One reason Miko snapped [Archive] - Giant in the Playground Forums

Olinser

2013-03-25, 04:22 PM

So I just had a bit of an insight. We know that Shojo's ruse began a few years BPD, and that Miko had been under his guidance as a Sapphire Guard for a lot longer than that (somewhere between 15 and 20 years, given that she was 28 at death, by Word of Giant, and that she was "still a child" when Shojo chose her). We also know that Shojo's guidance was a huge part of what was keeping her stable (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=12240910&postcount=39).

Now consider for a moment what Shojo's ruse would have looked like to Miko. She would have seen two things that would have put her mind under incredible stress.

First, she would have seen her father-figure, the man who "saw great power in her", who comforted her when she cried and gave her life purpose, degenerate into senility, into an undignified and ridiculous wreck. This alone would have been enough to put her mind under stress, to give her a wellspring of pain and hurt that nobody could now treat.

But second, her life as a Sapphire Guard was defined by loyal service, and for her first years, she saw Shojo as worthy of that service. But as he seemed to slip further and further into madness, she was more and more forced to obey the orders of someone who she did not respect, did not believe in. This also would have filled her with conflict, with the perpetual question "is there any honor in obeying a madman?"

Miko was, to be blunt, the epitome of what has become known as the "Lawful Stupid" Paladin.

She obeyed the letter of the law without ever thinking for a second about the intent behind the law.

She is theoretically 'Good', in that she kills Evil, but she always struck me as a borderline sociopath that simply had an acceptable target for her violence.

I can't remember a single Good act that she actually committed on-panel. Even the dirt farmer begging for help:

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0211.html

Miko specifically said it was her duty to 'smite the abominations' - without bothering to mention the person they were allegedly supposed to rescue.

ReaderAt2046

2013-03-25, 04:28 PM

Miko was, to be blunt, the epitome of what has become known as the "Lawful Stupid" Paladin.

She obeyed the letter of the law without ever thinking for a second about the intent behind the law.

Is it possible that she became this, or so overwhelmingly this, as a side effect of Shojo's senility undermining her faith in the intent of the law? That is, as Shojo grew "mad", and his orders thus lost any justification other than "he is my lord, the law demands I obey him", Miko's mind shifted to place higher and higher emphasis on the letter of the law which was now her only justification for obeying Shojo.

Olinser

2013-03-25, 04:49 PM

Is it possible that she became this, or so overwhelmingly this, as a side effect of Shojo's senility undermining her faith in the intent of the law? That is, as Shojo grew "mad", and his orders thus lost any justification other than "he is my lord, the law demands I obey him", Miko's mind shifted to place higher and higher emphasis on the letter of the law which was now her only justification for obeying Shojo.

Not really. Miko is explicitly hated by almost every other Paladin in the order, and Shojo also explicitly says that he has questioned her stability in the past.

The big clue is when she is getting ready to kill Shojo - despite the fact that she herself has verified that nobody is Evil (except Belkar),

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0406.html

She states outright that everybody in the room is Evil, and they are rigging the system.

When you are a sociopath charged with enforcing the law, you start to believe you are ARE the law - as she did.

She was even given an indisputable sign that her actions were wrong - when she was stripped of Paladinhood. She continued to spin more and more convoluted theories without ever even considering that her summary execution of Shojo might have been wrong.

Soon said it flat out - she never once even considered the fact that she could be in the wrong, despite ample evidence to the contrary.

She's a classic example of Narcissistic Personality Disorder - she is never, EVER wrong. Any evidence to the contrary is clearly false or planted by your enemies to try to make you look bad.

It's really showcased in http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0409.html

She says it flat out, "I am special, the most powerful Paladin in the Sapphire Guard!"

If anything, Shojo's failing was not recognizing how unbalanced she was previously and throwing her in prison.

Porthos

2013-03-25, 05:00 PM

hamishspence

2013-03-25, 05:04 PM

Miko could have been a real sweet kid at one point who got twisted into what we saw on screen.

This post:

I've always felt that someone who had come to him with less underlying issues (whether due to her inherent personality or the trauma of losing her parents and getting sent to a monastery) could have been raised the same way and not turned out to be like Miko. Likewise, if Miko had never met Shojo, she probably would have left the monastery as an angry unstable loner with no purpose. Shojo's guidance was the tape that was held her together for so long, which is why she went to pieces when it was ripped off.

did seem to suggest (to me, anyway) that by the time Shojo recruited her, Miko was already close to being what we see now.

SaintRidley

2013-03-25, 05:05 PM

Miko's concern seems less upholding the letter of the law than upholding her own very warped understanding of morality, if strip 313a (a bonus strip) of War and XPs is any indication. Miko's problem is that she conflates Law and Good as well as Chaos and Evil, finding Chaos and Evil to both be opposites of Good, and Law to simply be another name for Good.

Brief summary of the bonus strip:
Miko suggests New Year's dinner with two other young paladins, who accept and suggest a restaurant that Miko does not approve of because the employees have been seen throwing dice in the alley behind the restaurant. Using her uncanny ability to jump to conclusions, she determines that the owners accept or encourage this "illegal (and more importantly immoral)" activity. In order to get out of having to dine with a psychopath, one of the paladins says they can't eat out with Miko after all, because they just hooked up over the weekend and were hoping to have a date. So Miko dines alone with Windstriker that night.

Porthos

2013-03-25, 05:09 PM

This post:

did seem to suggest (to me, anyway) that by the time Shojo recruited her, Miko was already close to being what we see now.

Which all but confirms the Father Figure betrayal angle, IMO.

Rogar Demonblud

2013-03-25, 08:26 PM

I can't remember a single Good act that she actually committed on-panel.

The closest she came was in the little showdown with Xykon and Redcloak. Probably when she escaped to ride with the news of the huge fricking hobgoblin army.

veti

2013-03-25, 09:09 PM

I can't remember a single Good act that she actually committed on-panel.

I have no brief for Miko, but that is a bit harsh. She shows concern (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0238.html) for the wellbeing of people in the inn, and even heads back in (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0243.html) to rescue the helpless.

She doesn't get a lot of opportunities to demonstrate 'good', but when she does, she does OK. Up until the point where she snaps, anyway...

GigaGuess

2013-03-25, 11:05 PM

I think it's pretty basic in that the person she put absolute, complete faith in as a barometer (Or as much of a barometer someone like Miko would look to) of Law and Good turned out to be an utter sham. Combine that with someone who is utterly assured that she cannot be incorrect (she trusted her own beliefs over a SPELL SPECIFICALLY DESIGNED TO DIVINE A PERSON'S INTENT after all) and you get...well...that.

Kish

2013-03-26, 07:38 AM

Combine that with someone who is utterly assured that she cannot be incorrect (she trusted her own beliefs over a SPELL SPECIFICALLY DESIGNED TO DIVINE A PERSON'S INTENT after all) and you get...well...that.
Uh. Let's have a few fewer capital letters for not putting Detect Evil above sapient-being judgment, shall we? Since it wouldn't actually have been either a good thing or something that reflected well on Miko had she responded to Durkon's explanation with the crown with, "You're trying to trick me! I know my Detect Evil ability is infallible!" and slaughtered Roy.

It's just a spell. It can be tricked as easily as any other first-level divination spell. It is not a "the DM guarantees you this person is/is not an acceptable target" device.

Copperdragon

2013-03-26, 07:42 AM

SPELL SPECIFICALLY DESIGNED TO DIVINE A PERSON'S INTENT after all)

You can throw out CAPS ALL YOU WANT... it does not change the fact Detect Evil is not finding out the intent of people or certain actions the people do.
Detect Evil tells you the alignment (unless it is fooled) of a being, nothing more. This is vastly different from intent.

GigaGuess

2013-03-26, 09:38 AM

Uh. Let's have a few fewer capital letters for not putting Detect Evil above sapient-being judgment, shall we? Since it wouldn't actually have been either a good thing or something that reflected well on Miko had she responded to Durkon's explanation with the crown with, "You're trying to trick me! I know my Detect Evil ability is infallible!" and slaughtered Roy.

It's just a spell. It can be tricked as easily as any other first-level divination spell. It is not a "the DM guarantees you this person is/is not an acceptable target" device.

You can throw out CAPS ALL YOU WANT... it does not change the fact Detect Evil is not finding out the intent of people or certain actions the people do.
Detect Evil tells you the alignment (unless it is fooled) of a being, nothing more. This is vastly different from intent.

Yeah, sorry, I meant it for emphasis and not to be snotty, but at any rate, I do stand corrected. Just the same though, it does show how Miko's mindset is. It was physically unthinkable for her to believe she was wrong. Shinjo stood as something that challenged her beliefs and rather than step down and evaluate, she rolled him into her increasingly convoluted scenario where the order must be evil. Even as she fell, she was convinced that it could not have been that she murdered someone, but because Roy (somehow) tricked her into doing something to make her fall.

Zerter

2013-03-26, 11:33 AM

Olinser

2013-03-26, 11:46 AM

The sad thing about the entire Miko saga is that she died. She was strong-willed in a way that played out poorly for her in OoTS, but if she had been given time to reflect on her actions, who knows what insights she could have attained? Imagine that same incredibly efficient, dedicated, fighting machine only with more wisdom. Would have been a true force for Good.

Uh, she was given the most concrete sign possible that her actions were wrong: being stripped of Paladinhood.

Instead of even CONSIDERING that her actions were wrong, she contrived more and more elaborate scenarios to pin the blame on ANYBODY but herself.

Give her 30 years she would still be convinced she was right.

Zerter

2013-03-26, 11:58 AM

Uh, she was given the most concrete sign possible that her actions were wrong: being stripped of Paladinhood.

Instead of even CONSIDERING that her actions were wrong, she contrived more and more elaborate scenarios to pin the blame on ANYBODY but herself.

Give her 30 years she would still be convinced she was right.

Uh... no. Miko was no average joe, Miko was extremely driven and pursued her goals at the cost of her own happiness. You need great personal strength to be like her and part of what comes with great personal strength is the ability to change. Unfortunately her development never got to the point where she channeled it properly, but given time it could have.

GigaGuess

2013-03-26, 12:16 PM

Uh... no. Miko was no average joe, Miko was extremely driven and pursued her goals at the cost of her own happiness. You need great personal strength to be like her and part of what comes with great personal strength is the ability to change. Unfortunately her development never got to the point where she channeled it properly, but given time it could have.

Could have, perhaps. And indeed, it took something very profound (Dying and being confronted by Soon himself) to even consider that she may have been wrong. Not even being stripped of her paladinhood and being tossed in prison did that. I am hesitant to think what else would have achieved that because it seemed literally anything else would just be spun into her convoluted persecution story.

Basically, I agree that she had the strength to affect great change in herself, but she lacked the desire to do so.

SowZ

2013-03-26, 12:35 PM

Personally I've always thought the Father Figure bit was a huge contributing factor to her snapping.

Also, we have heavy selective bias here. We don't see Miko when she wasn't crazy(ish) so therefore we presume she is always crazy(ish) (though, tbf, her scenes before the Order shows up don't exactly paint her in a crazy(ish) light - ust devoted to Duty). It's the same arguments when it comes to Eugene Greenhilt. We (outside of SoD) almost never see him when he isn't a callous jerk, so we presume he is always a callous jerk.

Miko could have been a real sweet kid at one point who got twisted into what we saw on screen.

Finally, unlike people like say Hinjo, Shojo might have been the only 'close' person in her life. Hinjo at least seemed to have other friends. But if all Miko had was Duty and Shojo, and then Shojo betrayed her (In her opinion) in one of the worst ways possible, and she was already teetering on the edge, it makes perfect sense to me that she acted in the way she did.

Not excusable. Not even close. But understandable. There is a major difference in the two statements after all. :smallwink:

I like Shojo, but I would say that he DID betray he. He tricked her, sure. But also? He made her think that her father figure and only friend/family member was losing his mind. He made her go through the pain of losing someone while they are still alive. That's a pretty hard betrayal. Was it justified? Probably. But that doesn't change how it effects Miko.

Uh... no. Miko was no average joe, Miko was extremely driven and pursued her goals at the cost of her own happiness. You need great personal strength to be like her and part of what comes with great personal strength is the ability to change. Unfortunately her development never got to the point where she channeled it properly, but given time it could have.

