that clerk Roy dealt with, at least, apparently gives point for such.

Her drop from good to neutral seems much more likely than her drop from lawful to neutral.

[The Vorpal Tribble]

Arcadia is most likely. It's law-aligned, and though not good-aligned, it's well disposed to good. Sounds like a likely place.

Either that or she reincarnated. Possibly the purple worm...

[Sir_Elderberry]

I like the Arcadia idea. I don't know that she went Evil enough to end up as LN, although that's possible as well. I think the comments about Windstriker imply that she's not in Celestia, unless you twist words and planes around to make it work.

[Starscream]

Actually, she lives with me now.

Just showed up on my doorstop one day looking cranky, and holding one of my "roommate needed" fliers.

I've had worse roommates, I guess. Pays her share of the rent on time, does the dishes when it's her turn. But she also forgets to pick up her socks and once threatened to skewer me in the name of some gods or other when she caught me downloading an mp3.

[DarkElfGangsta]

Actually, she lives with me now.

Just showed up on my doorstop one day looking cranky, and holding one of my "roommate needed" fliers.

I've had worse roommates, I guess. Pays her share of the rent on time, does the dishes when it's her turn. But she also forgets to pick up her socks and once threatened to skewer me in the name of some gods or other when she caught me downloading an mp3.

you deserve a nobel prize for being incredibly awesome.

[J.J.J-H-Schmidt]

i believe that miko went to the LN line, at least untill she gets her attonment on, which might be pretty hard in her case, unless she went to paladin purgatory...

[Zevox]

But that's a good question about the paladins. Do divine casters have a separate, "better" area of the afterlife, or are they just in with the proletariat?
Presumably, they'd go to spend eternity with whatever deity they devoted themselves to, assuming they did an acceptable job of it. Whether that's better or not depends on your perspective. They'd probably say it is.

Anyway, I'd have sent her to Mechanus (LN) myself, but if her judgment was generous Arcadia (Lawful, mildly good plane, between Mechanus and Celestia) might be possible. Then again, Roy nearly got deemed TN for just abandoning Elan to the bandits, and it seems to me that Miko murdering Shojo was a much worse offense than that, so maybe she moved even further from her preferred destination than Mechanus.

Zevox

[AshDesert]

I'm of the opinion that she had done enough good in her life (just because she's annoying doesn't mean she didn't do good:smallwink:) and stayed Lawful in the end enough that she gets to go to Arcadia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arcadia_(Dungeons_%26_Dragons)) or some other "border-plane" between Neutral and Good on the Lawful side of things. I'm sure there will be others who disagree with me:smalltongue:.

[Green Bean]

OP, I hope you know the horror you've just unleashed. :smalleek:

On topic, I like to think she ended up in some version of a Good afterlife; the standards for Good are a lot more lax than the standards for being a Paladin. Crazy or not, she became a Paladin at a very young age, which means she went for her entire adult life without a single Evil act. That's a lot of mitigation on her karmic record, regardless of how Evil you think she acted towards the end.

[DarkElfGangsta]

OP, I hope you know the horror you've just unleashed. :smalleek:


WHY do people keep saying this. this is a forum. it is for debating things. a forum where everyone knew everything and agreed on everything is boring.
let us debate things in this forum without being scared of other people's opinions!:smallfurious: also thanks for informative answer.

[Turkish Delight]

Then again, Roy nearly got deemed TN for just abandoning Elan to the bandits, and it seems to me that Miko murdering Shojo was a much worse offense than that, so maybe she moved even further from her preferred destination than Mechanus.

That clerk even hypothetically suggesting Roy could be rightfully shunted over to the True Neutral afterlife always seemed bizarre to me. A lifetime of lawful good deeds undone primarily by one temporary moment of weakness, quickly retracted, and her supervisors wouldn't even blink at it? If I were one of her supervisors, after finding that out, I'd flat-out fire her. It simply isn't that extreme an evil or chaotic act.

[DarkElfGangsta]

That clerk even hypothetically suggesting Roy could be rightfully shunted over to the True Neutral afterlife always seemed bizarre to me. A lifetime of lawful good deeds undone primarily by one temporary moment of weakness, quickly retracted, and her supervisors wouldn't even blink at it? If I were one of her supervisors, after finding that out, I'd flat-out fire her. It simply isn't that extreme an evil or chaotic act.

well imagine a person who spends all his life taking care of the infirm old and sick, becoming a pillar of support to the community flipping out and punching a baby in the face or something. that is pretty much something to get kicked out of the LG pile for. I guess the more good and rightgeous you are, the more the law is strict with you? the bigger you are the harder you fall?

[Zevox]

WHY do people keep saying this. this is a forum. it is for debating things. a forum where everyone knew everything and agreed on everything is boring.
Because this topic has been debated many a time in the past, and almost always produced very heated arguments. Some of which, if I recall, got bad enough that Roland locked them.

Zevox

[DarkElfGangsta]

Because this topic has been debated many a time in the past, and almost always produced very heated arguments. Some of which, if I recall, got bad enough that Roland locked them.

Zevox

okay I don't want to get another thread locked by chuck noriss Roland so let's keep it civil peeps:smallsmile:

[KillerQueen]

I personally think she's in the same little area Eugene is in, meditating on how she went wrong, scrying on those down below.

[thubby]

TN assuming massive laps in sanity can shift alignment.
she betrayed the man she was sworn to, escaped after being arrested by a legitimate authority.
and i think the non-good is pretty obvious.

[Herald Alberich]

I think Arcadia is likely as well. It's only one plane over on the alignment wheel, so not much of a trip for Windstriker.


Pittsburg.

Ouch, no one deserves that. :smalltongue:

[Watcher]

She went to Crazy bitch heaven.

I think all the paladins expected her to go to Celestia, and she went to Celestia's demiplane of judgment or whatever, but then was kicked over to Arcadia.

[Kish]

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=7120677&highlight=sufficient#post7120677

[Callista]

well imagine a person who spends all his life taking care of the infirm old and sick, becoming a pillar of support to the community flipping out and punching a baby in the face or something. that is pretty much something to get kicked out of the LG pile for. I guess the more good and rightgeous you are, the more the law is strict with you? the bigger you are the harder you fall?It's the same way with evil, too. One major Good act can flip your alignment pretty quickly (Darth Vader, anyone? You can make a case for a neutral or even good alignment there at the end). The impact of a lot of Good on a Good character is outweighed by the impact of a single strongly Evil act; similarly, the impact of a lot of Evil is outweighed by a single strongly Good act.

I think that's because alignment changes in your thoughts and feelings before it changes in your actions, and especially with Lawful types, you'll be acting the old way out of habit, thinking the new way, and eventually something's just got to give. It's not usually dramatic like that, but it can be. If you're a LG person who does a strongly CE thing like killing your superior, who doesn't deserve death, then it's clear you've been thinking in non-LG ways for quite a while. Thoughts aren't actions, though, so short of magic you wouldn't change alignment just for being tempted to do something out of alignment. It's when someone of one alignment changes outlook to another alignment, and then does something drastically opposed to his current alignment, that sudden changes can happen.

Of course, said single alignment-changing act is going to be very out-of-place unless it is a reasonable thing for the character to do; so if you're writing or RPing a story where a character falls or is redeemed (moves an alignment step, or even two, all at once) in a single act, you'd better foreshadow it and make it in-character, or it's just going to leave people going, "But... but... s/he wouldn't DO that!"

[martinkou]

Acheron - she's so concerned about enforcing the law to the point that the spirit of the law is lost. Fighting without a cause, enforcing the law for conformity rather than for good, that's what Acheron is.

[Selene]

I'd say Mechanus, although Acheron also seems reasonable to me. I certainly wouldn't want to be the deva who has to explain to the Twelve gods that I let her into Celestia. She not only fell, but she refused to accept their judgment of wrongdoing. They can't be very happy with her.

[Shale]

Pittsburg. (Calvin and Hobbes was great, wasn't it?)

All things considered, she'd rather be in Philadelphia.

[J.J.J-H-Schmidt]

when miko died her soul shattered into many pieces, each one of which resides within the heart of all oots fan

[Sewblon]

I think True Neutral afterlife, the idea behind her character is she was always more Lawful than Good, and summarily bisecting her octogenarian lord and benefactor must have included at least one cardinal sin.

[Boogastreehouse]

OP, I hope you know the horror you've just unleashed. :smalleek:


WHY do people keep saying this. this is a forum. it is for debating things. a forum where everyone knew everything and agreed on everything is boring.
let us debate things in this forum without being scared of other people's opinions!:smallfurious: also thanks for informative answer.



One of the reasons people keep saying things like this because discussions like this occur so often that they become tedious. I've only been on the forum a year (and lurking for about a year before that) and I've probably seen a dozen Miko-alignment debates.

Once you've seen a few of these, you also see how easily they can get nasty. This one's been pretty mild so far, so maybe enough time has passed that the utterance of Miko's name will not bring the white-hot anger of the Miko-haters into explosive contact with the icy glare of the Miko-defenders.

But seriously, discussions on the alignment of Miko, Belkar, Redcloak or Vaarsuvius; whether an act that Haley committed was morally justified; debates over Vaarsuvius' gender; threads that heap praise on O-Chul; these have been so done to death that many long-time forum-readers just throw up their hands in exasperation at the appearance of a new thread.

[Asta Kask]

Megacity 1. where she hooked up with Judge Dredd and went on enforcing THE LAW!

[LuisDantas]

I don't see Miko as ever having been LG or even LN, so it is the TN afterlife all the way. The subrealm reserved for those who need to continuously delude themselves (namely, the insane) specifically.

Even more adequate would be a true, final death. I don't see Miko as someone who would choose to have an afterlife if offered the choice, myself.

[Tackyhillbillu]

I see her in Mechanus. Which isn't the greatest place, but it is better then Hell.

Or New Jersey.

[Eldan]

Acheron - she's so concerned about enforcing the law to the point that the spirit of the law is lost. Fighting without a cause, enforcing the law for conformity rather than for good, that's what Acheron is.

She would also be allowed to fight endless armies of mostly evil soldiers.

But I support the Arcadia theory as well. The more militant Harmonium people would be right up her alley.

[hamishspence]

There is certainly precedent for a single act, or massive change of perspective, leading to a full change of alignment (DMG)- however, this tends to be the exception rather than the rule.

You could make the case that Miko's perspective on alignment changed away from Lawful with her killing of Shojo. The Giant says something along these lines in War & XPs.

"Hinjo's reaction was that of someone who believed in the law, whereas Miko's was that of someone who believed herself above the law."

The deva, when discussing Roy, said her superiors wouldn't blink at her putting him in the NG afterlife.

The issue of him going straight into TN, is a seperate one- "if you hadn't gone back for him, whether or not anything bad happened to him, you would have gone straight into TN"

"You're trying" being the deciding factor, may only apply to borderline cases. Roy was a borderline case- but was Miko?

I'd say there are good arguments for her being neither Good, nor Lawful- and thus going to TN afterlife at best- but it's not entirely certain either way.

[factotum]

I don't see Miko as ever having been LG

Unfortunately the D&D rules disagree with you. Miko was a paladin and therefore by definition was LG--the fact she was a particularly badly played LG was the entire point Rich was making with her character; e.g. "this is how you DON'T play a paladin".

[LuisDantas]

Unfortunately the D&D rules disagree with you. Miko was a paladin and therefore by definition was LG--the fact she was a particularly badly played LG was the entire point Rich was making with her character; e.g. "this is how you DON'T play a paladin".