There is no evidence that she ever truly looked inside herself or examined things objectively. Not once. There's nothing as drastic as murdering your lord and falling from grace with your gods. If that doesn't get you to think, nothing will. She was incapable of guilt, either by nature or by choice. Could she have chosen to feel guilt and change? Probably, sure. But Belkar could choose to stop murdering people if he wanted to. Doesn't mean Miko wasn't the most unreasonable person ever.

Zerter

2013-03-26, 01:38 PM

There is no evidence that she ever truly looked inside herself or examined things objectively. Not once. There's nothing as drastic as murdering your lord and falling from grace with your gods. If that doesn't get you to think, nothing will. She was incapable of guilt, either by nature or by choice. Could she have chosen to feel guilt and change? Probably, sure. But Belkar could choose to stop murdering people if he wanted to. Doesn't mean Miko wasn't the most unreasonable person ever.

Change is not such a easy process. Miko barely had any time to reflect on her actions before she died. You compare her to Belkar, but I would rather compare her to Vaarsuvius. Vaarsuvius is also stubborn in the pursuit of her goals, the result of which is that it is hard to make her see things differently. But when extreme circumstances and time do make her see things differently the effect goes a lot deeper.

SowZ

2013-03-26, 10:36 PM

Change is not such a easy process. Miko barely had any time to reflect on her actions before she died. You compare her to Belkar, but I would rather compare her to Vaarsuvius. Vaarsuvius is also stubborn in the pursuit of her goals, the result of which is that it is hard to make her see things differently. But when extreme circumstances and time do make her see things differently the effect goes a lot deeper.

Thing is, Miko was confronted with the consequences of her actions and didn't spend time to think. She wouldn't have reflected given a year on the road, probably, because she wasn't trying to. It would have been totally possible to never confront her inner demons for the rest of her life and live blindly ignorant. Since this was the pattern she had lived her life by up until that point, I see no reason why she would have went through a painful and self-image shattering process when the alternative is so much easier, in line with her habits, and, (to her,) rewarding.

Her ego meant thinking well of herself is more rewarding than actually 'doing' good. Extreme circumstances? Those already happened. She faced the consequences of her evil and ran away from them and from herself. When V was confronted with the results of his evil deeds, her conscience shattered her. V broke down in grief.

Miko, in the same circumstance, lashed out at others. That is how she lived her life. Delighting in punishing and berating others, proving her own superiority. V and Miko have many of the same faults and have both committed great evil. But V is more rational and less sociopathic than Miko.

Soon himself did not think Miko could redeem himself. He thought it might be possible with more time, but even then he struck me as doubtful.

There are things to admire about Miko. There are things to admire about Redcloak. Both have many of the same faults. V shares many of their faults, as well. But at the end of the day, Miko and Redcloak have a pathological inability to admit they are wrong. V doesn't have that particular fault and so has a far greater ability to turn away from an evil path once she starts down it.

Zerter

2013-03-27, 05:20 AM

Thing is, Miko was confronted with the consequences of her actions and didn't spend time to think. She wouldn't have reflected given a year on the road, probably, because she wasn't trying to. It would have been totally possible to never confront her inner demons for the rest of her life and live blindly ignorant. Since this was the pattern she had lived her life by up until that point, I see no reason why she would have went through a painful and self-image shattering process when the alternative is so much easier, in line with her habits, and, (to her,) rewarding.

Her ego meant thinking well of herself is more rewarding than actually 'doing' good. Extreme circumstances? Those already happened. She faced the consequences of her evil and ran away from them and from herself. When V was confronted with the results of his evil deeds, her conscience shattered her. V broke down in grief.

Miko, in the same circumstance, lashed out at others. That is how she lived her life. Delighting in punishing and berating others, proving her own superiority. V and Miko have many of the same faults and have both committed great evil. But V is more rational and less sociopathic than Miko.

Soon himself did not think Miko could redeem himself. He thought it might be possible with more time, but even then he struck me as doubtful.

There are things to admire about Miko. There are things to admire about Redcloak. Both have many of the same faults. V shares many of their faults, as well. But at the end of the day, Miko and Redcloak have a pathological inability to admit they are wrong. V doesn't have that particular fault and so has a far greater ability to turn away from an evil path once she starts down it.

She did not have time to think. She went from one extremely stressful situation to another. This actually happened her entire life to some extent as far as the comic seems to indicate.

V reacted very poorly to being confronted with her (much more extreme) evil deeds at first. Not to mention she had it spelled out that she was taking the Evil way. It took time to pass before she set on a road to change. Miko was young and immature, there is no indication she had ever received a strong signal that there might be something wrong before. Yes, people might indicate it towards her, but she would be comparable to a professional that pursues her career with maximum vigor until she burns out. Not understanding that she is like other people until it happens.

Soon understood that redemption is reserved for only a few. Miko is many things, but she is not ordinary however. She could have been one of the few.

The comparison to Redcloak really does Miko no justice because of two reasons: Redcloak has shown he will not redeem himself despite age and chances to do so and Redcloak is a weak individual compared to Miko. His weak will compared to her is shown by the fact that any meaning he has in OoTS is derived from outside circumstances: the cloak is what gives him power, his master is what gives him power. Miko on the other hand forged her own way into this world. She is an orphan that willed herself into becoming the strongest warrior of the Sapphire guild at the young age of 28.

Carry2

2013-03-27, 08:24 PM

Regardless of how excusable Miko's behaviour toward the end might be, after reading Snips & Snails I'm just hoping she'll be treated a little more gently in the O-Chul backstory that Rich is supposed to be working on. As in, shown to be doing things that might concretely explain why she has an LG alignment to begin with. (I think there's adequate evidence for this in the earlier strips, but people are... somewhat prone to overlooking it.)

Reaver

2013-03-27, 09:37 PM

SowZ

2013-03-27, 10:33 PM

you guys are pretty tough on Redcloak. He strikes me as someone who has admirable goals and realizes that very unsavory methods are required to accomplish them. He's never really given the vibe of being a weak individual, rather demonstrating on several occasions that that is a facade he maintains to preserve his ability to manipulate the lich.

You really have to read Start of Darkness to realize what a hypocritical and bad person he is. I thought how you did too until I read SoD. His motivations are not nearly as simple as the good of goblinkind. That is his goal, but not his primary motivation. While he does care about it, he actually has far more selfish reasons to do what he does.

Revenge and a pathological case of the sunk cost fallact not being the least of these selfish motives.

She did not have time to think. She went from one extremely stressful situation to another. This actually happened her entire life to some extent as far as the comic seems to indicate.

V reacted very poorly to being confronted with her (much more extreme) evil deeds at first. Not to mention she had it spelled out that she was taking the Evil way. It took time to pass before she set on a road to change. Miko was young and immature, there is no indication she had ever received a strong signal that there might be something wrong before. Yes, people might indicate it towards her, but she would be comparable to a professional that pursues her career with maximum vigor until she burns out. Not understanding that she is like other people until it happens.

Soon understood that redemption is reserved for only a few. Miko is many things, but she is not ordinary however. She could have been one of the few.

The comparison to Redcloak really does Miko no justice because of two reasons: Redcloak has shown he will not redeem himself despite age and chances to do so and Redcloak is a weak individual compared to Miko. His weak will compared to her is shown by the fact that any meaning he has in OoTS is derived from outside circumstances: the cloak is what gives him power, his master is what gives him power. Miko on the other hand forged her own way into this world. She is an orphan that willed herself into becoming the strongest warrior of the Sapphire guild at the young age of 28.

Why would she change though? One thing about psychology, one of the first things is taught, is that people only undergoe serious and painful change when motivated. If losing her Paladinhood wasn't that Catalyst, I don't think anything would have been. There would be no strong motivation for her to change if the falling wouldn't do it. So why shift gears?

She is clearly not an introspective person at all, since she was immediately willing to kill her second in command, someone she know to be very Good, instead of spend some time in thought. Rather, she selfishly pursued her own freedom and ego at the expense of good peoples lives. Her moral code was far more flexible and self oriented than she would have anyone, (even herself,) believe. Becuase she has no problem murdering good people to avoid the law when it is after her.

She believed herself above retribution, above the law, above introspection. Since she never takes the chance to do it. If she has lived her life up til 28 pursuing new goal after new goal, never stopping to spend time in thought, why change now?

Procyonpi

2013-03-28, 12:14 AM

OOH BOY! Another Miko Thread! Guess I need to contribute my STRONGLY STATED OPINION!!!

Zerter

2013-03-28, 03:57 AM

Why would she change though? One thing about psychology, one of the first things is taught, is that people only undergoe serious and painful change when motivated. If losing her Paladinhood wasn't that Catalyst, I don't think anything would have been. There would be no strong motivation for her to change if the falling wouldn't do it. So why shift gears?

She is clearly not an introspective person at all, since she was immediately willing to kill her second in command, someone she know to be very Good, instead of spend some time in thought. Rather, she selfishly pursued her own freedom and ego at the expense of good peoples lives. Her moral code was far more flexible and self oriented than she would have anyone, (even herself,) believe. Becuase she has no problem murdering good people to avoid the law when it is after her.

She believed herself above retribution, above the law, above introspection. Since she never takes the chance to do it. If she has lived her life up til 28 pursuing new goal after new goal, never stopping to spend time in thought, why change now?

As you correctly state, you need motivation to change. Actually, let me show you an example of where I am coming from: The 2nd greatest show on earth (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_Arrest_%28The_Sopranos%29). Melfi raises the subject by asking Tony if he knows why sharks were always in motion and going on to explain that this is a condition that affects people with antisocial personalities; if they aren't constantly engaged in activity and receiving requisite stimulation, they tend to crash because they then have time to confront the ways in which their actions have brought suffering on others.

I am not saying Miko is like Tony Soprano 100%, but she was always in motion in her life. Your argument seems to be that the extremity of her acts should have led to introspective behaviour, mine is that if she would have been forced to take rest at any point it would have come naturally.

GigaGuess

2013-03-28, 09:27 AM

As you correctly state, you need motivation to change. Actually, let me show you an example of where I am coming from: The 2nd greatest show on earth (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_Arrest_%28The_Sopranos%29). Melfi raises the subject by asking Tony if he knows why sharks were always in motion and going on to explain that this is a condition that affects people with antisocial personalities; if they aren't constantly engaged in activity and receiving requisite stimulation, they tend to crash because they then have time to confront the ways in which their actions have brought suffering on others.

I am not saying Miko is like Tony Soprano 100%, but she was always in motion in her life. Your argument seems to be that the extremity of her acts should have led to introspective behaviour, mine is that if she would have been forced to take rest at any point it would have come naturally.

Except that at the very least, as long as she would have been in prison, she would have been convinced she was a martyr. That is the reason why she killed Shinjo in the first place. Since she saw the system she relied on as flawed with the revelation of what Shinjo truly was, she couldn't accept just letting him face justice through it's methods. Those same courts convicting her? A kangaroo court, imprisoning her unjustly. Remember, she thought that Roy and Shinjo were in cahoots and were ushering in an army of Kobolds to overtake Azure City and rule it without the Paladins to..."answer to" I suppose. In one fell swop, Azure City's justice went from her guiding light t rotten to the core. Now that being said, is it impossible that the gravity of her actions would have hit home? Certainly not. But at the very least, given her mindset and actions in her final hours, I have my sincere doubts.

Carry2

2013-03-28, 09:42 AM

We don't see Miko when she wasn't crazy(ish) so therefore we presume she is always crazy(ish) (though, tbf, her scenes before the Order shows up don't exactly paint her in a crazy(ish) light - ust devoted to Duty)...
She doesn't really start behaving seriously erratically until after the trial scene. Before that point she is, in fact, willing to give folks the benefit of the doubt and defer to empirical evidence. There's also reasonable evidence of genuine altruism on her part.

Miko after, say, strip 400 might or might not be redeemable, but she is a quite different person from Miko before, say, strip 250. Basically, the author had to bend over backwards to manufacture viable conflict between her and the Order at all.

Imgran

2013-03-28, 11:14 AM

Nah, he didn't have to bend over backwards, he just had to turn Belkar loose.

Belkar is the sadistic little X factor here. Roy's willingness to associate with a clearly and unrepentantly evil character is what convinced Miko of his guilt-by-association. It was the run-in with Belkar during the trial, his murder of multiple Azure City guards, and the Order's subsequent defense of Belkar that turned Miko against the order, and Shojo's collusion with the Order that caused her to snap.

In one way Miko was right. Despite your alignment, shielding an evil character from the consequences of his actions is an evil act. What she didn't get was that the only possible consequence of an evil action is not a death at the end of her own personal katana. The order had no problem exposing Belkar to the consequences of Azure City law. They just weren't going to stand around while he was summarily executed without a trial.

Miko was an extremist, and extremists don't believe in tones of gray or half measures. Once you accept that and combine it with Belkar's little caper during the trial in which he demonstrated his own clearly evil nature, and the sheer level of stress Miko was under to begin with, everything else clicks into place like it was meant to. And one complete lack of either space, time or willingness to examine the premise later, you have half a fallen paladin dying in the ruins of her former master's castle.

Carry2

2013-03-29, 07:59 PM

Nah, he didn't have to bend over backwards, he just had to turn Belkar loose.

Belkar is the sadistic little X factor here. Roy's willingness to associate with a clearly and unrepentantly evil character is what convinced Miko of his guilt-by-association. It was the run-in with Belkar during the trial, his murder of multiple Azure City guards, and the Order's subsequent defense of Belkar that turned Miko against the order, and Shojo's collusion with the Order that caused her to snap.
I was referring more to her first encounter with the Order, with the odd circumstances of evil twins and inconvenient trophy-crowns and oddly-timed assassination attempts complicating the picture. (I realise that comedy often relies on strange timing, but the effect is a little like a slapstick routine where somebody slips on a banana peel and winds up writhing in agony on a pitchfork. Yeah, I guess they should've been looking where they were going, but the serious consequences seem at odds with the frivolous cause.)

Frankly, I consider Miko's willingness to kill Belkar a fairly minor issue of legal technicality- what shocked me was her apparent willingness to mow down the Order for getting in the way. It seemed, under the circumstances, excessive, not to mention suicidal.

Xexyz

2013-03-31, 12:18 AM

She doesn't really start behaving seriously erratically until after the trial scene. Before that point she is, in fact, willing to give folks the benefit of the doubt and defer to empirical evidence. There's also reasonable evidence of genuine altruism on her part.

Miko after, say, strip 400 might or might not be redeemable, but she is a quite different person from Miko before, say, strip 250. Basically, the author had to bend over backwards to manufacture viable conflict between her and the Order at all.

I disagree. Right from the start she was presented as at least bloodthirsty: In her very first appearance in #120 she says, "my blades will be bathed in the blood of those responsible." Then as early as #189, her third (forth if you count a bonus strip) appearance, she kills Samantha and her father - while she could claim self-defense for Samantha, she straight up murders Sam's father. In strip #290, after she makes the comment above and Shojo tells her to bring the OotS back to Azure City, she sighs in disappointment that she's not allowed to just simply kill them - bringing them back to face justice is an annoying inconvenience to her.

From the very beginning Miko was a unrepentant killer, so when she first met the OotS - who are (with the exception of Belkar) good and decent adventurers - and tried to kill them, it was pretty inevitable that there was going to be conflict between them. In fact the only reason they stopped fighting back and agreed to be her prisoners was because she was a paladin - and even then Roy calls her out on her behavior in #251. There was certainly no unnecessary backwards-bending needed by the Giant in order to get Miko and the OotS to be antagonistic to each other.

JCAll

2013-03-31, 01:37 AM

I disagree. Right from the start she was presented as at least bloodthirsty: In her very first appearance in #120 she says, "my blades will be bathed in the blood of those responsible." Then as early as #189, her third (forth if you count a bonus strip) appearance, she kills Samantha and her father - while she could claim self-defense for Samantha, she straight up murders Sam's father. In strip #290, after she makes the comment above and Shojo tells her to bring the OotS back to Azure City, she sighs in disappointment that she's not allowed to just simply kill them - bringing them back to face justice is an annoying inconvenience to her.

From the very beginning Miko was a unrepentant killer, so when she first met the OotS - who are (with the exception of Belkar) good and decent adventurers - and tried to kill them, it was pretty inevitable that there was going to be conflict between them. In fact the only reason they stopped fighting back and agreed to be her prisoners was because she was a paladin - and even then Roy calls her out on her behavior in #251. There was certainly no unnecessary backwards-bending needed by the Giant in order to get Miko and the OotS to be antagonistic to each other.

I thought the went with her because Roy wanted to get in her pants.

ti'esar

2013-03-31, 02:48 AM

I disagree. Right from the start she was presented as at least bloodthirsty: In her very first appearance in #120 she says, "my blades will be bathed in the blood of those responsible." Then as early as #189, her third (forth if you count a bonus strip) appearance, she kills Samantha and her father - while she could claim self-defense for Samantha, she straight up murders Sam's father. In strip #290, after she makes the comment above and Shojo tells her to bring the OotS back to Azure City, she sighs in disappointment that she's not allowed to just simply kill them - bringing them back to face justice is an annoying inconvenience to her.

From the very beginning Miko was a unrepentant killer, so when she first met the OotS - who are (with the exception of Belkar) good and decent adventurers - and tried to kill them, it was pretty inevitable that there was going to be conflict between them. In fact the only reason they stopped fighting back and agreed to be her prisoners was because she was a paladin - and even then Roy calls her out on her behavior in #251. There was certainly no unnecessary backwards-bending needed by the Giant in order to get Miko and the OotS to be antagonistic to each other.

...It's really better to just humor Carry2 on this kind of thing.

rodneyAnonymous

2013-03-31, 04:11 AM

When I see this thread title I think "because spines don't bend that way".

hamishspence

2013-03-31, 04:28 AM

Then as early as #189, her third (forth if you count a bonus strip) appearance, she kills Samantha and her father - while she could claim self-defense for Samantha, she straight up murders Sam's father.

He is swinging his sword at her head, as he says "You killed my little girl!"

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0189.html

Carry2

2013-03-31, 11:51 AM

...It's really better to just humor Carry2 on this kind of thing.
Meaning what? That complacent silence is preferable to honest confrontation?

@ Xexyz- rather than addressing a set of specific arguments that have been repeatedly debunked dozens, possibly even hundreds of time on this board, it might save us all a great deal of time if you would read this thread (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=263542). All of it. Yes, all of it. Front to back, cover to cover, end to end, chewing slowly. Then get back to us.

Miko has legitimate flaws (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=14445092&postcount=441), and they do get worse over time. But 'incorrigible bloodthirsty sociopath' is a verdict that requires ignoring large chunks of her actual behaviour.

.

Xexyz

2013-03-31, 12:09 PM

Meaning what? That complacent silence is preferable to honest confrontation?

@ Xexyz- rather than addressing a set of specific arguments that have been repeatedly debunked dozens, possibly even hundreds of time on this board, it might save us all a great deal of time if you would read this thread (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=263542). All of it. Yes, all of it. Front to back, cover to cover, end to end, chewing slowly. Then get back to us.

Miko has legitimate flaws (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=14445092&postcount=441), and they do get worse over time. But 'incorrigible bloodthirsty sociopath' is a verdict that requires ignoring large chunks of her actual behaviour.

.

Ok, so I skimmed that thread to page 3 or so. Nothing beyond that was necessary. You obviously have your mind made up, so there's no point in engaging you on the matter because it's doubtful I have anything to say that you haven't heard before, and I don't care enough about the topic to try to change your opinion.

Good day.

Themrys

2013-03-31, 12:49 PM

I disagree. Right from the start she was presented as at least bloodthirsty: In her very first appearance in #120 she says, "my blades will be bathed in the blood of those responsible."

They have committed a crime that could destroy the universe.

Just read the comments under a newspaper article about some horrible crime. You'll find much, much worse threats than Miko's - after all, she basically just announces that she'll kill the OotS - which seems to be a common punishment in stickverse:
The OotS kills lots of humanoids for the crime of "being evil", or for attacking a group of adventurers, and you think it's bloodthirsty to want to kill someone for attacking the world?

Miko isn't evil. She isn't a likable person, but before she killed Shojo, she was clearly a good person.She's just misinformed and not clever enough to figure out the truth. And she does have a tendency to act before thinking.
Her fate shows that intent doesn't matter, that to be Good, you must be able and willing to find out what is good. And that's a valuable lesson for everyone.

Gift Jeraff

2013-03-31, 12:55 PM

When I see this thread title I think "because spines don't bend that way".

I keep thinking "because she was at the epicenter of a magical explosion," but I like yours better.

denthor

2013-03-31, 06:56 PM

I have read quite a bit of this thread by now. The one thing that Miko shows is how a Paladin can fall. I have been in many games where Paladins can get away with almost anything the players goes that was not enough to make me fall.

Scene: Group fights it way down to cells where prisoners are being held. The group tells where safety is the Paladin points up the stairs. The Stairs are trapped.

DM: You just fought your way down you know the stairs are trapped. They will die

The Paladin instructs "That way out." The player thinks this helping people escape if they die it a more honoralbe death since they are helping him. Nothing wrong I freed people.

The same character would routinely send corpses down the hall to set off traps and leave them.

Miko snapped but at least she got her stripping of powers. Hello Fighter without feats.

She minorly redeemed herself by rejecting "friendly contact" (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0419.html) here

SavageWombat

2013-03-31, 07:01 PM

I thought the went with her because Roy wanted to get in her pants.

The term is "smite evil", not ... wait, never mind.

Guy Incognito

2013-04-01, 10:27 PM

One of the things I've always thought was utterly tragic about Miko was her last words. In her last appearance, she doesn't do her usual "everyone but me is wrong, I'm a good paladin, I'm a 12.0 on the 10.0 scale of goodness" speech. She doesn't say much, but the little she does say is pretty revealing, and to understand why, you need to recognize Miko's two great flaws.

The first is a refusal to listen to logic and instead jump straight to the most personally-aggrandizing conclusion. Roy pointed it out multiple times in his third fight with her, but it shows up well before that: attacking the Order with lethal force when they clearly didn't know what she was talking about was an obvious early example.

The second is an absolute inability to handle compromise. She actually claimed it to be a virtue of hers at one point, taking other paladins to task for not upholding the same stringent attitude - even Hinjo. This one was likely brought on by an absolute lack of social skill or street smart: Miko's essentially a robot; she doesn't understand that being less than absolute honor and authority isn't really a bad thing.

Both of these traits seem to have been exacerbated by her time with the Order; while her attitude towards them was pretty awful, their understandably open hostility in her presence likely didn't help her paranoia, particularly since they were probably among the few people to ever share an extended journey with her. You can see her start fraying at the edges more and more after Roy calls her out; the bonus strips of War and XPs show her trying to seek divine guidance in shirt stains well before her Fall.

But her last scene is a complete reversal of that. When Soon tells her that she'll never be a paladin again, she doesn't contest his statement; she listens. When he's done talking, she asks, noticeably shaken and saddened, if she'll ever see Windstriker again. Miko knows how other planes work. If she was still operating under the belief that she's a Good Person being put through trials, she wouldn't bother asking: good people go to the good afterlife, and if that were the case with her, she could see Windstriker whenever she wants. But she's unsure now if she's going to the good afterlife, so she asks Soon. That's why Soon starts smiling: Miko has asked a question, rather than jumping to a conclusion.

And when Soon answers her question, referring to Windstriker as a visitor rather than a companion, Miko's response is "Okay... Okay, then... I can live with that." The first part shows that Miko understands the meaning of Soon's words: she's almost certainly left the good afterlife well behind. But the second part? "I can live with that?" That's a compromise. It's something people say every day, when they know that they can't have it perfect every time. It's accepting a setback and moving on from it, not obsessing over it and trying to erase it like Miko was so wont to do.

In short, it's the closest she ever comes to admitting she was wrong.

Then she dies.