Maybe so, but then there is the often-mentioned behavior of the prequel books' Paladins. From that and Miko's own canon appearances it seems clear to me that in the OOtS-verse Paladins (Azure City Paladins, at least) are bound to their allegiance to the 12 Gods, far more so than to any alignment.

The Giant made the world, so of course he is quite free to trump the standard D&D rules if he wants to - as we know he did in some specific stances, in fact.

So no, I don't see how Miko could be anywhere better than the Outlands.

[lord_khaine]

TN assuming massive laps in sanity can shift alignment.
she betrayed the man she was sworn to, escaped after being arrested by a legitimate authority.
and i think the non-good is pretty obvious.

Really? i see it the other way, and considder Miko LG all the way though.

[LuisDantas]

How do you explain her behavior from killing Shojo until her death, then?

Is it your understanding that insanity excuses one from following one's own alignment, perhaps?

[FujinAkari]

The Giant made the world, so of course he is quite free to trump the standard D&D rules if he wants to - as we know he did in some specific stances, in fact.

Except that we explicitly know that Miko is the result of Rich asking himself "Can I make a Lawful Good character be a villian while remaining Lawful Good?" so claiming that the Giant is ignoring the rules is to ignore his statement on the matter :P


How do you explain her behavior from killing Shojo until her death, then?

Is it your understanding that insanity excuses one from following one's own alignment, perhaps?

Her behavior from killing Shojo until the time of her death was still LN at worst, with the glaring exception of the attack on Shojo and Hinjo.

[hamishspence]

What standard does OoTS use to define good?

In Roy's judgement by the Deva, the first things she says about why he's Good is:

"you regularly risk yourself against the forces of evil without expecting any kind of compensation"

By this standard- Miko was Good. Combine that with her eagerness to help people in trouble (such as the kidnapped dirt farmers) and her less laudable attitudes are excusable (berating people for removing a tag from a mattress, ranting at the Order for not wanting to sleep in a ditch and eat lichen).

However, a big part of Good is respect for life and dignity of other intelligent beings. Once she killed Shojo and attacked Hinjo, it became very hard to say that she was continuing to show this.

If we hold Miko to the same standards the Deva was holding Roy to, she was Good until she killed Shojo- at which point her Goodness, or at least, her place in a Good afterlife, came seriously into question.

The Origin of PCs paladin, by contrast, was Good in Name Only.

And the same case can be made for the SoD paladins- "respect for life" didn't seem to be a big priority when the slaughtered goblin children after they had killed the guy they came for.

So Miko was Lawful Good till her breakdown.

After that she was possibly not Lawful, possibly not Good.
(and, whether she was Lawful Good or not, had committed acts more serious than the one that would have barred Roy from the Lawful Good afterlife)

[hamishspence]

He also said she was "sticking to her Lawful Good code, albiet by a razor-thin margin"

Implying she was intended to be very close to the borderline, all the way through.

Not so much a paragon of Lawful Goodness, as an "only just LG" person.

Making it more plausible that her breakdown pulled her out of LG territory entirely.

[FujinAkari]

He also said she was "sticking to her Lawful Good code, albiet by a razor-thin margin"

Implying she was intended to be very close to the borderline, all the way through.

Not so much a paragon of Lawful Goodness, as an "only just LG" person.

Making it more plausible that her breakdown pulled her out of LG territory entirely.

This isn't in question. It actually reinforces my point that Luis' claim that Miko was never LG is explicitly denied by the author.

[lord_khaine]

How do you explain her behavior from killing Shojo until her death, then?

Is it your understanding that insanity excuses one from following one's own alignment, perhaps?

She was still doing what she belived was good, it was just unfortunately that she had completely misunderstood the situation, and it was not imrpoved by the hostile relationship she had by then with Roy.

[hamishspence]

"Not ever Lawful Good" was a bit much.

Not ever better than borderline within the strip, is a better case.

Belief isn't really the issue- Atonement spell stresses that even if the act was not believed by the paladin to be evil, they still need to atone for it. It will just cost the person casting the atonement spell no XP.

Its a common trope for an evil character to believe that their every act is Good, in a fictional setting.

[LuisDantas]

Except that we explicitly know that Miko is the result of Rich asking himself "Can I make a Lawful Good character be a villian while remaining Lawful Good?" so claiming that the Giant is ignoring the rules is to ignore his statement on the matter :P

Indeed, that is exactly what I am doing. I figure Rich changed his mind about Miko, be it consciously or not.

May I be wrong? Of course I can. But that is my take on Miko and I am sticking to it.


Her behavior from killing Shojo until the time of her death was still LN at worst, with the glaring exception of the attack on Shojo and Hinjo.

And her self-serving self-delusion after that, which IMO puts her quite confortably inside TN territory from that point on.

Assuming, of course, that she wasn't there from the beginning. Her behavior implies that she was. Despite what others feel, ever since we met her she expected rewards, albeit of the self-image variety.

[hamishspence]

But whenever someone tries to say something that might boost her self-image:

"Flattery breeds ego. I did nothing but serve my lord"

Suggesting that it must be a subliminated urge.

[LuisDantas]

But whenever someone tries to say something that might boost her self-image:

"Flattery breeds ego. I did nothing but serve my lord"

Suggesting that it must be a subliminated urge.

Far more like one she is dishonest with herself about, really.

[hamishspence]

Depends on how much multiple motivations count.

If there is real benevolence in her desire to help people in distress, a secret desire to be admired probably doesn't nullify it.

[lord_khaine]

And her self-serving self-delusion after that, which IMO puts her quite confortably inside TN territory from that point on.

Assuming, of course, that she wasn't there from the beginning. Her behavior implies that she was. Despite what others feel, ever since we met her she expected rewards, albeit of the self-image variety.

And her continual fight, for what she belived to be good puts her inside LG IMO.

[LuisDantas]

Depends on how much multiple motivations count.

If there is real benevolence in her desire to help people in distress, a secret desire to be admired probably doesn't nullify it.

True... but I simply don't see that in the Miko that was actually present in the published strips. Miko is not like that, not at all.

[LuisDantas]

And her continual fight, for what she belived to be good puts her inside LG IMO.

Really? It's her insistence to claim that she believed to be in the good side despite all evidence to the contrary that convinces me that she had a hard time being Lawful and was, in fact, quite insane and therefore True Neutral.

She was driven, if not all-out stubborn, but that does not help in making her Lawful OR Good.

[hamishspence]

And her continual fight, for what she belived to be good puts her inside LG IMO.

You can fight for what you believe to be good, and not be good yourself, in D&D- numerous books from Lords of Darkness to Exemplars of Evil bear this out.

on helping others- the dirt farmer strip is the main one. Miko is otherwise more concerned with punishing those that are evil than helping those that need help- still, the trait is there.

Bonus strips in War & XPs also suggest Miko occasionally tries to reach out to others. But, she does so poorly.

On Insane = TN, in some D&D splatbooks at least, insanity + atrocity = Evil. The sort of guy "driven by their insanity to do atrocious things"

Might depend on how atrocious her activities were. So far before death she killed Shojo, tried to kill Hinjo, and these seem like possibly the worst activities.

(trying to kill Belkar, Sabine, and blowing the gate, are generally seen as less questionable- at least based on the info she had available to her)

[LuisDantas]

on helping others- the dirt farmer strip is the main one. Miko is otherwise more concerned with punishing those that are evil than helping those that need help- still, the trait is there.

But it seems so secondary to everything else. Miko seemed far more motivated by a missing cushion tag and by the opportunity to display her martial prowess than by any true compassion to the dirt farmers. Or, really, to anyone else.


Bonus strips in War & XPs also suggest Miko occasionally tries to reach out to others. But, she does so poorly.

Indeed. Alignment is to some degree a matter of skill. Mainly, of having the skill to deal with unpleasant circunstances and difficult decisions without losing grace and mental clarity.

[hamishspence]

her outrage at Belkar's slaying of the prison guard may also be an example of redirected compassion.

It may be a minor motivation for her, but it's enough to keep her out of LN- at least initially.

I figure Miko has enough compassion to be Good- but only just.

And compassion isn't enough if the being does a lot of evil things as well- Serenity's The Operative is a prime example.

[Amiel]

Being of corrupt nature and evil thought, Miko should logically descend into the Nine Circles of Perdition, to be resculpted and remade as a pit fiend.

[LuisDantas]

her outrage at Belkar's slaying of the prison guard may also be an example of redirected compassion.

Or it may be many other things, including despise for Belkar and irritation for having one of her subjects escaping and spreading havoc.


It may be a minor motivation for her, but it's enough to keep her out of LN- at least initially.

It is all in the eyes of the beholder, I guess.


I figure Miko has enough compassion to be Good- but only just.

She does have her moments, particularly in her initial interations with Durkon and her reaction to Roy's admission that he behaved poorly towards her (see #250, IIRC). It is too bad that Roy blundered so much at that point.

All that said, the fact of the matter is that everyone has their own reasons for their behavior, whatever they turn out to be. Letting circunstances carry oneself away from one's duty marks one as probably not Lawful. Letting oneself do what he wants as opposed to what would bring the greater good marks one as probably not Good. Deluding oneself to try and solve that conflict marks one as quite likely not Good.

By those parameters, Miko is in dire straits.

[hamishspence]

Certainly after killing Shojo- I was thinking of before.

Hence "miko was only just Lawful good before killing Shojo, and possibly not either afterwards"

While Miko isn't a tabletop game PC- I see her alignment as working a bit like that- LG written on character sheet- played as very, very close to what the DM would tolerate a Lawful Good paladin as doing and being-

until finally one big act and DM institutes a Fall, and possibly (I think so, but can't be sure of) an alignment shift.

[LuisDantas]

Wouldn't that make her a criticism of the alignment system then?

[lord_khaine]

Really? It's her insistence to claim that she believed to be in the good side despite all evidence to the contrary that convinces me that she had a hard time being Lawful and was, in fact, quite insane and therefore True Neutral.

She was driven, if not all-out stubborn, but that does not help in making her Lawful OR Good.

Sure it does, she gave everything she had, including her entire life for the cause of Good, it is just a shame that a paladin monk only have 1 dump stat, and thats int.

[hamishspence]

The giant did say "worst way to play a paladin" after all.

The alignment system, at its worst, regarding paladins who feel the need to police everyone around them.

And badly played paladins in general.

The phrase "adhering to the letter, rather than the spirit, of her alignment" was used in War & XPs.

a bit like a player saying:

"I make sacrifices to help others- by going out and risking my life fighting monsters to save lives"

DM: "But you are also abrasive and bully NPCs half the time"

Player "That's different"

[Querzis]

Shes gone to Mechanus. As far as I'm concerned, she was always more LN then LG anyway. Killing Shojo and destroying the gate to follow her crazy code and her 'destiny' was just the last straw.

And by the way, people have to realize that, unlike the good/evil axis where both matter, as far as the Lawful/Chaotic axis is concerned, intent and ideals matter a lot more then actions. A chaotic man can serve a king loyally if he does it because he like or respect the king himself with total disregards to his title. And on the other hand, there is absolutely nothing chaotic about killing a king if you do it because you serve a higher purpose (or think you serve a higher purpose in Miko case) or because you have to punish him for his crime in a judge/jury/executioner kind of way. Yes Miko killed her ruler, but she did it in a very Lawful way for Lawful reasons. There is some actions that are good or evil no matter what but no action is chaotic or lawful.

And by the way, Windstriker visiting her means absolutely nothing. Someone in the Celestials realms could technically go visit the abyss if he wanted to, its just that he would get killed as soon as he got there. All the afterlives are connected through the Outlands. The people in Mechanus certainly woudnt care if Windstriker would come to visit her as long as he got an appointment.

[RickDaily12]

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0464.html

Consider the following...

Despite killing Shojo, Miko has always done what she considered the gods wanted her to do. She was always freaking annoying by always blowing EVERYTHING out of preportion, but her motives were always to help the greater good... sorta... in most case...:smalltongue:

But Soon gives us a BIG clue here.

To turn from an Ex-Paladin back to a Paladin again takes LOTS of time. More than less than 3 days. At the very least, no DM I know would give you that short to return to a Paladin. Being Good Aligned alone just doesn't cut it.

I think that even when she killed Shojo, you can STILL call her Lawful, because she did it for the benefit of the Twelve Gods. She thought that they commanded her to do it for the sake of Azure City, and the Gate. And I think you can STILL call her good, because she was doing THAT to protect the tens of thousands of innocents whom don't even know they've about to be attacked. It was an Evil and Chaotic Act, but the motivations behind it were both Lawful and Good. She didn't change her goal in Alignments at all! She was just mistaken with an incident that will be impossible for her to change now.

Also, think back to the conversation between the two:

:miko:"Will... will I get to see Windstriker again?"

"Of course. He has been waiting for you. He will visit you as much as he is able."

Windstriker is a celestial beast. He resides in the Celestial Realm when he ISN'T constantly being called down by Miko. So as you can see, if she was going to be able to see him again, and only Lawful Goods can go to the Celestial Realm, then I see no way that Miko isn't still Lawful Good.

She's still a (insert obvious word here) but I decided to leave that part out.:smallbiggrin::smalltongue:

[LuisDantas]

Sure it does, she gave everything she had, including her entire life for the cause of Good, it is just a shame that a paladin monk only have 1 dump stat, and thats int.

Er, Fanaticism hinders lawfulness and goodness.

[hamishspence]

There is some actions that are good or evil no matter what but no action is chaotic or lawful.

This one is debated a lot, with a few people saying "the only books that say some acts are evil no matter what are non-core- so they don't count"

Also with lawful- one (non-core) WoTC book has a few Always Lawful acts to go with the Always Evil ones.

Mostly involving obeying even when you don't personally respect the guys you are obeying. When you go to court, it makes the "wrong" decision- and you accept their judgement anyway- that's listed as extra-Lawful. When your authority gives "stupid" orders and you follow them- that's extra-Lawful.
And so on.

The paladin's obeying Shojo after he'd gone senile, may count. Miko clearly seemed to think Shojo's order to not kill Belkar was stupid- but she obeyed it anyway- because at that time, obedience to authority, even senile authority, was still important to her.

[Querzis]

Er, Fanaticism hinders lawfulness and goodness.

Goodness yes, lawfulness no. Quite the opposite in fact, fanaticism is the extreme of Order while randomness is the extreme of Chaos.


Mostly involving obeying even when you don't personally respect the guys you are obeying. When you go to court, it makes the "wrong" decision- and you accept their judgement anyway- that's listed as extra-Lawful. When your authority gives "stupid" orders and yoy follow them- that's extra-Lawful.

...you do realize that you got into the intent right there? Obeying isnt lawful, obeying if you dont respect the guy you're obeying is lawful. Following the court judgement isnt lawful, following the court judgement when you think (or know) its wrong is lawful. Following orders isnt Lawful, following order you find stupid is lawful. Thats my point.

[hamishspence]

It doesn't give an intent per se- but the assumed intent is "To avoid destabilizing the chain of command."

"why are you obeying this stupid authority?"
"Because it is authority"

so to speak.

Technically you can have fanatical Chaos guys- who believe any authority is wrong- and go to any length to bring it down.

"Because it is" doesn't really speak of intent.

"Because the harm caused by following a stupid order will be less than the harm caused by not obeying and thus causing massive breakdown" is more intent-based.

[Querzis]

It doesn't give an intent per se- but the assumed intent is "To avoid destabilizing the chain of command."

"why are you obeying this stupid authority?"
"Because it is authority"

so to speak.

Thats not an action. Obeying is the action. Talking is an action. Saying that you follow the autority even if you think its stupid is stating your ideals and intents.


Technically you can have fanatical Chaos guys- who believe any authority is wrong- and go to any length to bring it down.

No they would be lawful. Anarchism definitly isnt especially chaotic, just look at the beginning of the URSS. As a matter of fact, any guy that hate any authority strike me as lawful since hes doing a generalization while the point of being chaotic is to be whimsical.

[hamishspence]

Intent, in this case, is "why you are following orders that appear stupid"

I wonder what a LE guy's rationale for following an order to charge, when he thinks doing so will waste his life to no purpose, would be?

On anarchy and authority- we are using PHB definitions. Legitimate Authority and Law are intertwined. Lawful people respect legitimate authority.

Doesn't mean that chaotic people oppose legitimate authority, but it does mean that "There is no legitimate authority" doesn't fit into the PHB definition of Law.

[Querzis]

Intent, in this case, is "why you are following orders that appear stupid"

Hum isnt that what I said? Yes, the word «why» imply that you are questionning someone about his intent.


I wonder what a LE guy's rationale for following an order to charge, when he thinks doing so will waste his life to no purpose, would be?

Same as the LG guy really.


Doesn't mean that chaotic people oppose legitimate authority, but it does mean that "There is no legitimate authority" doesn't fit into the PHB definition of Law.

Yes because they are using: «there is no legitimate authority» as a law. For anarchist, there is no legitimate authority is a rule and we must destroy all form of authority is a code they must respect at all cost. Chaotic people simply doesnt care. If someone tell them to do something that they think is a really good idea, they will do it.

And here I'm not saying that chaotic people cant hate being told what to do or hate anyone who try to use their authority on them. I'm just saying they wont automatically hate someone just because hes a king and they wont automatically try to destroy a government just because its there. Doing things automatically as if it was a law is a very lawful mindset.

[hamishspence]

The point I was trying to make is that "because" isn't much of an answer to why.

"because it minimises harm" is an answer.

Or "because I made a promise to obey at all times- and I never go back on my word"

[hamishspence]

Yes because they are using: «there is no legitimate authority» as a law. For anarchist, there is no legitimate authority is a rule and we must destroy all form of authority is a code they must repsect at all cost.

Still doesn't fit that well- Chaos weapons are called Anarchic, prestige classes based on anarchy (planar handbook) are Chaotic only, etc.

It may be just a case of terminology, but Lawful + Absolute Anarch seems like a contradiction in terms.

Remember that Order is one of the key features in the D&D concept of Law as a cosmic force.

Or, for that matter- PHB CG "Follows a moral code that, while good, may not agree with the rest of society"

That's part of being Chaotic- following your own code, even if it ignores authority.

I agree that Chaotic people won't always try to undermine authority.

But it's hard to imagine Lawful people who try to undermine all authority.

[Querzis]

Still doesn't fit that well- Chaos weapons are called Anarchic, prestige classes based on anarchy (planar handbook) are Chaotic only, etc.

It may be just a case of terminology, but Lawful + Absolute Anarch seems like a contradiction in terms.

Remember that Order is one of the key features in the D&D concept of Law as a cosmic force.

You really need to read some anarchist philosopher. They often saw destroying all form of authority as the best way to restore order.
Also, please realize that there is many definition of anarchy.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/anarchy

Now I agree that this definition: confusion; chaos; disorder: Intellectual and moral anarchy followed his loss of faith or this one Absence of any cohesive principle, such as a common standard or purpose. are really chaotic. But the definition of anarchy that you used in your first post is this one: a theory that regards the absence of all direct or coercive government as a political ideal and that proposes the cooperative and voluntary association of individuals and groups as the principal mode of organized society. and thats most definitly not chaotic. Its just another political ideals even if its a political ideals that imply destroying all politics.


But it's hard to imagine Lawful people who try to undermine all authority.

Dont you understand that its because of the all that it make it Lawful? Chaos is whimsical, wild and random. There is no all in chaos, its just case by case.

[derfenrirwolv]

Belief isn't really the issue- Atonement spell stresses that even if the act was not believed by the paladin to be evil, they still need to atone for it


No. If the paladin doesn't beleive its an evil act, then they CAN"T atone for it, spell or no spell. The person has to legitimately beleive that they did something wrong and want forgiveness. That can't happen if the person still believes that they're in the right.



http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0464.html





"Of course. He has been waiting for you. He will visit you as much as he is able."

Windstriker is a celestial beast. He resides in the Celestial Realm when he ISN'T constantly being called down by Miko. So as you can see, if she was going to be able to see him again, and only Lawful Goods can go to the Celestial Realm, then I see no way that Miko isn't still Lawful Good.

She's still a (insert obvious word here) but I decided to leave that part out.:smallbiggrin::smalltongue:

If she was going to the LG realm, windstriker wouldn't have to VISIT. They would be living in the same place. Even short of the top of the mountain there were LG celestial creatures (the marlins that got summoned to an aquatic adventure)

Its quite possible that windstriker can fill out the 45 pages of requisite forms and go see Miko in the LN afterlife.

[hamishspence]

I'm thinking more anarchy in a D&D context.

D&D anarchists are, as a rule, Chaotic.

Anarchist factions (Planescape) are Chaotic.

We're not supposed to be discussing real-world politics, anyway.

PHB does clarify that "campaigns of anarchy" do not fit CN- but CG or CE.

But they are affiliated with Chaos, not Law.

CE would be "tear down all authority- Lawful Evil and Good alike"
CG would be- "only undermine evil authorities, or those heading that way."

[Querzis]

I'm thinking more anarchy in a D&D context.

D&D anarchists are, as a rule, Chaotic.

Anarchist factions (Planescape) are Chaotic.

We're not supposed to be discussing real-world politics, anyway.

If it really is then it shoudnt be. Anarchism is a politics. Chaos never do politics. It really doesnt matter if its a politics to destroy all politics, the fact is that it has a golden law «all authority is bad» and thats more then enough to make it most definitly not chaotic. If D&D somehow use another definition of anarchism I never heard about please tell me but «I must destroy all form of authority» is most definitly not chaotic, quite the opposite.

If you're starting to put politics on people whose most important personality trait is supposed to be: «being whimsical», then you got a real problem. You cant be an anarchist and be whimsical or wild at the same time. If all the personality traits they associated with being chaotic really doesnt fit being an anarchist, its not my fault. And if the definition of anarchism as «hating all authority» was always defended by people with really lawful personality traits, its not my fault either. If the D&D writers somehow decided that giving a politics to chaotic people even if the rest of the definition of chaotic is basically :«people who really woudnt care about politics and would never use absolute rules like «all authority is bad» then go complain to the D&D writers.

[hamishspence]

Chaotic elves? Ruled by a monarch, lots of court manuevering, etc?



If you're starting to put politics on people whose most important personality trait is supposed to be: «being whimsical», then you got a real problem. You cant be an anarchist and be whimsical or wild at the same time.

Why is "being whimsical" the most important bit of Chaos? I don't see anything like that in the PHB.

What I see is a long list of traits- one of which, a possible negative, is "Resentment to legitimate authority"

A person who goes overboard with "resenting authority" is more likely to be Chaotic in D&D.

I think your definition of Law and Chaos doesn't fit the PHB- where are you getting it from?

[Querzis]

Why is "being whimsical" the most important bit of Chaos? I don't see anything like that in the PHB.

What I see is a long list of traits- one of which, a possible negative, is "Resentment to legitimate authority"

A person who goes overboard with "resenting authority" is more likely to be Chaotic in D&D.

I think your definition of Law and Chaos doesn't fit the PHB- where are you getting it from?