Carry2

2013-04-02, 09:30 AM

The first is a refusal to listen to logic and instead jump straight to the most personally-aggrandizing conclusion. Roy pointed it out multiple times in his third fight with her, but it shows up well before that: attacking the Order with lethal force when they clearly didn't know what she was talking about...
...Yeah, because only innocent people would protest their innocence. I agree with the broad thrust of your argument, and it might be a fair characterisation of her behaviour if you average things out over the course of the strip. But I find it strange that you can dwell on some pretty subtle aspects of her death scene, when there are entire (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0174.html) strips (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0203.html) that explain her assault on the Order.

But the second part? "I can live with that?" That's a compromise.
I think that's more a tacit admission of fault, not a compromise. (She isn't bargaining here, because she has no further power to affect events. This (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0225.html) is a compromise. So is this (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0228.html).) It's worth noting that Soon was probably the only significant authority figure that Miko still had significant faith in, and that probably had a lot to do with her being willing to listen.

Given the vagaries of the planescape setting, we don't really know what afterlife Miko wound up in. (Windstriker's schedule is unknown, and Soon's wording is deliberately ambiguous, given that, IIRC, the author was hoping to avoid further controversy on the topic. But my money's on Arcadia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arcadia_(Dungeons_%26_Dragons)).)

Kish

2013-04-02, 09:38 AM

Windstriker would not be spending all his time with Miko in the afterlife under any circumstances. He's not dead.

Zerter

2013-04-02, 10:26 AM

Windstriker would not be spending all his time with Miko in the afterlife under any circumstances. He's not dead.

Windstriker lives in the afterlife, when he is in OoTS he is just visiting.

SaintRidley

2013-04-02, 10:35 AM

Windstriker lives in the afterlife, when he is in OoTS he is just visiting.

Specifically:

Once per day, as a full-round action, a paladin may magically call her mount from the celestial realms in which it resides.

Kish

2013-04-02, 10:37 AM

Zerter

2013-04-02, 12:28 PM

You're assuming that a paladin's mount doesn't get reassigned? That every paladin's mount serves exactly one paladin? That Thanh's mount, who we never saw, will do nothing now but spend eternity with Thanh? That Windstriker will spend the rest of his existence in Celestia now that Miko is dead?

All strike me as unlikely, but it's not possible to prove anything here.

Since you present no new arguments, I guess we are in agreement that Windstriker will be spending his time with Miko :smallsmile:.

SaintRidley

2013-04-02, 01:02 PM

You're assuming that a paladin's mount doesn't get reassigned? That every paladin's mount serves exactly one paladin? That Thanh's mount, who we never saw, will do nothing now but spend eternity with Thanh? That Windstriker will spend the rest of his existence in Celestia now that Miko is dead?

All strike me as unlikely, but it's not possible to prove anything here.

Even if reassigned, his home is in Celestia, and until his new assignment is high enough level, he'll be spending a good amount of his time kicking back in his Celestial stable.

Rogar Demonblud

2013-04-02, 02:33 PM

And over-eating Heavenly Oats brand fodder.

Imgran

2013-04-02, 03:20 PM

He is swinging his sword at her head, as he says "You killed my little girl!"

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0189.html

Yep. Both killings were at least technically legit self defense. I have no problem with the death of Samantha, and Daddy wasn't in a condition to listen to reason. And when daddy drew sword, he became lawful prey too, and subject to the mercy or lack thereof of his opponent.

There was probably a less lethal way to handle the problem of Daddy, but Samatha was an accomplished sorceress. Exhausting your nonlethal options when up against one of those is dicey at best. Since Daddy seemed to be a reasonably competent swordfigher, and stun-bind-and-abandon was probably death anyway, Miko handled the accounter relatively appropriately.

rodneyAnonymous

2013-04-02, 08:03 PM

There was probably a less lethal way to handle the problem of Daddy...

All that could have been avoided if Miko had made a Gather Information check instead.

Imgran

2013-04-02, 11:05 PM

... as we learn in retrospect.

In a world without "takebacks," your alignment is not defined by what you could or should have done had you thought of it at the time instead of 10 minutes later.

Miko made a series of reasonable requests for information and got attacked for her trouble. Everything she did in that scene is justifiable, even if it does reveal her willingness to err on the side of violence at times which was eventually part of the suite of psychological issues that would bite her in the butt.

Manga Shoggoth

2013-04-03, 06:52 AM

But her last scene is a complete reversal of that. When Soon tells her that she'll never be a paladin again, she doesn't contest his statement; she listens. When he's done talking, she asks, noticeably shaken and saddened, if she'll ever see Windstriker again. Miko knows how other planes work. If she was still operating under the belief that she's a Good Person being put through trials, she wouldn't bother asking: good people go to the good afterlife, and if that were the case with her, she could see Windstriker whenever she wants. But she's unsure now if she's going to the good afterlife, so she asks Soon. That's why Soon starts smiling: Miko has asked a question, rather than jumping to a conclusion.

There's a good reason for Miko's reaction here. Miko is Lawful, and Soon is the founder of the Sapphire Guild. He is the authority figure, and one who is a lot more personal than the Twelve Gods.

(I won't touch the question of Miko's alignment/afterlife destination after death - it's been done to death on this forum...)

vergil

2013-04-04, 12:40 AM

Might as well throw my two cents in.

Miko, I think, at heart, had two problems. One, she is inherently chaotic rather than lawful, and the strain of her nature conflicting with her nurture was simply too much, and two, she simply could not connect with other people, and that led to her trusting and relying on herself to an excessive degree.

To explain what I'm getting at, let's take a look at some of Miko's scenes before she meets the party.

You take a look at 174, and Miko clearly states that her master has ordered the Order of the Stick's execution. However, later on we see the scene, and that wasn't the case at all, he explicitly ordered that she not simply execute them and instead bring them back in for trial.

Then, when she finally confronts the order, she introduces herself in the most hyper-aggressive, confrontation inducing manner possible. She does not identify herself as a paladin, she does not state the crime, she does not identify where she is claiming authority from, and she flat out states (paraphrased) "either surrender so I can kill you later, or I'll kill you right now".

Now, she waits while the order to give a response (which you have to do once you demand surrender), but doesn't allow Roy to finish his "without a little" caveat.

I tend to look at this as "following the letter of the law while subverting the holy living hell out of the spirit". She stated her own preference for execution, even claiming that it was her master's order when it was later shown to clearly not be, and upon confrontation did quite literally everything within her power to ensure that the demand for surrender was not accepted. Basically, she wanted to kill them, and was willing to skirt the edges of her lord's order to do it.

While the evidence she gathered was rather damning (if a little colored by her poor investigation skills, seriously "what race were the men who attacked you" should have been one of the first questions out of her mouth and would have clued her in that something was off), she did not seem to understand the concept of "two sides to a story".

Her poor social skills are also demonstrated immediately afterwards, where she implies that there is no way that the Order could have obtained their wealth lawfully, and immediately thinks the best of the their enemies and the worst about the order themselves. That is likely to be received more than a little coldly even by a group of paladins, which the order is not.

She doesn't seem to "get" other people. Let's take a look a little later, in strip 223. She responds to Roy's statement of "you can't treat them like they're your hirelings" with "yes I can, they're my prisoners so they have to obey my orders".

Well, technically, they don't. While they are obligated to come with her to Azure city for trial, they are not obligated to do as she tells them disregarding that. To put it in analogy form, if I am being taken by the police to the station, and the policeman pulls over and tells me to risk my life to help him take down some gangsters that he sees, there is no jury that would convict me of anything for telling him "yeah, right" and sitting on my ass in the car. Even if I am under arrest, the police officer does not have the right to order me to perform tasks for him as though I were his slave, and any police officer who tried would have some disciplinary action headed his way.

Why is this relevant? It's because it shows she does not deal with others as people, she deals with them as positions. It's the same thing as when she tells Roy he has no right to speak to her that way because she's a samurai in 251. She doesn't try to defend herself against his accusations, just puts herself on a pedestal above him. Or again in 265, when she tells Hinjo to stop fraternizing because they're beneath him. Or in 289. She doesn't stop because the law demands a trial or because it's wrong to kill someone who's already subdued without due process, she stops because he is her lord and she has to obey his wishes. Is it starting to come together? She turns people into positions and deals with them according to that.

Going back to my theory about Miko's first problem, I strongly believe that Miko is inherently chaotic rather than lawful. She likes following her own judgement and left to her own devices she'd rather do what she wants than what the law requires, best illustrated before her fall in 289 where she is clearly unhappy that Belkar is going to get a trail rather than her simply gutting him as he lay there helplessly. It is only her trying to maintain her oath that keeps her lawful, and I suspect that the reason she tries so hard is because due to her upbringing, "law" and "good" got conflated.

Anyway, back to the original point. She has shown that she views her own judgement as the best guide, to the point of skirting Lord Shojo's orders to do it.

So, her nature and nurture are straining against each other every day, and her lack of ability to interact with other people caused her to be isolated, and so she had no one to talk to, or confide in, or help her with that conflict, and it just boiled until it broke loose.

Overall, while she does display some signs of altruism, I think she's far more focused on the "punish evil" part of being good than the "doing good" part, best illustrated in 211 where she's more focused on smiting the abominations than helping the dirt farmers. Which, I think, fits my theory, she doesn't really "get" other people so the parts of it that aren't "smite evil" are sort of alien to her, and being out fighting monsters makes her the sole arbitrator of justice and she can follow her conscience rather than be bound by laws, which she clearly resents when they come into conflict with her wishes. And before anyone says anything, that is a perfectly valid way of playing good, and it does not make her less good than someone focused more on the "doing good" part, although it does have a wider margin for error, as so tragically seen.

Chad30

2013-04-04, 08:18 AM

I always considered Miko extremely lawful, but not actually very good. You make a good case for her being a chaotic person trying to be lawful, though I'm not sure I agree with your opinion on it being a valid way to play a good character. Killing evil people doesn't make you a good person.

vergil

2013-04-04, 08:36 AM

Well, certainly just killing evil by itself is not alone enough to make you good (coughPunishercough), but she does show traits of altruism (if a little naive, such as not bothering to find out why Samantha and her father were tied up before releasing them) and rushing back into the burning building to try to save people.

I said that she was more focused on the smiting of evil than on doing good, not that she did no good at all.

She was a little triggerhappy at first, but not to the point where it negated her goodness, although she was walking a dangerous line. Then, once her sanity started slipping, she started veering from that line and, well, we know the rest.

sims796

2013-04-04, 12:12 PM

When did Miko become so popular all of a sudden, anyway?

Kish

2013-04-04, 12:14 PM

Strip #200.

The fanbase's division over whether she was the best or the worst thing that ever happened to the comic remains the deepest I've seen here.

sims796

2013-04-04, 12:32 PM

Strip #200.

The fanbase's division over whether she was the best or the worst thing that ever happened to the comic remains the deepest I've seen here.

I might as well start up discussion on Celia at this point. Seems like an instant 300+ thread.

Kish

2013-04-04, 12:37 PM

Copperdragon

2013-04-04, 12:53 PM

When did Miko become so popular all of a sudden, anyway?

When she died.

Chad30

2013-04-04, 12:55 PM

sims796

2013-04-04, 01:32 PM

In retrospect*, the division caused by Celia was never anywhere near as deep as that caused by Miko.

*Insofar as it is "in retrospect"; Celia is likely done with her stint as a semi-major character but is far from gone.

This must be one hell of a wound - you'd think these discussions would have been settled some odd 3 or 400 strips ago. Just curious as to what bought up these discussions now, of all times. Ain't like she's popping up to give us more to work with. Well, she might, I suppose, I don't write this stuff.

lio45

2013-04-04, 05:24 PM

This must be one hell of a wound - you'd think these discussions would have been settled some odd 3 or 400 strips ago. Just curious as to what bought up these discussions now, of all times. Ain't like she's popping up to give us more to work with. Well, she might, I suppose, I don't write this stuff.

You'll notice that every single time you see one of "these discussions", the thread starter's join date indicates that person wasn't a forum member 400 strips ago -- nor even a mere 300 strips ago.

So yes, these discussions would definitely have been settled long ago if this community was a closed group that didn't have the steady stream of new member additions over time that it actually has.

sims796

2013-04-04, 05:35 PM

You'll notice that every single time you see one of "these discussions", the thread starter's join date indicates that person wasn't a forum member 400 strips ago -- nor even a mere 300 strips ago.

So yes, these discussions would definitely have been settled long ago if this community was a closed group that didn't have the steady stream of new member additions over time that it actually has.

Alright, no need to get snippy here, it isn't that serious at all. I'm not insulting anybody here over the seemingly recent Miko fixation, just wondering why it's now of all times.

It's just a curiosity that's been rattling in my head. New members or no, this is a rather old character whose story was resolved long ago. I find it noteworthy that she is still a topic of discussion, even to the old members still on this board; after all, this thread isn't filled with new members only, this must still be a topic of interest to older members as well. Especially in light of what's been going down in the comics now. I expected a few more Durkula or Marack threads before this.

Heck, thinking back, there's been a "dry spell" of all things Miko for a while. I'd have thought Celia to be a more discussion-worthy character. Or at least, I'd thought I'd see more of that popping up.

Kish

2013-04-04, 05:40 PM

I expected a few more Durkula or Marack threads before this.
I know what "Durkula" refers to, but what's Marack?

Tvtyrant

2013-04-04, 05:43 PM

I know what "Durkula" refers to, but what's Marack?

http://images.wikia.com/yugioh/images/3/3a/Yami_marik_ID_by_88yami_marik.jpg

I feel bad about myself now..

sims796

2013-04-04, 05:44 PM

I know what "Durkula" refers to, but what's Marack?

That was cold. Malack. Sorry for the typo, I suppose :smalltongue:

http://images.wikia.com/yugioh/images/3/3a/Yami_marik_ID_by_88yami_marik.jpg

I feel bad about myself now..

Shame there isn't a like button on this site.

lio45

2013-04-04, 06:01 PM

Alright, no need to get snippy here, it isn't that serious at all. I'm not insulting anybody here over the seemingly recent Miko fixation, just wondering why it's now of all times.

Your observations don't mirror mine on that point... that Miko fixation has been a present and visible phenomenon on the forum since the days when Miko was still in the current strips. (Of course the exact level of Miko-themed forum activity will show random variations over the course of each year... but when you observe one of these chance increases, no need to "wonder why it's now of all times.")

It's just a curiosity that's been rattling in my head. New members or no, this is a rather old character whose story was resolved long ago.

No, it most definitely wasn't resolved "long ago" to someone who's just discovered/read the whole comic then joined the forum.

I find it noteworthy that she is still a topic of discussion, even to the old members still on this board; after all, this thread isn't filled with new members only, this must still be a topic of interest to older members as well.

Old members obviously like to look around various threads, otherwise they wouldn't have remained active members...

Especially in light of what's been going down in the comics now. I expected a few more Durkula or Marack threads before this.

Seriously? There has been a gazillion of those recently. I expected the opposite...

Heck, thinking back, there's been a "dry spell" of all things Miko for a while. I'd have thought Celia to be a more discussion-worthy character. Or at least, I'd thought I'd see more of that popping up.

I'm pretty sure most of us would disagree with your opinion that Celia is a more discussion/argument-worthy character than Miko. Miko's in the major league...

sims796

2013-04-04, 06:09 PM

Your observations don't mirror mine on that point... that Miko fixation has been a present and visible phenomenon on the forum since the days when Miko was still in the current strips. (Of course the exact level of Miko-themed forum activity will show random variations over the course of each year... but when you observe one of these chance increases, no need to "wonder why it's now of all times.")

No, it most definitely wasn't resolved "long ago" to someone who's just discovered/read the whole comic then joined the forum.

Old members obviously like to look around various threads, otherwise they wouldn't have remained active members...

Seriously? There has been a gazillion of those recently. I expected the opposite...

I'm pretty sure most of us would disagree with your opinion that Celia is a more discussion/argument-worthy character than Miko. Miko's in the major league...

Ok, dude. It really, really isn't that serious at all. Sorry for bringing up a simple observation of mine, I didn't think it'll turn into a huge "thing", and I certainly am not looking for a long, drawn out, quotation dissecting "debate". Though I should have, to be fair.

Kish

2013-04-04, 06:14 PM

That was cold.
It may be, but it was also uncomprehending. If you want me to think "typo," y'might want to not deliberately misspell another character's name in the same sentence. :smalltongue:

sims796

2013-04-04, 06:16 PM

It may be, but it was also uncomprehending. If you want me to think "typo," y'might want to not deliberately misspell another character's name in the same sentence. :smalltongue:

Hah, that is true, easy to think I was mixing up two names together :smallbiggrin:

lio45

2013-04-04, 06:38 PM

Ok, dude. It really, really isn't that serious at all. Sorry for bringing up a simple observation of mine, I didn't think it'll turn into a huge "thing", and I certainly am not looking for a long, drawn out, quotation dissecting "debate". Though I should have, to be fair.

Don't worry... basically, all you did was ask a not-so-unreasonable question, and I happened to have the answer to it.

(And even that long, drawn out, quotation-dissecting post of mine didn't really take me more than a minute to write.)

The_Jackal

2013-04-04, 06:38 PM

Miko is a complex character, and I think worth discussing. She's not my favorite character, but I didn't think she had no redeemable qualities, and I didn't cheer when she died. She's kind of a tragic antagonist, in my opinion. A good example of what happens when you take lawful too far.

I would have put her in the lawful neutral category, but after vergil's post that may not be accurate for her.

She probably would have been more easily forgotten if she didn't listen to soon, and shouted at him that she was still right.

I don't think Miko's a very complex character, but she's put in a complex situation of serving her own egomania and being bound by oaths as to her obedience and behaviour. Whatever you may think of Miko's goodness or evilness, you at least have to concede that she's IMMENSELY self-centered, driven by a level of confirmation bias that would make Fox News envious. This quote (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0406.html) pretty much confirms that:

Everyone in this room but you and I are agents of Evil, whether or not their alignment registers as such.

And that's what really drives her character: Not good or evil, but unswerving belief in the face of contrary evidence. What her intentions were are really irrelevant, the results of her actions, based on that fallacious reasoning, were undeniably unlawful, and arguably evil.

sims796

2013-04-04, 06:46 PM

Don't worry... basically, all you did was ask a not-so-unreasonable question, and I happened to have the answer to it.

(And even that long, drawn out, quotation-dissecting post of mine didn't really take me more than a minute to write.)

Ok, cool. I didn't want a huge argument off of this thing, I've seen it happen far too often on this site, and I didn't want to derail this thread simply for that.

ti'esar

2013-04-04, 08:06 PM

Strip #200.

The fanbase's division over whether she was the best or the worst thing that ever happened to the comic remains the deepest I've seen here.

Is that actually what the division is over? Almost all modern discussion I've seen is about whether Miko was a bad person, not a bad character.

Kish

2013-04-04, 08:24 PM

The ones who really hated her existence seem to have left the site.

...I remember one who insisted she was the DM's girlfriend, a Blackguard, and She-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named, and "corrected" anyone who called her Miko instead of one of those things.

Shadowknight12

2013-04-04, 08:34 PM

...I remember one who insisted she was the DM's girlfriend

So a competent female antagonist who is not overtly sexualised is the DM's girlfriend now? :smallmad: I'm glad whoever thought that way is gone.

rodneyAnonymous

2013-04-04, 08:58 PM

Olinser

2013-04-04, 09:05 PM

Miko was a lot more than competent, she took out the whole Order single-handed. I disagree with "teacher's pet" type accusations but that is understandable.

Also, it doesn't seem relevant to me, but she was sexualized more than most female characters in the strip (though not as much as some): repeatedly referred to as "hot", and Roy drooled over her for a bit. She was just not at all responsive.

If by 'took out the whole order single-handed' you mean 'beat the order with the aid of her horse (which doesn't make it single-handed), when Durkon was sitting in the background, while Roy had the absolute worst (and non-magical) weapon possible, and when the DM (Rich) had already decided she had to win the fight', then yes, you are correct. Seriously, when he got his sword back Roy took her out single-handedly.

Shadowknight12

2013-04-04, 09:07 PM

Miko was a lot more than competent, she took out the whole Order single-handed. I disagree with "teacher's pet" type accusations but that is understandable.

Because Durkon refused to fight her, Elan did nothing and Roy had a non-magical greatclub as a weapon. She was fighting a rogue, a ranger, a crippled fighter and a blasting wizard. The first time she fought them, the rain nullified Haley and V's attacks. And since she was the highest-level paladin in the Sapphire Guard, it's possible she was considerably higher level than the Order at that time.

Now I don't like Miko one bit, but she was a great example of a competent female warrior, and I hate the idea that her agency and power are denied and granted instead to the presumably male DM who made it happen (as per the "DM's girlfriend" comment).

rodneyAnonymous

2013-04-04, 09:07 PM

Rakoa

2013-04-04, 09:08 PM

If by 'took out the whole order single-handed' you mean 'beat the order when Durkon was sitting in the background, while Roy had the absolute worst (and non-magical) weapon possible, and when the DM (Rich) had already decided she had to win the fight', then yes, you are correct.

Durkon, perhaps, did not contribute much. Roy was far from useless, and his weapon was not "the absolute worst", but certainly was nonmagical. Which is largely irrelevant. It isn't as if his entire build is based of wielding a +1 Longsword or something.

And to say that the DM had decided she needed to win is a weak argument at best. Rich's will determines every single battle in this comic. By this logic, no character is competent, they just dance on their puppet strings to his tune.

Tragak

2013-04-04, 09:11 PM

Didn't Durkon specifically show that the storm was the only reason Miko lasted more than one round?

Oh, right, Durkon :smallfrown:

rodneyAnonymous

2013-04-04, 09:14 PM

He speculated. It is possible. Not "show"ed as in "proved", or anything. Like I said, disadvantages. Still :) That is pretty impressive.

Shadowknight12

2013-04-04, 09:22 PM

They were at a few disadvantages but still, one versus five :) The battle did go "luckily" (though plausibly) in her favor. She exhibited battle prowess several other times. "Competent" seems like an extreme understatement.

I know what you mean but that is kind of exaggerating for the sake of a point, she did in fact have some potentially "Mary Sue" qualities and being a combat badass was one of them.

One versus four. Elan did nothing in both fights. In the first fight, her tanglefoot bag and the storm neutralised V right off the bat, who also did nothing. The storm also neutralised Haley until she took Elan's rapier.

She wasn't some combat master who took out five people at once. She was a moderately competent warrior who fought four people with the aid of her intelligent mount and heavily relied on strategies that shut down one or more members while she took care of the Order one by one.

Not to mention that the Order fought her directly and without any sort of cunning whatsoever. When Belkar faced off against her on his own, he relied on trickery, the environment, traps and guerilla warfare to whittle her down (and it worked. He could have killed her all on his own at one point).

While she was a horrible person who I do not miss in the comic at all, it is also pretty crappy to see that she gets a "Mary Sue!" or "DM's girlfriend!" treatment when the other villains get treated as proper antagonists regardless of how many times they beat the protagonists to a pulp.

sims796

2013-04-04, 09:22 PM

He speculated. It is possible. Not "show"ed as in "proved", or anything. Like I said, disadvantages. Still :) That is pretty impressive.

Agreed. I can't stand Miko, glad she's dead, but I wouldn't dare call her anything other than powerful. She beat the order twice - the second time in an even playing field (fine, 2 vs 5). She's good.

vergil

2013-04-04, 09:38 PM

Oh, Miko's good, but she ain't good enough to drop the entire Order without surprise, luck, good tactics by her (combined with poor tactics by them), at least one of their members doing nothing and at least another one of them lacking their specialized weapon. Look at the way Belkar KO'ed her, or the way Roy beat her like a red-headed stepchild in the throne room.

She is skilled and powerful, but saying that she's powerful enough to drop the entire Order without a laundry list of things being stacked in her favor is way overrating her.

rodneyAnonymous

2013-04-04, 10:49 PM

She is skilled and powerful...

That's all I'm sayin'. Skilled and powerful go a lot farther than competent.

Also, it's still 1-on-5 with V being neutralized early and Elan being useless. And she did beat them twice, with fewer advantages the second time. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=291639&postcount=489)

Shadowknight12

2013-04-04, 11:08 PM

That's all I'm sayin'. Skilled and powerful go a lot farther than competent.