:smallsigh: «Chaotic characters follow their consciences, resent being told what to do, favor new ideas over tradition, and do what they promise if they feel like it. “Chaos” implies freedom, adaptability, and flexibility.»

Would you look at that, most of the text before we get to the downside can be easely resumed with «being whimsical». Hell, even on the downside: «recklessness and irresponsibility» fit once again with «being whimsical». Honestly, are you doing this on purpose?

And by the way, it says «can» include resentment toward authority which is something I never denied. They dont like being told what to do, thats normal if they are whimsical. Trying to destroy all form of authority no matter what and using destroying all authority as if it was a rule is most definitly not being whimsical, its quite the opposite.


Chaotic elves? Ruled by a monarch, lots of court manuevering, etc?

Elves are still just usually chaotic good which means only about half of them are and wood elves are usually neutral so elves are close enough to neutral (or enough of them are) so that it doesnt matter. And even then, elves dont all have governement. But do see politics in the Limbo, in the Abyss or in any Chaotic planes? And no, the abyss and their «I can beat you therefore you're my minion» doesnt count as politics.

Anyway, did you ever see a Slaad trying to take down authority? Chaos is supposed to favor freedom, doing what you feel like, not having traditions or rules and being irresponsible (on the downside but still.) And guess what? An anarchist think that there is a golden rule (all authority is bad), hes not trying to uphold freedoms or doing what people feel like since people have the freedom to chose rulers and hes not being irresponsible since he consider its his responsability to take down all authority. If we go by everything else that was written about chaos then chaos should favor democracy, not anarchism (when they actually cares about politics that is, which should only happen with the ones that are close to neutral). Being anarchist is just really out of place with the rest of the definition of chaos. Are we over yet? I'm kinda tired of this.

[theinsulabot]

down the belly of a few ghouls. or an unmarked mass grave. i like to think miko's religion was one that without the necessary burial rites her soul will wander eternally. i doubt it because soon will guide her to it, but maybe at least it will give the others in the lawful stupid paradise a good reason to rag on her constantly and steal her lunch money

[hamishspence]

It is consistant with CE though. As written, some varieties of CE alignment will be eager to undermine authorities, and undiscriminating as to which authorities.

They might spare one or two on a whim, but not in general.

I figure that "actions matter more than intent" applies to Law and Chaos just as it does to Good and Evil. A person consistantly tearing down structure and order is Chaotic regardless of why they are doing it.

and the idea that "chaos can't be consistant" seems iffy. A Chaotic Good guy is going to be consistantly Good, even if he lapses once in a while.



Anyway- we don't want to derail the thread-

so shall we stop debating over "what is Chaotic" and "what is Lawful"- and focus on whether Miko, after her fall, was either of these?

[theinsulabot]

It is consistant with CE though. As written, some varieties of CE alignment will be eager to undermine authorities, and undiscriminating as to which authorities.

They might spare one or two on a whim, but not in general.

I figure that "actions matter more than intent" applies to Law and Chaos just as it does to Good and Evil. A person consistantly tearing down structure and order is Chaotic regardless of why they are doing it.

and the idea that "chaos can't be consistant" seems iffy. A Chaotic Good guy is going to be consistantly Good, even if he lapses once in a while.



Anyway- we don't want to derail the thread-

so shall we stop debating over "what is Chaotic" and "what is Lawful"- and focus on whether Miko, after her fall, was either of these?


she didnt change alignments. she was still lawful stupid. thats my take anyway :smallcool:

[hamishspence]

No. If the paladin doesn't beleive its an evil act, then they CAN"T atone for it, spell or no spell. The person has to legitimately beleive that they did something wrong and want forgiveness. That can't happen if the person still believes that they're in the right.

I mean that if they didn't believe at the time they committed the act, that it was evil- then atonement spell doesn't cost XP.

The main bit I was taking issue with was:


Goodness yes, lawfulness no. Quite the opposite in fact, fanaticism is the extreme of Order while randomness is the extreme of Chaos.

since in D&D, fanaticism and Order are not inextricably tied.

In fact, one of the levels you can push a group to with diplomacy, is Fanatical- they don't have to be Lawful for it to work.

[Shyftir]

Miko clearly went to the Lawful Stupid afterlife. Where she works a desk job because she wasn't lawful stupid enough to get a cool job punishing people who break the rules there. (Even lawful stupid people have trouble keeping the rules there.)

So yeah a subset of Mechanus for people who are incredibly lawful, where she's a slave because she's not quite lawful enough for them.

that's my pet theory.

[hamishspence]

that's one possibility.

Arcadia- midway between Mechanus and Celestia, was another.

Still, it's entirely possible she wasn't lawful at all.

If "abandoning a comrade" is enough to move Roy from LG to TN afterlife (if he hadn't changed his mind) what's "trying to slay a comrade" (Hinjo)?

[DarkElfGangsta]

you guys...can you decide on an answer? she was LG in life, right? killing Shojo made her neutral, right? but she still believed the law to be great right?
so doesnt that meant LN?

she is like somekinda sexy paladin asian female judge dredd. with magic.

[hamishspence]

Possibly.

That said, according to War & XPs- she believed herself to be "above the law"

Which may be... less than Lawful.

She got told- several times, about the rule of law- and her response "I am Special!"

also possibly less than Lawful.

Law and Chaos are rather ill-defined in D&D.

Is following a personal code Lawful?
Or Good?
Or neither?

[Scarlet Knight]

Hmmm, where did Miko go after she died ? I thought the answer was obvious: A bit to the left & a bit to the right...:smallwink:

[Manga Shoggoth]

If she was going to the LG realm, windstriker wouldn't have to VISIT. They would be living in the same place. Even short of the top of the mountain there were LG celestial creatures (the marlins that got summoned to an aquatic adventure)

...Because, of course, the word "Visit" can only refer to transport between planes. It was quite impossible for Roy's grandfather to "Visit" him from the third level of the mountain (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0497.html).

[Samurai Jill]

"I make sacrifices to help others- by going out and risking my life fighting monsters to save lives"

DM: "But you are also abrasive and bully NPCs half the time"

Player "That's different"
In my experience, that describes the behaviour of about 50% of 'good-aligned' D&D PCs of any description.

Miko did, in fact- at least initially- walk the walk as well as talk the talk. Yes, she was abrasive. She also rescued people from a burning inn (which did risk her own life but didn't involve fighting monsters of any description,) and tried to evacuate people safely beforehand. She offered to heal Roy when wounded, and wound up paying for the OOTS' rather luxurious accomodations despite loud protests on her behalf in the first place. You can argue that rescuing the dirt-farmers was just a convenient source of XP, but that doesn't stop Roy arguing it gave them enough karma to justify the impersonation of royalty. C'mon, people.

If "abandoning a comrade" is enough to move Roy from LG to TN afterlife...
Actually, I reckon leaving Elan behind would be technically non-Evil for the same reason rescuing him would be technically Good- because rescuing him would involve significant personal sacrifice to himself or others.

[hamishspence]

Actually, I reckon leaving Elan behind would be technically non-Evil for the same reason rescuing him would be technically Good- because rescuing him would involve significant personal sacrifice to himself or others.

Under some DMs, maybe, but I'm not sure if The Giant subscribes to that one.

Agreed on Miko being willing to risk herself even when it doesn't involve monster-slaying.

[Sanraal]

Yup, I believe she went to Lawful Good heaven all right. She actually still kept her alignment - it's her lack of judgement and self-importance that went berserk. I also believe she have had hell of a talk with deva about her overgrown ego. The question is if she'd be able to finally acknowledge her mistakes - but I guess that would require some sort of a Lawful Good Purgatory. Wonder if thing like that exists in Giant universe.

[LuisDantas]

you guys...can you decide on an answer? she was LG in life, right? killing Shojo made her neutral, right? but she still believed the law to be great right?
so doesnt that meant LN?

The thing is, we have been through this road many times before; Miko's alignment is one of the top controversies in this forum. Most of us have decided on an answer, but consensus is apparently not going to happen any time soon.

[hamishspence]

War & XPs

"she pushed and pushed at what it means to be Lawful Good and a paladin, until finally she broke through"

I suppose she could have just broken through paladin-ness, and stayed Lawful Good- still, seems a bit borderline.


The thing is, we have been through this road many times before; Miko's alignment is one of the top controversies in this forum.

Alignment in general is one of the top controversies in this forum.

Such as

"are there Always X alignment acts, or is it all intent and consequences?"

Usually X is Good or Evil, but even Law and Chaos seem to get a lot of disagreement.

For example- by trying to kill Hinjo, in order to escape and continue her goals, was Miko acting in a Lawful fashion, Chaotic fashion, or neither?

Same with killing Shojo.

[Mugen Nightgale]

Woah you just opened the Pandora's Box there OP.

IMHO Miko went to the LG plane but will stay on the lower levels until she deals with her issues. So... forever I guess. This or Arcadia.

[hamishspence]

we could also look at it from the other direction- based on her long career of goodness, just how few dubious acts she committed (all after finding out about Shojo's deception)

which afterlives is it unlikely that she'd go to?

I'd exclude all of the truly Evil planes, and all of the truly Chaotic planes (I don't think she changed that much.

That pretty much leaves planes that aren't (technically) Evil or Chaotic.

Note that two of the Lower Planes (Pandemonium and Acheron) are not Evil in the sense of imposing a penalty on the Good or non-Evil.

So-

Outlands (Neutral)

Acheron (Lawful)
Mechanus (Lawful)
Arcadia (Lawful)
Celestia (Lawful Good)
Bytopia (Good)
Elysium (Good)
Beastlands (Good)

That just leaves the question of how Lawful or Good she was when she died.
Which I'm still not entirely sure about.

[Kish]

you guys...can you decide on an answer?
No, of course not. The board's not a hive-mind and Miko's moral standing was, in its time, probably the most divisive issue here.

No amount of D&D knowledge would tell you for sure based on the information we have. She's not in the same place as Windstriker, but she wouldn't be in any case, since he's not dead, and is probably another paladin's mount now. If she was still Lawful Good, she's somewhere in Celestia, just not as high on the mountain as she would be if she'd died a true paladin. If she was any other alignment then...etc. People say that "she was obviously X alignment and therefore she is in Y." People will say that what Soon said about Windstriker visiting her as much as he is able proves she's in an upper plane (because Windstriker couldn't visit her in the Nine Hells) and that it proves that she's not in an upper plane (because there would be no limits on Windstriker visiting her in Celestia). At the end of the day, the information the comic's given us is simply not sufficient for anyone to know where she is.

[hamishspence]

yes- taking a poll on it might show which people think is most likely, but it would never prove anything.

At the moment, my (tentative) opinion is: Not an Evil Plane, and not a Chaotic Plane. That's about all I'm faintly confident of though.

[RickDaily12]

HOLD IT!

Now wait just a moment! Miko was trained as a paladin since she stepped out of the Monastery. The evidence of this is a paladin trait: Paladins who stop taking the class can't take a level of it ever again. So all evil acts that Miko may or may not have committed in the past are almost completely meaningless. So can someone please address this before we continue assuming Miko must be neutral...

My point? What about Roy?

Miko was a PALADIN. If she was able to become one with no trouble, then killing Shojo must be the ONLY case against her being LG. Now, keep this in mind, because I think that Rich put it best with Celia's closing argument. One Action ALONE should NOT cause you to instantly change your alignment. This makes even MORE sense, since Roy had lots of black marks and criminal offenses on his record, with tampering with a trial, abandoning Elan, and being leader to Belkar at the top of the list, stacked with the rest.

So if ALL THAT doesn't cause Roy to lose his LG alignment, why would JUST Miko killing Shojo ruin all her hopes of keeping LG, without even a chance to redeem herself?