Also, it's still 1-on-5 with V being neutralized early and Elan being useless. And she did beat them twice, with fewer advantages the second time. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=291639&postcount=489)

Nope, same deal. Elan was still useless, Durkon was still reluctant to fight her, she neutralised V right off the bat (note how she apparently begins the fight right next to V, rather than several feet away, as it was the case for the first fight), eliminated Haley's ranged attacks with Windstriker and got a lucky drop on Belkar at the start of the fight, so her only true enemy was Roy, who had a less than optimal weapon (also, his original sword was +4, according to the Azure City blacksmith. That's nothing to sneeze at).

She kept switching between Roy and Belkar while Windstriker kept Haley busy, making it a 3-on-2 fight that she won because Belkar's Will save was terrible and she sicced her mount on the ranged rogue who lacked a backup weapon.

She was competent, while the Order was not. Once the Order gets its act together, she gets pummelled like the Tier 5 she is.

vergil

2013-04-04, 11:34 PM

Shadowknight12

2013-04-04, 11:45 PM

Doesn't stunning fist target fortitude and not will? Belkar should have decent consitution given that he seemed to have dumped every single mental stat, combine that with the halflings plus 1 racial bonus on all saves, fortitude being a good save for both rangers and barbarians and he should have been making his stunning fist saves, especially since Miko's major stats seem to be dexterity and charisma, so her save DC shouldn't be monstrously high.

I just checked and yup, it was Fortitude. Having said that, I doubt Charisma was a high stat for her at all. She seemed exceedingly abrasive and socially graceless. I'm pretty sure her highest stats were all physical (she seemed to be able to take quite a beating, much like Roy). I don't think her Wisdom was too high, but it could have been enough to give the DC a +1 or +2. If she was level 16 and had a Wisdom of 14, that would have been a DC 20. Though admittedly Belkar's Fort save would have been something like +8 or +10 back then, and would have had even odds of succeeding.

Roy also has weapon focus and specialization for his greatsword (probably the greater versions of each as well, maybe improved critical while he's at it, he's certainly got the feats to spare), so that club really cuts in to his effectiveness.

I'm more on shadowknight's side here, her earlier success was the result of surprise, good tactics and the Order being disadvantaged (and acting like a bunch of gibbering morons, Vaarsuvius with magic missile, I'm looking at you). In a one-on-one with both Belkar and Roy, she got trucked from start to finish.

She did pretty good against redcloak, but he seems to be more a blaster-type cleric, and her high save bonuses give her the edge against him, just like V being a blaster type wizard puts V at a disadvantage against her as well. If V hadn't barred necromancy then waves of exhaustion or ray of enfeeblement (which don't allow saves) would have been the end of her right quick. Hell, even V's transmutation spells could have buffed the party and tipped the odds in their favor. The Order was just operating at significantly less than full capacity, both physically, numerically and mentally.

This is pretty much my take on it, yes. In fact, Durkon's speculation is that V and Haley could have taken her out on their own in the first round, if it wasn't for the storm. And in the second fight, if she hadn't taken V out in the first round, she wouldn't have fared nearly so well.

Anterean

2013-04-05, 05:26 AM

How exactly does eliminating one of the more dangerous opponents right of the bat ( V.) speak against her abilities ?

Tragak

2013-04-05, 08:52 AM

Didn't Durkon specifically show that the storm was the only reason Miko lasted more than one round? Wow, I completely forgot about the Railroad. My bad :smallredface:

Shadowknight12

2013-04-05, 10:13 AM

How exactly does eliminating one of the more dangerous opponents right of the bat ( V.) speak against her abilities ?

She caught V by surprise, unbuffed, unprotected, did not even have to move to attack her, and did so before anyone could react.

We see in the first fight that if V had had some distance on her, she would've Disintegrated Miko to the Abyss and back.

Carry2

2013-04-05, 12:10 PM

Hmm. Long thread. Many posts.

Oh, Miko's good, but she ain't good enough to drop the entire Order without surprise, luck, good tactics by her...
Well yes, but arguably the ability to recognise, exploit or engineer such favouring factors is part of what made her dangerous. (Incidentally, the lead sheet damage has no basis in D&D mechanics, and she was stripped of her powers in the fight with Roy.)

Also, if we're going to talk about all the extenuating circumstances which allowed her to prevail in battle with the order, it's only fair to acknowledge a large number of extenuating circumstances which prompted her, e.g, going crazy.

...And that's what really drives her character: Not good or evil, but unswerving belief in the face of contrary evidence.
Again, this may have been true at one point in her development, but it kind of overlooks the earlier occasions when her convictions were, quite demonstrably (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0264.html), swerved by contrary testimony. (It's also hard to interpret belief-in-the-importance-of-rescuing (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0243.html)-others-from-blazing-infernos as non-good.)

In retrospect*, the division caused by Celia was never anywhere near as deep as that caused by Miko.
I'm frankly surprised that Celia's behaviour was ever remotely contentious. Sometimes I wonder if the author introduced her specifically to find out what happens if someone with utterly unimpeachable moral/ethical credentials has the temerity to argue with the Order.

Miko, I think, at heart, had two problems. One, she is inherently chaotic rather than lawful, and the strain of her nature conflicting with her nurture was simply too much, and two, she simply could not connect with other people, and that led to her trusting and relying on herself to an excessive degree.
This might be a more interesting and original point to discuss. I'll probably have to come back to it later.

.

Rakoa

2013-04-05, 03:45 PM

She caught V by surprise, unbuffed, unprotected, did not even have to move to attack her, and did so before anyone could react.

We see in the first fight that if V had had some distance on her, she would've Disintegrated Miko to the Abyss and back.

So Miko attacked intelligently, is what you're saying. How, again, does this make her incompetent?

Shadowknight12

2013-04-05, 04:05 PM

How, again, does this make her incompetent?

I never said that. On the contrary, I said the exact opposite: that she was competent. My argument is that she was merely competent. Not a "DM's girlfriend" or a "Mary Sue" or any other vaguely sexist presumptions. She was competent while the order was incompetent. Once the Order started acting competently, numerical/tier advantage reasserted itself and her competence could no longer save her.

Rakoa

2013-04-05, 04:11 PM

I never said that. On the contrary, I said the exact opposite: that she was competent.

Anterean asked for reasons asserting Miko's lack of ability. You provided a list. Could you quote me, exactly, where you said she was competent in your last post?

Shadowknight12

2013-04-05, 04:16 PM

Anterean asked for reasons asserting Miko's lack of ability. You provided a list. Could you quote me, exactly, where you said she was competent in your last post?

It wasn't in my last post. It was in practically every other post I made in this thread.

Carry2

2013-04-05, 04:37 PM

It wasn't in my last post. It was in practically every other post I made in this thread.
Point taken.

Dr.Epic

2013-04-05, 07:54 PM

Miko was, to be blunt, the epitome of what has become known as the "Lawful Stupid" Paladin.

She stood up for her country. She never let anybody retire her. Never cashed in on her reputation. Never set up a company selling posters and diet books and toy soldiers based on herself. Never became a prostitute. If that makes her a "Lawful Stupid" Paladin, you might as well call me a Lawful Stupid Paladin, too.

Major points if you get the reference.

Carry2

2013-04-07, 04:56 PM

Going back to my theory about Miko's first problem, I strongly believe that Miko is inherently chaotic rather than lawful. She likes following her own judgement and left to her own devices she'd rather do what she wants than what the law requires...
I could quibble with a number of specific points you make to illustrate her priorities, but I do agree that Miko arguably exhibits a number of stereotypically Chaotic qualities: A tendency to work alone, resourcefulness, imagination, strong passions, a certain tendency to be economical with the truth, and even, ultimately, a tinge of madness. And yet, she's also organised, disciplined, conformist, authoritarian in the sense of both obeying and expecting to be obeyed, and at least typically adhered to a rather trying ethical code, which are all Lawful qualities. (There's a similar tension between what I believe is her evident concern for others' material well-being expressed through her actions, and her seemingly total disregard for, or at least lack of attunement to, their feelings.)

I think, however, that resolving whether this is really a nature vs. nurture question requires more information about her background than we really have. What we do know is that she was orphaned at an early age, taken in by the monks at the monastery, and then selected by Shojo to be a paladin at age 13. The Giant has remarked (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=12240910&postcount=39) that Shojo was a surrogate father-figure to her, that he recognised "she needed discipline to function", that otherwise she "would probably have left the monastery an angry (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ew3--XVFioU), unstable loner (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vZa0Yh6e7dw) with no sense of purpose in life", and that most of her more benign qualities could be attributed to his guidance or intervention. So, to the extent that Shojo gave Miko a structured environment, this appears to have been to her benefit.

But what about the monastery? It's tempting to ascribe her harsher qualities to internalisation of her formative caregivers' handling methods, but while her background certainly admits the possibility of trauma, it's also conceivable that the folks at the monastery were entirely decent people, and/or that she was orphaned too young to even remember the experience. 'Needing discipline to function' could be interpreted as meaning she was naturally erratic and needed external correction, or that she naturally preferred a stable, orderly environment and couldn't orient herself otherwise.

Going back even earlier, there are a few elements to her background that I find puzzling: Miko was born to noble parents, and while there's no shortage of ways for a feudal warrior-class aristocrat to die, you'd expect their children to either be, e.g, raised by servants and retainers, taken hostage, or butchered to tie up loose ends. Why and how did she wind up at the monastery? Did her parents die from illness, or because of a political feud? Would she have someone to bear a grudge against? Was she out on the streets? She certainly seems to have been very driven.

If one were to drag in real-world psychology, you can argue Miko shows at least some traits from a constellation of possible mental/personality disorders- schizoid, obsessive-compulsive, ASD, take your pick. And in the worst-case scenario, there's a passage from Johnson's Character Styles that might be telling-

"At the low end of the ego development continuum, one sees those blatantly narcissistic individuals whom most laymen could diagnose after a couple of minutes of casual conversation. These people show the gross levels of entitlement, grandiosity, manipulation, devaluation, and objectification of others, which are definitional to all as narcissistic. Some of these people can be relatively effective in life in spite of all this, because they are able to mobilise a good deal of their aggressive self-expression and, particularly when they are bright and talented, may be quite successful in some areas. Interpersonally, they are a disaster, and if the 'false self' fails, they break down into serious forms of void and fragmentation, often becoming truly dangerous to themselves and others."

But it would be grossly unfair to say that Miko is unequivocally entitled, manipulative, or devaluing of others, and I tend to be skeptical (http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/psp/54/6/1031/) of blaming-the-parents for anything short of extreme abuse. Then again, I doubt the author had the DSM IV in one hand when he has writing the script, but he has expressed the opinion (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=12718655&postcount=132) that fantasy literature has no value except insofar as it helps us to think about reality. (And also forbids real-world religion or politics discussions, but I digress.)

My basic point here is that we don't have enough information to go on. But I do think Miko is likely to have layers, so to speak.

Major points if you get the reference.
I'm not locked in here with you- you're locked in here with ME! (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0419.html)

Dr.Epic

2013-04-07, 06:57 PM

I'm not locked in here with you- you're locked in here with ME! (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0419.html)

No Google search! You cheated! I know!:smalltongue:

vergil

2013-04-07, 07:11 PM

I could quibble with a number of specific points you make to illustrate her priorities, but I do agree that Miko arguably exhibits a number of stereotypically Chaotic qualities: A tendency to work alone, resourcefulness, imagination, strong passions, a certain tendency to be economical with the truth, and even, ultimately, a tinge of madness. And yet, she's also organised, disciplined, conformist, authoritarian in the sense of both obeying and expecting to be obeyed, and at least typically adhered to a rather trying ethical code, which are all Lawful qualities.

Most of the lawful qualities you list I attribute to her upbringing rather than her inherent nature. I agree with you that I'm trying to extrapolate her personality from a relatively small sample size, but isn't that how you bring 2D characters to life to begin with?