I'm not saying I think she's Good beyond a doubt, but I want to know why you guys are ruling it out so fast.:smallconfused:

[derfenrirwolv]

Because, of course, the word "Visit" can only refer to transport between planes. It was quite impossible for Roy's grandfather to "Visit" him from the third level of the mountain.

It doesn't HAVE to mean that but its definitely a valid interpretation. My belief that she went to the LN afterlife is based on her actions rather than the word visit. I don't think that a paladin and their mount would normally be separated in the afterlife.

[SoC175]

Darth Vader, anyone? Well, the force is obviously elitist, caring only what one jedi does to annother jedi. All this hudreds of people whose blood stains Vader's hand directly and the billions of people who died through Vader's orders don't count as long as Vader was nice to Luke. Makes one wonder when there'll be an anti-force made up of all the angry spirits of the people murdered directly or indirectly by sith who were later pardoned by the force :smallsmile:

[derfenrirwolv]

Makes one wonder when there'll be an anti-force made up of all the angry spirits of the people murdered directly or indirectly by sith who were later pardoned by the force

Never. Its star wars. If you're not a force user then you're nothing.

[The Glyphstone]

Never. Its star wars. If you're not a force user then you're nothing.

Or married to a force user. Or friends with a force user. Or the comic-relief sidekick of a force user.

[LuisDantas]

HOLD IT!

Now wait just a moment! Miko was trained as a paladin since she stepped out of the Monastery. The evidence of this is a paladin trait: Paladins who stop taking the class can't take a level of it ever again. So all evil acts that Miko may or may not have committed in the past are almost completely meaningless. So can someone please address this before we continue assuming Miko must be neutral...

What exactly do you want to be addressed? It is my understanding that Azure City Paladins are not necessarily LG, due to the evidence from Miko's behavior and that of the Paladins from the prequel books (SoD particularly). They must earn the 12 Gods' approval and will have a hard social time unless they believe themselves to be LG, but that falls short of actually being Lawful Good.


My point? What about Roy?

Miko was a PALADIN. If she was able to become one with no trouble,

Do we know that she had no trouble? I don't think so. On the contrary, Hinjo indicates that she is something of a pariah among her supposed peers.


then killing Shojo must be the ONLY case against her being LG.

That is explicitly not the case, however; Miko had lots of questionable moments in the strips prior to that moment. To say nothing of those after.


Now, keep this in mind, because I think that Rich put it best with Celia's closing argument. One Action ALONE should NOT cause you to instantly change your alignment.

That is generallly true, but 1) there are exceptions, and 2) does not apply to Miko anyway. Her fall (not only from grace, but from inner peace and even mental sanity) was in fact quite gradual and probably extends to years before the strip began.


This makes even MORE sense, since Roy had lots of black marks and criminal offenses on his record, with tampering with a trial, abandoning Elan, and being leader to Belkar at the top of the list, stacked with the rest.

"Lots"? That's an overstatement.


So if ALL THAT doesn't cause Roy to lose his LG alignment, why would JUST Miko killing Shojo ruin all her hopes of keeping LG, without even a chance to redeem herself?

It wouldn't. It was the last straw, so to speak, not at all the sole reason.


I'm not saying I think she's Good beyond a doubt, but I want to know why you guys are ruling it out so fast.:smallconfused:

The main reason is her utter failure to understand the implications of her fall. Miko seemed completely clueless about her own character flaws despite literal divine signs pointing the way... and then deluded herself merrily into a path without return.

A true Lawful character would know how to see herself as less than the center of the universe. A true Good character would question her own motivations a lot better.

Ergo, Miko was likely never Lawful, nor Good. Or barely so, at least during the timeframe when we saw her.

By the time she died, Miko was literally claiming out aloud (to herself, mind you) that she was the chosen weapon of the 12 Gods. Had she lived a bit longer, she couldn't help but feel betrayed by them, arguably with good reason. They certainly betrayed her expectations, if nothing else.

[RickDaily12]

It is my understanding that Azure City Paladins are not necessarily LG, due to the evidence from Miko's behavior and that of the Paladins from the prequel books (SoD particularly). They must earn the 12 Gods' approval and will have a hard social time unless they believe themselves to be LG, but that falls short of actually being Lawful Good.

I disagree completely. It is a class requirement that ALL paladins must be Lawful Good to be able to take a new level in it. Go check the SRD if you don't believe me. Say all you want about Miko, but that fact makes it irrefutable that Miko was, at the very least, LG before killing Shojo. Also, you're wrong about the Paladins from 32 years ago...

They were sent by Shojo to kill the bearer of the Crimson Mantle, which ended up failing in the long run. That's why all Paladins attacked Redcloak's master when he revealed himself as a sacrifice! His master knew why the paladins were there, and gave the quest to Redcloak.

ALL paladins are LG. Their everyday behavior will NOT send dispute with their alignment.


Do we know that she had no trouble? I don't think so. On the contrary, Hinjo indicates that she is something of a pariah among her supposed peers.

So like I said, she is a (insert obvious word here).:smalltongue: Unfortantlely, like I said, that alone will NOT conflict with the definition of LG. Also, how do you know that there WAS trouble? We prove that Miko became a Paladin, so that fact alone that all her evil acts, IF there were any, "don't even measure a blip on the 'Malev-o-Meter'".:smallwink:


That is explicitly not the case, however; Miko had lots of questionable moments in the strips prior to that moment. To say nothing of those after.

Name one that is NOT easy to be justified and brings her alignment into question, and then we'll talk.:smallannoyed:


That is generallly true, but 1) there are exceptions, and 2) does not apply to Miko anyway. Her fall (not only from grace, but from inner peace and even mental sanity) was in fact quite gradual and probably extends to years before the strip began.

1) Her act caused her to fall from grace, but that doesn't automatically mean she immediately turned Neutral on the Good-Evil spectrum on that point. She's kinda middle-ish on possible reasons of falling 2 and 3, but did she betray the Sapphire Guard after her fall? Despite attacking Hinjo, she didn't. She even escaped from her prison to assist the Sapphire's Martyrs, despite utterly failing to be of any true assistance at all. =/

2) This assumes that Miko did NOT reconsider all her actions after speaking with Soon. She might have been breaking limits of sanity after being imprisoned, but after that talk with Soon, I bet she made a MAJOR reality check afterwards. He was the Founder of their group, after all. If I were Miko, that's what I would have done after he told me that. Wouldn't you?


"Lots"? That's an overstatement.

So I exagerated a little. The fact still stands: Roy almost lost LG that day due to his record. Remember, this was NOT including his Childhood.:smallbiggrin:


It wouldn't. It was the last straw, so to speak, not at all the sole reason.

The main reason is her utter failure to understand the implications of her fall. Miko seemed completely clueless about her own character flaws despite literal divine signs pointing the way... and then deluded herself merrily into a path without return.

That's an unfair judgment, wouldn't you say? Just from being crazy and uptight? Straight from the SRD, there are three ways to fall from Paladinhood:

1. Ceases to be lawful good
2. Willfully commits an evil act
3. Grossly violates the code of conduct

Number 3, and maybe an extent of 2, are how Miko fell. Not her crazed strategies to fulfill her duties as a paladin. They were unfair, but not technically in violation against ANY code of conduct, by DnD rules and by the Code of the Sapphire Guard. Rich was smart with how she acted. She was an uptight bully, but she played her cards right until Shojo opened his mouth about betraying the Guard.


A true Lawful character would know how to see herself as less than the center of the universe. A true Good character would question her own motivations a lot better. Ergo, Miko was likely never Lawful, nor Good. Or barely so, at least during the timeframe when we saw her.

To Counter... I present a few quotes from the SRD.


“Law” implies honor, trustworthiness, obedience to authority, and reliability. On the downside, lawfulness can include close-mindedness, reactionary adherence to tradition, judgmentalness, and a lack of adaptability. Those who consciously promote lawfulness say that only lawful behavior creates a society in which people can depend on each other and make the right decisions in full confidence that others will act as they should.

A lawful good character acts as a good person is expected or required to act. She combines a commitment to oppose evil with the discipline to fight relentlessly. She tells the truth, keeps her word, helps those in need, and speaks out against injustice. A lawful good character hates to see the guilty go unpunished.

These DIRECT definitions of Law and Lawful Good do not agree to yours. In Fact, Miko saw Shojo as a traitor who conspired with the Order to bring death and destruction to Azure City. A lawful good character HATES to see the Guilty get away. She acted naturally, but by the Paladin Code, a Paladin CANNOT execute their liege. That's where she messed up. She should have put Shojo to trial to remove him from power, but she was denied that movement, due to lack of time before the attack on the city walls.

So no, Miko could STILL be on the possibility of Lawful Good.


By the time she died, Miko was literally claiming out aloud (to herself, mind you) that she was the chosen weapon of the 12 Gods. Had she lived a bit longer, she couldn't help but feel betrayed by them, arguably with good reason. They certainly betrayed her expectations, if nothing else.

This was her mistake, but it is irrelivant. It has little to do with her alignment. All it proves was that she was crazy, which we already know.:smalltongue:

[Kish]

ALL paladins are LG. Their everyday behavior will NOT send dispute with their alignment.

This is a tautology. In a comic where (SoD spoiler) paladins slaughtered defenseless goblin children without Falling, a horrific one.

I'm inclined to think they were technically Lawful Good, in the same way the paladin in Roy's original adventuring party was technically Lawful Good. Certainly they didn't Fall, and a number of people have used that to argue that they did nothing wrong, in the process demonstrating having aggressively missed the point of that scene in Start of Darkness, and of the paladin in Roy's original adventuring party (hint: trying to get a Lawful Good teammate killed for annoying you will make a paladin fall in a strict by-the-book D&D, even if the paladin doesn't personally kill him). That said, I'm equally puzzled (if not nearly as aggravated) by Luis' apparent belief that which afterlife you go to in some way depends on your "real alignment" rather than "technical alignment." Since it's possible to be both "Lawful Good" and genocidally racist, I'd say the logical conclusion is not that Miko would never have gotten near Celestia, but rather, that she would be far from the worst person there.

Also, your sig attributes a famous Wolfgang Pauli quote to someone who posts in this forum, you do realize. :smalltongue:

[jamroar]

These DIRECT definitions of Law and Lawful Good do not agree to yours. In Fact, Miko saw Shojo as a traitor who conspired with the Order to bring death and destruction to Azure City. A lawful good character HATES to see the Guilty get away. She acted naturally, but by the Paladin Code, a Paladin CANNOT execute their liege. That's where she messed up. She should have put Shojo to trial to remove him from power, but she was denied that movement, due to lack of time before the attack on the city walls.


I find it hilarious she was pointing out the stupidity of Star Wars tropes just a few strips before, and then immediately decides to renact Mace Windu vs. Palpatine in her delusion with equally disastrous results (but for different reasons).

[RickDaily12]

I get that, Kish, and honestly, I felt the same way.:smallsigh:

I talked it over with my brother on that one. He told me that they likely only killed the children to avoid future trouble with the Goblin tribe. The point ultimately is, they needed only the destruction of the future of the Crimson mantle. They did everything nessicary to reach that point, despite unfortante innocent bloodshed.

It's horrid, but makes sense. The eradication of the whole tribe was nessicary to protect the gates. Guess what? The plan was continued anyway, and Lirian's gate ended up burning to the ground.