Authoritarian and conformist, for example, I would attribute to what I believe to be her second problem, relating to people as positions rather than other people, which I believe comes from trying to be lawful without really understanding or internally believing it. Remember, I said that she's inherently chaotic trying to be lawful, so her exhibiting lawful traits wouldn't be in conflict with that interpretation, since that's what she's been raised to believe is good, and thus is trying to be that way. The same thing with the ethical code, she wants to adhere to it because she's been taught that said ethical code is what is good and right, but at the same time, if it gets in the way of what she wants, she's willing to skirt it, or even outright break it.

(There's a similar tension between what I believe is her evident concern for others' material well-being expressed through her actions, and her seemingly total disregard for, or at least lack of attunement to, their feelings.)

Oh, I agree, and I'm more on the lack of attunement side. Again, referring back to what I believe to be her second problem, most of her life feelings have had very little to do with it. One of the hallmarks of most east asian (which is more what the D&D Monk is rather than the cloistered european type) monks is respect and obedience towards those higher than you, and the fuedal samurai system that the Azure City paladins seem to be also place a great deal of emphasis on obeying your superiors.

To Miko's credit, I do not believe that she is intending to be a jackass when she insinuates that there is no way the Order could have legally obtained their wealth or the other comments that piss them off, but I also don't think that she really cares either way. To her, thanks to her monk and paladin upbringing, you are supposed to respect your superiors, and as the Order are her prisoners, she is their superior and they are supposed to show her proper deference. Of course, she doesn't realize that they don't operate under the same principle, which is where a lot of the tension comes from.

I think, however, that resolving whether this is really a nature vs. nurture question requires more information about her background than we really have.

Yeah, I realize that we're working off of, what, 70 strips that she appears in? I don't dispute that a lot of what I am saying is conjecture, nor do I claim that I am certainly correct. What I am posting is the way that her character makes the most sense to me, and I realize that there are probably things that I've missed. Isn't that why we post? So we can learn other people's views and have our own challenged?

What we do know is that she was orphaned at an early age, taken in by the monks at the monastery, and then selected by Shojo to be a paladin at age 13. The Giant has remarked that Shojo was a surrogate father-figure to her, that he recognised "she needed discipline to function", that otherwise she "would probably have left the monastery an angry, unstable loner with no sense of purpose in life", and that most of her more benign qualities could be attributed to his guidance or intervention. So, to the extent that Shojo gave Miko a structured environment, this appears to have been to her benefit.

Yes, I've read that quote before, and the thing that struck me was that she would leave the monastery as an "angry, unstable loner with no sense of purpose in life". Aren't monasteries inherently rather structered environments themselves? Why would she leave such a structured place, a place that would usually place a great deal of emphasis on discipline, understanding oneself and inner tranquility so unstable? Unless that environment wasn't sitting well with her due to her inherently chaotic nature, and she was, at least on a subconscious level, rebelling against it?

Shojo gave her a vent. She could turn that anger, that turmoil inside of her, onto her enemies. I think that smiting evil became the way that she dealt with that constant internal struggle.

I agree that Shojo managed to keep her going several years past the point that she probably would have gotten on her own (he does seem to be one of the few, if not only person that she connected with as another person, look to her bringing him back a souvenier), but I also think that it was only a matter of time before she finally lost it, although the losing it did not have to be as spectacular as it was.

To summarize my somewhat rambling position here (and I do apologize for that), Miko was being held together by duct tape and glue (Lord Shojo's guidance and said structured environment), without anyone, even her, trying to fix the underlying issue that was causing the problem in the first place.

But what about the monastery? It's tempting to ascribe her harsher qualities to internalisation of her formative caregivers' handling methods, but while her background certainly admits the possibility of trauma, it's also conceivable that the folks at the monastery were entirely decent people, and/or that she was orphaned too young to even remember the experience.

Oh, I'm not in the slightest suggesting that she was abused, or that the people at the monastery weren't decent, just that from what I understand of the typical monastery, respect for authority (the "heirarchy" thing that I mentioned) is more important that personal interaction, and she ended up applying that model to all of her future interactions, even in cases where it wasn't necessary and even detrimental.

'Needing discipline to function' could be interpreted as meaning she was naturally erratic and needed external correction, or that she naturally preferred a stable, orderly environment and couldn't orient herself otherwise.

And I tend to view it as a milder form of the first one, she was probably naturally...free-spirited, but a monastery tends to be a place of discipline, and rather than work with her so she could learn to function as a free-spirit, they sort of forced her into a lawful mould that didn't really fit her.

Going back even earlier, there are a few elements to her background that I find puzzling: Miko was born to noble parents, and while there's no shortage of ways for a feudal warrior-class aristocrat to die, you'd expect their children to either be, e.g, raised by servants and retainers, taken hostage, or butchered to tie up loose ends. Why and how did she wind up at the monastery? Did her parents die from illness, or because of a political feud? Would she have someone to bear a grudge against? Was she out on the streets? She certainly seems to have been very driven.

That is something that I honestly can't speculate about. Starting at the monastery is about as far back as I feel comfortable going, since at least there I can look up information about how real monasteries work to make some reasoned guesses, but anything before that is pure guesswork.

If one were to drag in real-world psychology

You're obviously far more versed in that field than I am, so I'll take your word for it.

My basic point here is that we don't have enough information to go on.

Well, like I said, we're working off of around 70 strips where she appears, but I don't think that speculation is entirely unwarranted, or that we can't extrapolate some things from her behavioural patterns.

But I do think Miko is likely to have layers, so to speak.

And I agree, I wouldn't make huge posts about her if I didn't. She's not a simple character, and that's why I like to analyze her.

Themrys

2013-04-07, 08:08 PM

Also, it doesn't seem relevant to me, but she was sexualized more than most female characters in the strip (though not as much as some): repeatedly referred to as "hot", and Roy drooled over her for a bit. She was just not at all responsive.

She was "sexalized" by Roy, not by the comic itself.
Haley is sexualized by the comic.
Elan is "sexualized" by Haley and Therkla

This is an important difference. And I only count it as "sexualized" if the comic itself does it, since if defined otherwise, almost every character is sexualized and it's pointless to talk about it.

@vergil: I can't really follow your argumentation. What does Miko do that is chaotic? She seems pretty unflexible to me, so I'd say lawfulness suits her better than chaos.

How she fights the ogres can be considered unlawful, but I always saw that as showing how "good" characters don't consider non-humans "people", and therefore don't think "honour" applies while fighting them.

vergil

2013-04-07, 09:33 PM

I can't really follow your argumentation. What does Miko do that is chaotic? She seems pretty unflexible to me, so I'd say lawfulness suits her better than chaos.

Inflexibility (more commonly known as "stubbornness"), is not an inherently lawful or chaotic trait. Certainly, a rigid adherence to law can lead to inflexibility, but chaotic people can hold strong beliefs as well, and end up being just as uncompromising when they believe they are right. As for her being inherently chaotic, I'll repost below my initial reasoning below. If you have any specific questions, rebuttals or comments about that, let me know so we can clear the air and maybe come to a greater understanding of her character in the process.

You take a look at 174, and Miko clearly states that her master has ordered the Order of the Stick's execution. However, later on we see the scene, and that wasn't the case at all, he explicitly ordered that she not simply execute them and instead bring them back in for trial.

Then, when she finally confronts the order, she introduces herself in the most hyper-aggressive, confrontation inducing manner possible. She does not identify herself as a paladin, she does not state the crime, she does not identify where she is claiming authority from, and she flat out states (paraphrased) "either surrender so I can kill you later, or I'll kill you right now".

Now, she waits while the order to give a response (which you have to do once you demand surrender), but doesn't allow Roy to finish his "without a little" caveat.

I tend to look at this as "following the letter of the law while subverting the holy living hell out of the spirit". She stated her own preference for execution, even claiming that it was her master's order when it was later shown to clearly not be, and upon confrontation did quite literally everything within her power to ensure that the demand for surrender was not accepted. Basically, she wanted to kill them, and was willing to skirt the edges of her lord's order to do it.

and

She likes following her own judgement and left to her own devices she'd rather do what she wants than what the law requires, best illustrated before her fall in 289 where she is clearly unhappy that Belkar is going to get a trail rather than her simply gutting him as he lay there helplessly.

Basically, what I'm basing her being inherently chaotic off of, is that when what she wants and what her code says come into conflict, she subverts or outright breaks the code in order to get what she wants, rather than subordinating her wants to her code.

She's trying to be lawful, but I think her inherent nature is more to the chaotic side of the equation.

Carry2

2013-04-11, 12:13 PM

(Sorry for the delay, but I've a certain amount to digest here, and there's a few other points I might touch on briefly later.)

One of the hallmarks of most east asian (which is more what the D&D Monk is rather than the cloistered european type) monks is respect and obedience towards those higher than you, and the fuedal samurai system that the Azure City paladins seem to be also place a great deal of emphasis on obeying your superiors...
...Of course, she doesn't realize that they don't operate under the same principle, which is where a lot of the tension comes from.
I may be working off very little evidence here, but I'd say that Azure City culture shows some arguably chaotic qualities- the new year's celebration seemed to be pretty uninhibited, for example, and according to background info they've got something of an ethnic melting pot with elvish and half-orc immigrants. This is pretty untypical for conservative societies, and part of what leads me to wonder if Shojo's unpopularity with the nobles had a lot to do with liberalising reforms for the benefit of the unwashed masses.

Oh, I'm not in the slightest suggesting that she was abused, or that the people at the monastery weren't decent, just that from what I understand of the typical monastery, respect for authority (the "heirarchy" thing that I mentioned) is more important that personal interaction, and she ended up applying that model to all of her future interactions, even in cases where it wasn't necessary and even detrimental.
It's an entirely fair conjecture, but only can only point out that plenty of other paladins in the sapphire guard grew up in a similar culture, that they (A) had tolerable interpersonal skills, and (B) that little of it seems to have rubbed off on Miko after fifteen years' exposure. (A picture which is further complicated by all her solo assignments and rapid promotion.)

...That is something that I honestly can't speculate about. Starting at the monastery is about as far back as I feel comfortable going, since at least there I can look up information about how real monasteries work to make some reasoned guesses, but anything before that is pure guesswork.
Well, strictly speaking, if you can use real-world east-asian societies and monastic life as a basis for extrapolation here, one can equally make conjectures base on the typical antics of real-world samurai aristocrats, which was the basis for my speculations. But yeah- hard data is very scarce on the ground here.

Yes, I've read that quote before, and the thing that struck me was that she would leave the monastery as an "angry, unstable loner with no sense of purpose in life". Aren't monasteries inherently rather structered environments themselves? Why would she leave such a structured place, a place that would usually place a great deal of emphasis on discipline, understanding oneself and inner tranquility so unstable?
That's an entirely valid point, but I would mention that autism-spectrum-disorders are often associated with an emotionless facade punctuated by hyperemotional outbursts, which could be the kind of 'instability' in question here. ASD individuals also tend to crave orderly, predictable environments, where they can focus single-mindedly on particular tasks or pursuits, and have trouble interpeting others' emotional states.

(That sounds like Miko to a T, but on the other hand, autism is also associated with poor motor control, and Miko gives every indication of having pretty high DEX. So, yeah, it's complicated.)

...You're obviously far more versed in [psychology] than I am...
Well, I wouldn't exactly claim expertise- I'm mostly basing this off wikipedia summaries and a handful of lighter psychology texts. So take any and all of this with a pinch of salt.

Schizoid personality disorder is, IIRC, associated with disinterest in social relations along with a rich internal fantasy world or obsession with the intellectual or spiritual sphere. Obsessive-compulsive personality disorder is associated with perfectionism, parsimony, stubbornness and rigid self-control. Those both sound familiar, but I wouldn't say that Miko is disinterested in relationships so much as (A) bad at it or (B) overly picky. (She tries to connect with Roy, Durkon, and her fellow paladins at various points, though her unique approach prompts predictable rejection.) And OCPD usually causes excessive doubt and caution to to point of interfering with efficiency, whereas Miko, for better or worse, has precisely the opposite inclination.

As for whether any of the above are true, and whether they're due to environmental or somatic factors- well, some of the environmental hypotheses would fit her background pretty closely, but they're also heavily reliant on blaming-the-parents, which I tend to discount. (That said, there's also the question if the folks in the monastery would count as 'family', 'peers' or just 'culture', and the latter certainly have some effect on personality.)