When I realized that, everything fell into place. The single fact that it was done for the protection of the gates made sense. Why else would Shojo order them to go there? Otherwise, were that fact non-existant, then yes, I would agree completely.:smallwink:

And my sig does what, now?:smalleek:

[Kish]

I get that, Kish, and honestly, I felt the same way.:smallsigh:

I talked it over with my brother on that one. He told me that they likely only killed the children to avoid future trouble with the Goblin tribe. The point ultimately is, they needed only the destruction of the future of the Crimson mantle. They did everything nessicary to reach that point, despite unfortante innocent bloodshed.

And they didn't fall. They did evil things, they acted according to either "the ends justifies the means" or--more likely considering their attitude--"it's not like they're people." If your brother said by-the-book paladins wouldn't Fall for what they did because it had a reason other than pure sadism, your brother failed to understand what an evil action is.


And my sig does what, now?:smalleek:
"This isn't right, this isn't even wrong" is something Wolfgang Pauli said, famously. DarkElfGangsta quoted someone quoting Pauli saying it; it didn't originate with DarkElfGangsta.

[RickDaily12]

And they didn't fall. They did evil things, they acted according to either "the ends justifies the means" or--more likely considering their attitude--"it's not like they're people." If your brother said by-the-book paladins wouldn't Fall for what they did because it had a reason other than pure sadism, your brother failed to understand what an evil action is.

But disobeying their liege's direct orders would have caused them to fall anyway! The Twelve Gods wanted the gates to be protected! They didn't have any respect for The Dark One's Crimison Mantle Plan, or his kin! (except the evil ones)

Those Paladins were under direct order to attack Redcloak's Family. If the Twelve Gods did not wish this, they would have interfered, wouldn't they? And the Azure Code of Conduct directly states that you MUST obey your liege. I'm NOT defending them going as far to killing the defenseless babies, but logically, as Redcloak did, he chased the Azurites and destroyed the city. This is WHY they tried killing the children, too. They wanted to be absoultely sure they wouldn't need to return and do another massacre like that again.

That's the way I see it, anyway. If this is true, then Shojo put them in a spot unavoidable to fall, using your reasoning. But that's not how it happened, was it? The justification was accepted by the Twelve Gods.

Unless I forgot something?:smallconfused:


"This isn't right, this isn't even wrong" is something Wolfgang Pauli said, famously. DarkElfGangsta quoted someone quoting Pauli saying it; it didn't originate with DarkElfGangsta.

I have no idea what to say to that...:smalltongue::smallredface:

[Kish]

"The Twelve Gods wanted them to carry out their evil orders" is also an explanation, not a defense. Gods in D&D are neither all-wise nor all-benevolent, and in the OotS universe in particular, they're presented as acting like spoiled children. So we're still left with: They did something evil and didn't Fall, likely because the Twelve Gods gave them a pass.


I have no idea what to say to that...:smalltongue::smallredface:

You could change the attribution to "Wolfgang Pauli." Then again, you could just leave it the way it is with, probably, no worse result than a few face-palms from curmudgeons like me.

Then again, you might leave it the way it is and find out later that Wolfgang Pauli is suing DarkElfGangsta, because he has nothing better to do that take issue with people's signatures on the forum for a webcomic.

[RickDaily12]

"The Twelve Gods wanted them to carry out their evil orders" is also an explanation, not a defense. Gods in D&D are neither all-wise nor all-benevolent, and in the OotS universe in particular, they're presented as acting like spoiled children. So we're still left with: They did something evil and didn't Fall, likely because the Twelve Gods gave them a pass.

Lol... acting like spoiled children. That's just rich.:smallbiggrin:

Anyway, yeah, that was the point I was trying to get it. The justification behind it made the action nessicary. This is most definitely why they did not suffer any punishment. That was the end result the Twelve Gods wished for, as far as I believe. So this is the ONLY exception where I think a deity would not strip a Paladin of their powers: When they're put into situations unavoidable to be fallen. In this case, I believe the Twelve Gods will not strip the paladin of their powers if they use the correct judgment and do the better act. Hey, those far and few events will happen sometimes... =/


You could change the attribution to "Wolfgang Pauli." Then again, you could just leave it the way it is with, probably, no worse result than a few face-palms from curmudgeons like me.

Yeah, you're probably right. Give me a moment.:smallwink: Also, there's really no need to call yourself that.:smalltongue:

[veti]

On Insane = TN, in some D&D splatbooks at least, insanity + atrocity = Evil. The sort of guy "driven by their insanity to do atrocious things"

If (insanity + atrocity = Evil), doesn't that rather imply that (insanity + virtue = Good)? If insanity doesn't excuse you for evil actions, then it shouldn't nullify your good ones either. That's only fair.

As to the OP: I would argue that afterlifes are a "campaign setting" issue, rather than a "rules" issue. We don't even know what Outer Planes there are in the Stickverse, apart from Celestia and at least two "in the ventral position".

The answer is: she goes wherever Rich says she goes. No saving throw.

[derfenrirwolv]

The answer is: she goes wherever Rich says she goes. No saving throw.

She will of course, insist that the author is wrong :)

[Setra]

With Miko it's always hard to say... First I'll think about Law/Chaos

In her last conversation Soon says "Redemption requires more than executing your duty, even if you follow that duty to the end", this strikes me as Lawful, and to me, most of her actions speak to me as Lawful aside from her chaotic streak. That streak could very well have put her down to Neutral, but I personally think that she is lawful.

As far as Good/Evil goes? I was thinking Neutral, but I mean.. she wants to be good, and I think she wants to help people, she's just horrible at it... She's done many evil things, and many good things... but I think she was good (if irritating) for a lot longer than her brief stint as crazy bitch. And I think in the end she was still good, if barely.

As far as where she goes? Well, the ghosts do say they're returning to Celestia, and that they're ushering her to her destination.. so I think she may have went there... Then again, they could have dropped her off somewhere else.. that Arcadia place sounds about right.

That said, I admit to being a Miko fan... *Flees*

Edit:
PS. While I think she is barely lawful and barely good, I could see anything along the lines of LG, NG, LN, or TN. But not chaotic or evil. My personal opinion is that she's LG still, and I'll stick with it until proven otherwise.

[DarkElfGangsta]

from the posts here, I gather that general concensus is Lawful Neutral ?

kish:no need to go gung ho about a qoute. .:smalltongue:

[RickDaily12]

What? But we not even done debating yet!

They don't end a criminal trial right in the middle of the argument! The debate has to finish for us to think about the end result! We have to make arguments testing each theory until an agreed decision is reached for the best possible outcome.

You have to give us a little more time to argue this out!:smallannoyed:

[DarkElfGangsta]

What? But we not even done debating yet!

They don't end a criminal trial right in the middle of the argument! The debate has to finish for us to think about the end result! We have to make arguments testing each theory until an agreed decision is reached for the best possible outcome.

You have to give us a little more time to argue this out!:smallannoyed:
NO
I'm an insane despot.
MUHAHAHAHA killll-
ahem.
I was trying to draw a conclusion, cause I was goin ova this thread and it goes something like: (the following might perhaps maybe contain some slight dramatization)
-she is teh lawfulz cuz she iz paladinzorz
-she is teh koitic kuz she broke out of jail
-#$$%@@3 killed shojo so shes evil @#$$#$@$@#$%23432
-she is teh good cuz she believed what she did to be rite lolz

but by all means, the road to super enlightenment is through debate.

[LuisDantas]

I disagree completely.

Yes, you do. You are quoting SRD and expecting me to assume that Azure City Paladins are automatically LG (at least while they still gain new Paladin levels).

I disagree with that assumption, because I feel the strips proved it false, which by its turn makes the SRD powerless to accurately describe those Paladins.

Sorry, but it is very much a matter of choosing an interpretation.


It is a class requirement that ALL paladins must be Lawful Good to be able to take a new level in it. Go check the SRD if you don't believe me. Say all you want about Miko, but that fact makes it irrefutable that Miko was, at the very least, LG before killing Shojo.

Or rather, and IMO far less problematically, that those Paladins never needed to be LG in the first place, and that the SRD is overruled in this particular point.


Also, you're wrong about the Paladins from 32 years ago...

They were sent by Shojo to kill the bearer of the Crimson Mantle, which ended up failing in the long run. That's why all Paladins attacked Redcloak's master when he revealed himself as a sacrifice! His master knew why the paladins were there, and gave the quest to Redcloak.

ALL paladins are LG. Their everyday behavior will NOT send dispute with their alignment.

See? That is my point. Behavior reflects alignment. Following orders is no excuse, and certainly no proof that their alignment goes against their behavior.


So like I said, she is a (insert obvious word here).:smalltongue: Unfortantlely, like I said, that alone will NOT conflict with the definition of LG.

True. But again, all we have to even expect her to have been LG at any point at all is her Paladin status. Behavior-wise she could hardly even make technical claims to follow the letter of the definition of that alignment.

It is far less troublesome to simply understand that she was never required to be LG, despite what a standard setting would require of a Paladin.


Also, how do you know that there WAS trouble?

From the extra material of the books, and from Hinjo's comment in his debut strip.


We prove that Miko became a Paladin, so that fact alone that all her evil acts, IF there were any, "don't even measure a blip on the 'Malev-o-Meter'".:smallwink:

IF being LG is a requirement to being a Paladin in this particular environment, which has never been proven and goes counter to available evidence. Heck, it is not very LG of Hinjo to care so little about the mental health of Miko either, come to think of it.


Name one that is NOT easy to be justified and brings her alignment into question, and then we'll talk.:smallannoyed:

Really, with a couple of notable exceptions (her first talk with Durkon, her reaction to Roy's talk in #250) it turns out to be 50% to 90% of her appearances.


1) Her act caused her to fall from grace, but that doesn't automatically mean she immediately turned Neutral on the Good-Evil spectrum on that point.

Nor that she wasn't Neutral to begin with...


She's kinda middle-ish on possible reasons of falling 2 and 3, but did she betray the Sapphire Guard after her fall?

Actually, yes, she did. She had no good reason to challenge their choice of imprisoning her, yet she did, conveniently depicting herself as above their law due to divine edict.


Despite attacking Hinjo, she didn't. She even escaped from her prison to assist the Sapphire's Martyrs, despite utterly failing to be of any true assistance at all. =/

And that speaks so very ill of her. Claiming to be a savior in order to do as one pleases is very low indeed.


2) This assumes that Miko did NOT reconsider all her actions after speaking with Soon.

She certainly had little time to, and gave no true indication of even attempting, so it is not too much to assume.


She might have been breaking limits of sanity after being imprisoned,

She was all-out taken with delusions of grandeur, actually. The self-serving variety of same.


but after that talk with Soon, I bet she made a MAJOR reality check afterwards.

One can only hope... but the evidence simply isn't there.


He was the Founder of their group, after all. If I were Miko, that's what I would have done after he told me that. Wouldn't you?

Heck, no, I wouldn't. In fact, the way I read that scene, Miko was powerless to make such a reality check by that point. She lost that capability a few dozen strips before. That is why it is such a tragic scene.

Of course, she couldn't very well be a LG person if she gave such undue power to the simple fact of Soon being the founder of her Paladin order, either. Being LG is not supposed to be easy! :smallwink:


That's an unfair judgment, wouldn't you say? Just from being crazy and uptight?

No, that is exactly why I think so little of her. She chose insanity over humility, thereby betraying everything she claimed to uphold.



(...)So no, Miko could STILL be on the possibility of Lawful Good.

In the same sense that I "could" be heir to a throne, at the very least. But going by the strips, she probably never was.



This was her mistake, but it is irrelivant. It has little to do with her alignment. All it proves was that she was crazy, which we already know.:smalltongue:

On the contrary, her insanity is proof of her alignment failures.