But again, we don't know the details, and quite possibly never will. Miko does mention that she cried the night she left the place, so it doesn't appear that she hated it completely.

Remember, I said that she's inherently chaotic trying to be lawful, so her exhibiting lawful traits wouldn't be in conflict with that interpretation, since that's what she's been raised to believe is good, and thus is trying to be that way. The same thing with the ethical code, she wants to adhere to it because she's been taught that said ethical code is what is good and right, but at the same time, if it gets in the way of what she wants, she's willing to skirt it, or even outright break it.
It's one possibility, but this attitude could also be the simple result of pragmatism in the face of dangerous conditions with minimal backup or support. (The Paladin code has definite virtues in the larger context of dispute regulation between rival polities, but fine-scale tactical expediency is not one of them.)
.

Carry2

2013-04-11, 01:23 PM

Inflexibility (more commonly known as "stubbornness"), is not an inherently lawful or chaotic trait. Certainly, a rigid adherence to law can lead to inflexibility, but chaotic people can hold strong beliefs as well, and end up being just as uncompromising when they believe they are right...
Well, yes, in the same sense that good people can do bad things, and still remain good on average. Inflexibility is, by default, still generally Lawful. I am going to have quibble with your example of Miko's chaotic-ness, however.

* Shojo, in Miko's eyes, is a senile shell of his former self, and his orders probably need to be taken with a pinch of salt. Given the OP mentions this specifically, it also bears mention here.
* Witness interviews and DE-casting had given her the impression they had committed a bunch of other crimes and that Roy at least was evil, which make summary execution a reasonable response within the setting.
* Allowing the Order more time to surrender would be a major tactical risk against high-level villainous adversaries.

I'm consequently convinced (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=14422748&postcount=310) that Hinjo, O'chul, Sangwaan or any other hypothetical well-adjusted paladin would have done largely the same thing in her situation.
To be frank, I'd prefer not to have to go over these points again. Most Miko discussions become bogged down interminably in debunking false logic and unsupported claims, so it's rather refreshing to ever get past that and have an opportunity to discuss the aspects of her character that are genuinely uncertain and interesting- i.e, debatable.

No Google search! You cheated! I know!:smalltongue:
I knew it was Rorschach, but I couldn't quite remember who he was talking about. So, yes and no. :smalltongue:

vergil

2013-04-11, 11:11 PM

To be frank, I'd prefer not to have to go over these points again. Most Miko discussions become bogged down interminably in debunking false logic and unsupported claims

Well, I'm sorry, but we're going to have to go over these again, since we clearly disagree. I'll do my best to refrain from the false logic and unsupported claims, though.

Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but the first assertion here is that as Shojo is senile, his orders need to be taken with a grain of salt, correct? However, tell me, what is unlawful or ungood about having people accused of a crime stand trial? Even if he is (apparently) going senile, nothing about his orders here is going outside of the paladin code, and he is her lawful superior. She has a valid order, that is both lawful and good, not violating the paladin code in any way, and she takes it upon herself to outright lie to the weasel that her master had ordered their execution (incidentally, isn't lying against the paladin code?). That, to me, implies chaos, her orders (even if given by a senile old fart), are valid, good and lawful, and she, even as far back as 174, is already lying about her orders and stating she wants to kill the Order.

I don't really have a problem with the first part of the second assertion (and to her credit, she does later admit that her intelligence gathering abilities were flawed), however, the third assertion strikes me as somewhat of a false dichotomy. I don't recall saying that she should give them "more time" to surrender. What I said was that she should have identified who she was, what the crimes were, and where she was claiming authority from.

"Order of the Stick, I am a paladin of Azure city! You are charged with the destruction of the Redmountain Gate! Come with me to Azure City for trial, or I will bring you back by force!"

Something along those lines is essentially all I'm saying. That is 37 words, her original spiel was 31. You cannot tell me that six extra words is somehow going to cede tactical advantage, especially since she waits until Roy's "We're not surrendering without a little" before attacking anyway.

Miko is too experienced to get away with this. I will say it again, she technically speaking offered them the chance to surrender, while doing everything within her power to make sure they would not accept it (not identifying herself, not identifying the charges, telling them that they would die either way). We saw that she favored summary execution back in 174, and while you can argue that poor interpersonal skills are at work here, I find it far more likely that she followed the letter of Shojo's order while doing everything within her power to ensure a situation where her stated preference (summary execution) would come to pass.

We move onto the 285, where when Shojo tells her that Belkar will be tried, she looks up, clearly unhappy. Why? They have two Paladins there who would testify against him, Belkar wouldn't even bother denying it, there is no way he could be found innocent and she knows it. But she still doesn't like it. She doesn't like when the law gets in the way of what she wants. She submits to it because that's how she's been raised (note, she explicitly says that the only reason she won't kill him right there is because Shojo, who is her superior, said so. The laws, by themselves, pretty clearly don't matter to her in this instance), but she has no respect for the laws and is clearly unhappy that she doesn't get to smite him, which I think also fits my theory about her using smiting evil as a vent to get rid of her inner conflict.

Now, onto the rest of it.

It's an entirely fair conjecture, but only can only point out that plenty of other paladins in the sapphire guard grew up in a similar culture, that they (A) had tolerable interpersonal skills, and (B) that little of it seems to have rubbed off on Miko after fifteen years' exposure. (A picture which is further complicated by all her solo assignments and rapid promotion.)

They grew up in a similar culture, but not in a similar position. They (presumably) grew up with their families before being inducted into the paladin ranks. They had experience with interpersonal relations that didn't involve being in a heirarchy (or at least, a strict heirarchy). Miko, on the other hand, apparently grew up in a monastery, and lacked that initial experience.

As for the B part, not rubbing off can be just as easily be attributed to that initial lacking of experience, she doesn't know how to interact, so she never interacts with them in a non-official capacity, so even 15 years exposure wouldn't make much of an impression.

It's one possibility, but this attitude could also be the simple result of pragmatism in the face of dangerous conditions with minimal backup or support. (The Paladin code has definite virtues in the larger context of dispute regulation between rival polities, but fine-scale tactical expediency is not one of them.)

Lying about the orders you received to a freaking weasel of all things cannot be attributed to pragmatism.

As for the mental conditions, what you post makes sense, but separating if it actually is a mental condition or if it's simply her personality seems all but impossible at this point. Although, on a personal note, I am loathe to attribute a mental condition to her, as it seems a way of making her...less responsible for her own flaws. If that's not your intention, then I apologize, but I don't see anything in her that isn't attributable to upbringing and inherent personality.

Carry2

2013-04-12, 09:20 AM

Well, I'm sorry, but we're going to have to go over these again, since we clearly disagree. I'll do my best to refrain from the false logic and unsupported claims, though...
Been there, done that (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=14430277#post14430277).

"Order of the Stick, I am a paladin of Azure city! You are charged with the destruction of the Redmountain Gate! Come with me to Azure City for trial, or I will bring you back by force!"
But that's not what she was going to execute them for. The charges of murder, assault and kidnapping were, and that takes rather longer to explain the particulars of. (Trust me, I know.)

We move onto the 285, where when Shojo tells her that Belkar will be tried, she looks up, clearly unhappy....
Because Belkar is an odious little turd who butchered an innocent and set her on fire? Because someone she considered a friend has, in her eyes, turned against her in favour of said odious turd? There are any number of obvious reasons why Miko would be 'unhappy' here, without especial reference to lawful or chaotic tendencies.

The thing is, I don't disagree with your general conclusions- Miko most likely is a little trigger-happy and does push the limits of her code of conduct- as her, e.g, battling the Ogres and second assault on the OOTS demonstrate. But I don't think these specific examples are especially compelling.

As for the mental conditions, what you post makes sense, but separating if it actually is a mental condition or if it's simply her personality seems all but impossible at this point. Although, on a personal note, I am loathe to attribute a mental condition to her, as it seems a way of making her...less responsible for her own flaws. If that's not your intention, then I apologize, but I don't see anything in her that isn't attributable to upbringing and inherent personality.
Well, strictly speaking, mental conditions are an aspect of personality- just a dysfunctional extreme of it. And their development is generally attributed to some combination of genes and environment. So I'm not sure I see the difference. (Your attribution of her faults to a monastic upbringing, for example, essentially is environmentally-attributed OCPD. And it certainly sounds very plausible (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obsessive%E2%80%93compulsive_personality_disorder# Millon.27s_subtypes), but I just don't want to rush to conclusions.)

Given that Miko does actually show considerable degeneration over a short span of time during the strip, I doubt that her problems have nothing to do with environment. So, on the flip side, this might suggest at least some potential for improvement. And you'd certainly need the 'subject's' active co-operation and some acknowledgement of her own flaws before behavioural change could occur.

But responsibility in another sense is something of a distraction here: A permanently crazy person might not be able to stop themselves, but if they were dangerous you'd still need to keep them locked up. Conversely, if their condition were treatable with some combination of therapy and/or medication, then indefinite confinement might not be the most beneficial intervention, either for themselves or others. And- to my limited understanding- the exact form of 'treatment' could vary radically, depending on the type of dysfunction.

vergil

2013-04-12, 10:57 PM

But that's not what she was going to execute them for. The charges of murder, assault and kidnapping were, and that takes rather longer to explain the particulars of. (Trust me, I know.)

Please pardon me if this seems rude, but how is that relevant to the situation at hand, exactly? Was there a clause in Shojo's orders that said "if they've committed any other crimes, you're free to kill them"? As far as I can tell, there is no reason whatsoever why any other crimes couldn't also be addressed at their trial.

Even if I accept that spelling out the charges would take too long, (which I don't, more in a minute) why do you believe that identifying herself as a paladin of Azure City would be too hazardous as well? Or, to be more accurate, why do you believe that the way in which she approached the situation was anything other than an attempt to goad them into fighting so she could execute them, something that she has already stated is her preference back in 174?

As for taking too long, she has to wait for them to respond anyway. She stands there through Elan going on about how something was going to happen and Roy telling him to shut up. That's what I don't get about the whole "anything else would have been suicide" arguments. She clearly had the time to make a more professional introduction, and chose not to do for no reason that I can tell beyond wanting to minimize the chances that they would surrender.

Because Belkar is an odious little turd who butchered an innocent and set her on fire? Because someone she considered a friend has, in her eyes, turned against her in favour of said odious turd? There are any number of obvious reasons why Miko would be 'unhappy' here, without especial reference to lawful or chaotic tendencies.

I am pointing to a specific scene, comic 285, second page, last panel of row 2 and first two panels of row 3. She bows her head to Shojo, telling him that Belkar has murdered a guard and must be punished. Shojo says that he will be taken into custody and tried lawfully on those charges. In the next panel, which contains nothing but her, she raises her head to Shojo, brows creased, clearly unhappy. Sorry, there are no alternate explanations here, she does not like the fact that Belkar is going to get a trial.

She does not like the law when it gets in the way of what she wants. It's the same way as she shrugged off Hinjo when he wanted to have Shojo taken into custody in 406.

In the final panel I've mentioned, she explicitly says that the reasons she is stopping is because Shojo is her superior. Later in 409, when Hinjo is trying to talk her down, he mentions that the rule of law in the city says that you have to a trial because you don't get to kill someone just because they've done something wrong. In other words, she knows that the laws demand a trial, and she wants to go ahead with summary execution on a helpless, though evil, opponent anyway, even though he can be easily restrained at that point.

She would have gleefully shrugged off the laws in order to get what she wanted, which was a dead Belkar, even when he was already subdued. Later on, in 406, when Hinjo, who, incidentally, is her lord if Shojo is deposed, wants to imprison Shojo, she blows him off and does what she wants, irrespective of laws, and the order of someone who is her superior in the Azure City governmental structure, if not in the Sapphire Guard.

That's how her downward spiral goes, at first it's evil creatures that don't deserve due process, then its anyone that she defines as evil, regardless of their alignments that don't deserve it.

We see the same thing on multiple occasions, when what she wants and what the laws say come into conflict, what she wants wins out every time unless someone higher than her is right there with her to put their foot down (and as she gets worse, not even that can stop her).