<hr>


That said, I'm equally puzzled (if not nearly as aggravated) by Luis' apparent belief that which afterlife you go to in some way depends on your "real alignment" rather than "technical alignment." Since it's possible to be both "Lawful Good" and genocidally racist, I'd say the logical conclusion is not that Miko would never have gotten near Celestia, but rather, that she would be far from the worst person there.

Much like the discrepancy between Paladin behavior and SRD rules, this is yet more evidence that plot trumps standard logical alignment requirements in the OOtS-verse.

[derfenrirwolv]

and I think she wants to help people, she's just horrible at it

I don't know if she wants to help people. I think her problem is that she saw it as her duty to help people, rather than addressing the underlying morality of WHY you help people in trouble. She was the type that thinks the law is good and looses sight of why the law is there in the first place... to promote the good.

[Kish]

from the posts here, I gather that general concensus is Lawful Neutral ?

Why are you insisting on the presence of a consensus?

None to be found here, in any case.


kish:no need to go gung ho about a qoute. .:smalltongue:
Quote. Not "qoute," which sounds like an excruciatingly painful thing to do to someone.

[DarkElfGangsta]

sorry, bad english skills. not used to writing in it. I think it's pretty obvious what I mean when I write "qoute". this isn't school, so there is no need to correct my english constantly.
when I wrote "general concensus" I did not mean to imply that all have agreed. it simply the term that I know.
I simply meant that more people seem to think that she is lawful and/ or neutral then people who do not.

[Boogastreehouse]

from the posts here, I gather that general concensus is Lawful Neutral ?

kish:no need to go gung ho about a qoute. .:smalltongue:

You're not going to get a simple answer after a mere five pages of debate.

There are a lot of people with opinions who haven't even seen this thread yet (not everyone here has an average of twenty posts per day, you know...).

There are also lots of people who have weighed in on the subject, with interesting and insightful posts, who are no longer active on the forums, or who don't want to bother repeating themselves yet again on this, the fiftieth incarnation of the Miko-alignment/afterlife thread.

If you really want to pursue this subject, you might want to look back at the years-worth of threads that have gone over all of this before.

[Turkish Delight]

True. But again, all we have to even expect her to have been LG at any point at all is her Paladin status. Behavior-wise she could hardly even make technical claims to follow the letter of the definition of that alignment.

It is far less troublesome to simply understand that she was never required to be LG, despite what a standard setting would require of a Paladin.

Depends on whether you're contesting the 'Good' or the 'Lawful.' I'm assuming you're contesting the former. That Paladins are meant to be Good, like 3rd Edition Paladins everywhere, is pretty obviously assumed by Roy in panel 3 of this comic. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0251.html) Miko's constant prattle about righteousness, wickedness, etc. would also heavily imply she views herself as a force of Good and Justice rather than consciously accepting the idea a Paladin can be a force for Lawful Neutrality, with rigid obedience to rules trumping justice.

In this case, I would say the less troublesome approach would be to simply say you don't agree with the Giant's depiction of what a Lawful Good person could get away with and still retain the alignment.

But even beyond that, I think people who can't reconcile Miko's status as a Paladin with her actions are kind of missing the point; from what I see, Miko is designed, from top to bottom, as a brutal satire of how some people actually play Paladins. The completely anal Paladin who Detects Evil, Smites Evil, and asks questions later, while berating or even attacking his teammates for their slightest perceived moral failings. I'm not going to destroy everyone's day by linking TV Tropes, but a quick look at their page on Lawful Stupid pretty much sums it up. Are such people actually 'Lawful Good'? Pfftt, no, but because it's what people expect from Paladins much of the time DMs sometimes let them get away with an awful lot of such behavior.

In the same way, I think O'Chul comes across as the Giant's take on how to play a Paladin the right way. Unfailing brave and self-sacrificing when the need is required, but also kind and capable of thinking things through rather than smiting every tiny blip on their Detect Evil-o-meter.

[DarkElfGangsta]

You're not going to get a simple answer after a mere five pages of debate.

There are a lot of people with opinions who haven't even seen this thread yet (not everyone here has an average of twenty posts per day, you know...).

There are also lots of people who have weighed in on the subject, with interesting and insightful posts, who are no longer active on the forums, or who don't want to bother repeating themselves yet again on this, the fiftieth incarnation of the Miko-alignment/afterlife thread.

If you really want to pursue this subject, you might want to look back at the years-worth of threads that have gone over all of this before.

I just got my 1st computer 3 months ago and I like using it. a lot.:smallbiggrin:

seriously? you're telling me to trawl huge amount of threads and posts and edit wars that occured over the last several years.?

no.
I enjoy the debate that is going on, and from what people said it's a rare one as it hasn't exploded like those before it, so that's good. I'm simply trying to form a base (for me at least). despite what you may or may not believe, I am not God, and my word is not law. people can go on debating as much as they want. just trying to find my arms and legs in something I know almost nothing about.

[Kish]

What puzzles me is--both on this subject and on the Vaarsuvius' Gender subject--you seem highly resistant to the answer, "There is no agreement and is not likely to be." But short of Rich providing an answer, which seems unlikely, "There is no agreement and is not likely to be" is the answer, to both.

That's the way things are on this forum. Ask four people a question of opinion, and you'll get five different answers.

[DarkElfGangsta]

I know. maybe i can seem hard headed at times, but I don't like an answr that consists of you'll never get an answer.
as I said, I was seeking to build an understanding based upon the knowledge of other people.
I understand that there can be no concensus or ultimate answer apart from what Rich says.
we cool?

[Kish]

Oh, sure, I don't have any reason to be mad at you or anything like that. Just kind of puzzled. As a character in a webcomic I no longer read once said, "You are so much my opposite."

(For me, things in OotS which haven't been ruled on by Rich fall into two categories: The obvious-to-me, such as the morality of the actions taken by the Sapphire Guard at the beginning of Start of Darkness, and it's not worth debating them; and the obviously-unestablished, such as Vaarsuvius' gender, and it's not worth debating them either.)

[DarkElfGangsta]

Oh, sure, I don't have any reason to be mad at you or anything like that. Just kind of puzzled. As a character in a webcomic I no longer read once said, "You are so much my opposite."

(For me, things in OotS which haven't been ruled on by Rich fall into two categories: The obvious-to-me, such as the morality of the actions taken by the Sapphire Guard at the beginning of Start of Darkness, and it's not worth debating them; and the obviously-unestablished, such as Vaarsuvius' gender, and it's not worth debating them either.)

aye, on both accounts.
you are the V to my Belkar :smallsmile:

[LuisDantas]

Depends on whether you're contesting the 'Good' or the 'Lawful.' I'm assuming you're contesting the former.

I'm contesting both. Miko is too self-centered for me to consider her either lawful or good. As a variant of what I said a few posts ago, a Lawful character would be more used to listening to others, while a Good character would have an easier time listening to itself.


That Paladins are meant to be Good, like 3rd Edition Paladins everywhere, is pretty obviously assumed by Roy in panel 3 of this comic. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0251.html)

No argument there. The Paladins themselves obviously expect each other to be LG as well. Most of them, including Hinjo, Lien, Bandaladin and O-Chul, obviously are in fact LG.

Still, I feel that evidence is quite clear that they simply are not required to be LG, but instead to be in the good graces of the 12 Gods. Maybe they could acceptably be LN, but I doubt the 12 Gods much care about alignment at all.


Miko's constant prattle about righteousness, wickedness, etc. would also heavily imply she views herself as a force of Good and Justice rather than consciously accepting the idea a Paladin can be a force for Lawful Neutrality, with rigid obedience to rules trumping justice.

Again, no argument here. Miko thinks of herself as a major example of a LG character.


In this case, I would say the less troublesome approach would be to simply say you don't agree with the Giant's depiction of what a Lawful Good person could get away with and still retain the alignment.

Maybe so. But I am not convinced that the Giant still thinks of Miko as LG. Quite frankly, I would rather believe that he gave up on that goal and decided to play along with the alternative that sort of wrote itself in its place: a deluded TN that wants to be a true Paladin.


But even beyond that, I think people who can't reconcile Miko's status as a Paladin with her actions are kind of missing the point; from what I see, Miko is designed, from top to bottom, as a brutal satire of how some people actually play Paladins.

I agree with that. Miko is indeed a brutal satire of the most superficial traits of a Paladin.


The completely anal Paladin who Detects Evil, Smites Evil, and asks questions later, while berating or even attacking his teammates for their slightest perceived moral failings. I'm not going to destroy everyone's day by linking TV Tropes, but a quick look at their page on Lawful Stupid pretty much sums it up. Are such people actually 'Lawful Good'? Pfftt, no, but because it's what people expect from Paladins much of the time DMs sometimes let them get away with an awful lot of such behavior.

Redcloak might be a bit Lawful Stupid. Miko isn't perhaps even Lawful at all. Try Jerk Sue or Above Good and Evil instead.


In the same way, I think O'Chul comes across as the Giant's take on how to play a Paladin the right way. Unfailing brave and self-sacrificing when the need is required, but also kind and capable of thinking things through rather than smiting every tiny blip on their Detect Evil-o-meter.

O-Chul is ok, but I like Lien and Hinjo more. Hinjo, particularly, has a nearly perfect mix of virtue and flaws.

[Mugen Nightgale]

Oh wow.
Rejoice OP. One of your topics is going to be 20 pages long.

I still think her actions are not enough to put her in an evil afterlife. Or neutral. Maybe a quasi good plane.

[SoC175]

But disobeying their liege's direct orders would have caused them to fall anyway! Actually no. Paladins don't fall for chaotic acts unless they do enough of them to fall from LG. However paladins fall as soon as they do an evil act, even it's not enough to fall from LG.

This is WHY they tried killing the children, too. They wanted to be absoultely sure they wouldn't need to return and do another massacre like that again. Doing even more evil do make sure your other evil doesn't come back to bit you one day doesn't make either evil any less evil

That's the way I see it, anyway. If this is true, then Shojo put them in a spot unavoidable to fall, Avoiding the fall would have simply required to disobey.

But that's not how it happened, was it? The justification was accepted by the Twelve Gods. In D&D the gods themselves are not above the alignments. Even gods can fall and "I am a greater god, I decided what's LG and what's not" did never save any deity from falling.

The Giant simply chose to ignore all that. He was not pushing LG to the limit, he was simply breaking LG and trampling all over it.

[hamishspence]

Or, because it's earlier in time, it's a comment on the changes in D&D morality.

I've seen more than a few people argue that when goblins were Always Evil, back in 1st ed AD&D, their slaughter, right down to the last infant, was good and just- because anything that pinged on Detect Evil (rather than Know Alignment) was far more evil than your basic evil-aligned creature or person.

And I recall similar arguments to V's slaying of the dragons- if he'd done it as a safety precaution rather than for vengeance- it would have been morally right. (usually, the half-dragons are considered acceptable collateral damage by the people making this sort of argument).

These people usually criticise BoED and BoVD for forbidding this sort of thing.

So, even if the paladins behaviour tended to fall afoul of 3rd ed morality, where detect evil works in the same way as 1/4 of Know Alignment, it might not have been so bad in earlier editions.

"My daddy was a 1st edition thief" may have been a throwaway line.

Or it may be a hint as to this sort of thing.

Maybe the goblins are 3rd ed, morally, but being treated as if they were AD&D.

[Asta Kask]

So the consensus is that there is no consensus?

[hamishspence]

There might be a consensus as to where she isn't going to go- the lowest of the lower planes.

I don't think more than a tiny proportion of forum-goers, have argued that Miko's destination is Hades, Gehenna, Tartarus, etc.

If any.

[veti]

Or, because it's earlier in time, it's a comment on the changes in D&D morality.

I've seen more than a few people argue that when goblins were Always Evil, back in 1st ed AD&D, their slaughter, right down to the last infant, was good and just- because anything that pinged on Detect Evil (rather than Know Alignment) was far more evil than your basic evil-aligned creature or person.

But according to 1st ed rules as I remember them (and I could be mistaken here, please feel free to correct me if you've got a DMG to hand), basic 1HD goblins wouldn't ping a Det Evil, regardless of how nasty they were. Didn't you have to be extra-planar, magical, or ridiculously high level (i.e. above 8th) before your 'Evil' became concentrated enough to register?

[hamishspence]

Or evil clerics.

Though I think some people made the case that all "Always evil" monsters ping, because... the DM wants them to?

Its possible that the "earlier edition" comments were throwaway ones.

Also- we never see them scanning- no eye beams the way Miko does.

Maybe they didn't cast it at all- the comment "The twelve gods have judged" might mean that the gods cast Know Alignment rather than Detect Evil, and the paladins are acting based on this secondhand info.

Some people do take the position that it doesn't matter whether it's Detect Evil or Know Alignment- if you know its evil, you can kill it.

Its not very consistant with the way much of alignment is written- but it's written in a vague enough fashion, that people sometimes interpret "respect for life" as justifying slaughtering "evil beings whose plans threaten the world" to the last child.

On TV Tropes this is usually called a Genocide Dilemma.

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/GenocideDilemma

[Boogastreehouse]

I've always stated that I expect Vaarsuvius to spend some time in the lower planes as part of her/his contractual obligations, and that I likewise suspected Belkar to make an appearance, either to aid or hinder V, as they each reveal previously unknown sides of themselves* in this most soul-searching (and soul-rending) environment.

What hadn't occurred to me before is that there could be an appearance of Miko. I personally don't expect that she went to the lower planes upon death, but perhaps Rich's setting includes a "purgatory" of some sort, which might facilitate contact. It's also possible that a Dantes Inferno sort of arc, involving a journey that spans several planes, could allow the characters a chance to interact.

I'd be very interested in seeing how Miko's outlook might have changed, posthumously, and what her reaction to Belkar's presence might be, especially if he seems to be happier with his afterlife than she is with hers. Personally, while I would love to see the development that leads to a remorseful Miko, I would also love to see Belkar cause her to fall yet again, this time falling from whatever good or neutral plane she's found herself in, into a lower one.

*No, I'm not suggesting that they necessarily get it on!

[silvadel]

I would say acheron with a strong tendency to reincarnate in a very different form. Somewhere someday a goblin might be born..... who rankles against her evil society....

She needs a different point of view.

[Raw_fishFood]

I'd like to preface this by saying I've never played D&D, so please correct me if I'm wrong from my brief once over of the Wikipedia articles on the after life.

Well, the first question is, even after killing Shojo, was Miko still lawful? I think that she wanted to be. Miko respected Authority, and I think that's where her adherence to the law came from. Upon hearing Shojo's reveal of what he'd been doing for so long she lost the respect for his (and the City's) authority. That's why she struck him down, yet she considered it a lawful act. It still wasn't a good one (Or lawful) and so she fell. Even after that, her major concerns are becoming a Paladin again by following her duty, rather than any sort of (real) redemption. I think she wanted to be (and considered herself) lawful.

This limits her to Celestia, Arcadia, Mechanus, and Acheron, which are all the Lawful after lifes.

She did commit her life to lawful good acts, to the letter rather then the spirit of being good. For example, helping out the dirt farmers. I don't believe she did it out of any real concern for the farmers themselves; rather she did it because it's something a Lawful Good person would do. I think what I'm trying to say is Miko's motivation for doing it comes from the act itself, rather then the results of the act. The end result didn't matter but the performance of the act did to her.

She did have some times of honest human emotion. People are stating that in War and XPs it was said she did try to reach out to people (though having never read the book, I can't really comment), and of course there's her and Roy's conversation where she admits that a romantic relationship may not be out of the question. It would probably be awkward as hell, but it would be a step. As much as she was dedicated to law, I think Miko did have some goodness in her, even if it was hidden under the many layers of "Lawful Stupid".

I doubt there is little debate on the point that Miko cutting down Shojo was an evil act. I think not only the act itself, but the results of killing the City's leader right before a battle, are enough to limit her from Celestia. I think things would have gone much better had Shojo been alive, even if the end results would have been similar.

She probably did many many things during her life that count as good in result, if not in intent. At best she may end up in Arcadia. The Harmonium (which the wiki informs me are a militant sect) seem right up her alley.

I'm not sure how well she really suits Mechanus. It's very strict lawful, which seems like it would be perfect for Miko, but she seems a bit more devoted to an authority and its laws, rather then the concept of order itself.

I can also see Miko ending up in Acheron, depending on if the result or the intent of an act is more important for deciding if the act is good. If intent is more important (and given Eugene headed for Celestia once the blood oath gets sorted out, I'm not sure it is) I think Miko would end up here. It embodies Order to the point of conformity over any intent, and she acts this way much of the time.

It's pretty difficult to pin down where she'd end up. I've been lurking long enough to see how much conflict of opinion bringing up Miko (and her Alignment) cause, so people are bound to end up with differing opinions. I think the two best bets are Arcadia or Acheron, depending on alot of Miko's inner motivation and how much that plays into the grander scheme of where she ends up, and how much the act of cutting down Shojo cost her.

[silvadel]

In some ways it comes down also to "What would be best for her?"

Celestia -- Nope -- she wouldnt learn anything.

Arcadia -- A nice long rest -- maybe -- but really -- she strives for better and would never be happy here.

Mechanus -- Probably her worst option. It would reinforce her worst impulses and trap her there.

Acheron -- Yes it is an evil nasty place of war. But really what she needs is something like this. If she can learn some compassion, and figure out the futility of war then eventually she can redeem herself. I do NOT see her redeeming herself in any of the other options.

Baator -- Would mean the universe has no compassion whatsoever and it just doesnt fit. Windstriker couldnt ever come here.

--------

She blew this life in the end. She needs to grow in the afterlife then be reincarnated from a different perspective. She shouldnt be a paladin in the next life -- either the rebel good in a usually evil race, or some low gritty upbringing.

[Turkish Delight]

She blew this life in the end. She needs to grow in the afterlife then be reincarnated from a different perspective. She shouldnt be a paladin in the next life -- either the rebel good in a usually evil race, or some low gritty upbringing.

:smallconfused:

Do people get reincarnated in standard D&D, minus the spell of the same name?

If she ends up in Arcadia or Acheron, she's there for keeps. It's usually based on all-or-nothing Christian concepts of Heaven and Hell, where you get one life and you either do correctly with it and go eternally to Paradise or screw it up and go to everlasting torment.

But then, she's Azurite, and Azurites are a mish-mash of Oriental concepts, so I guess who knows? The Southern Gods could use their portion of the various Hells more like Buddhism, with the torment used for eventual reform rather than being everlasting.

Until the Giant gives even the slightest hint that this is the case, though, we can probably safely assume wherever Miko is now is her home from now until the end of time.

[Zevox]

In some ways it comes down also to "What would be best for her?"

Celestia -- Nope -- she wouldnt learn anything.

Arcadia -- A nice long rest -- maybe -- but really -- she strives for better and would never be happy here.

Mechanus -- Probably her worst option. It would reinforce her worst impulses and trap her there.

Acheron -- Yes it is an evil nasty place of war. But really what she needs is something like this. If she can learn some compassion, and figure out the futility of war then eventually she can redeem herself. I do NOT see her redeeming herself in any of the other options.

Baator -- Would mean the universe has no compassion whatsoever and it just doesnt fit. Windstriker couldnt ever come here.

--------

She blew this life in the end. She needs to grow in the afterlife then be reincarnated from a different perspective. She shouldnt be a paladin in the next life -- either the rebel good in a usually evil race, or some low gritty upbringing.
You misunderstand the D&D afterlife. Characters are not sent to a plane to "redeem" or otherwise improve themselves, nor are they reincarnated short of a Druid casting the actual spell Reincarnate (which is very rare, at best, and almost certainly not going to happen to Miko). They are sent to the plane that matches their alignment, in order to spend eternity with the fate they earned. Nothing more. If Miko's alignment hit Lawful Neutral by the end there, she probably wound up in Mechanus, with the possibility of Acheron or Arcadia, depending on precisely where she ends up falling on the good/evil scale.

Zevox

[hamishspence]

Except in Fiendish Codex 2- where sometimes characters who would normally go to a Lower Plane (Baator, specifically) get reincarnated as Hellbred, with a "second chance" at redemption.

This requires that they be repentant at the time of death though.

I'm not sure if Rich uses anything like that though.

[SoC175]

Acheron -- Yes it is an evil nasty place of war. But really what she needs is something like this. If she can learn some compassion, and figure out the futility of war then eventually she can redeem herself. I do NOT see her redeeming herself in any of the other options. Note that the planes are not a hierarchy (Celestia is not "better" than Hell or the Abyss) and do not try to help their inhabitants toward redemption so that they can move on to a higher ranked plane (quite the opposite, they consider themselves to be the only correct way and all other planes and their ways to be more or less wrong). Acheron couldn't care less that one of it's petitioners strives to become worthy of Celestia. As a matter of fact Acheron would not let a petitioner leave even if he would change his alignment and behavior during his time on Acheron.

Baator -- Would mean the universe has no compassion whatsoever and it just doesnt fit. Windstriker couldnt ever come here. Actually the D&D universe does indeed have no compassion, it's made up of four equally valid forces that despite each other and try to pull the whole universe into their own direction. Good is not "better" than evil, both are equally valid and try to pull the whole multiverse away from each other (and from law and chaos).

However you are correct that she's certainly not there, since this would mean no visits from Windstrider.

She needs to grow in the afterlife then be reincarnated from a different perspective. She shouldnt be a paladin in the next life -- either the rebel good in a usually evil race, or some low gritty upbringing. Except that no plane would allow that. Not only would they lose one of their petitioners (who actually lived absolut correctly as far as the plane is concerned), but would also risk no only the released petitioner then living a wrong life and not comming back but also possibly infecting other mortals with his new "wrong" ideas so that they also wouldn't end up on this plane.

Except in Fiendish Codex 2- where sometimes characters who would normally go to a Lower Plane (Baator, specifically) get reincarnated as Hellbred, with a "second chance" at redemption.

This requires that they be repentant at the time of death though.

I'm not sure if Rich uses anything like that though. Arg, yes. Now that you mention it, FC2 did contain it's fair share of pure crap that flew in the face of 30 years of prior D&D history.

[silvadel]

Actually while it was usually elves and other spirit races that reincarnated -- there was NOTHING in D&D that implied that soul races couldnt reincarnate also -- it is just that they often didnt. This implies that they find a "home" at their destination or have that forced on them in the case of some of the lower planes. I always took it that a soul that didnt find a home at their destination eventually managed to migrate back for another try.

[LuisDantas]

So there is a distinction between soul and spirits in D&D? And it is dictated by race/species?

[hamishspence]

Complete Divine goes into some depth on souls and afterlives (basically, petitioners are the exception, rather than the rule, and most souls are just "souls" that don't do very much- just hang around on the plane, until eventually they merge and (sometimes) become petitioners.

Once they pass from soul to petitioner, they can't be ressurrected, because they are essentially a "new creature"

Lantern Archons are one example of a petitioner.

[DEG]

wow. thread riched 5 pages.cool. I'm proud.