*Spoilers* Who Miko reminds me of, as an opposite.

[Sage in the Playground]

As of 406, Miko has murdered Shojo and taken the law into her own hands. This reminds me of Terry Pratchett's Sam Vimes. Ever time Vimes has come close to taking the law into his own hands (Carcer, Dr. Cruces) he has chosen to follow the law and attemped to take them into custody, while Miko obviously did not. Miko thinks her ruler is trying to make the organazation she serves impotent. At the start Vimes was leader of an organazation his leader HAD made impotent, the Night Watch. While Miko is of noble birth and respects nobles, Vimes hates the nobility, despite over the course of events marrying the richest woman in the city, becoming a knight, and then a Duke. Both have rulers who skillfully use politics to protect their cities. Someone suggested that Xykon may have used a special Crystal Ball to influence Miko in Shojo's murder, probably wrong and I think they said so, But Vimes has been influenced by and BEAT a gun, and a millenia old quasi-demonic entity.Vimes also took the Watch from 4 guys with no will to fight crime (except Carrot) to a large organazation across the continent, possibly the world. Miko may well be in the process of accidentally destroying the Sapphire Guard.

[slipper]

Paragraphs are fun.

[Captain van der Decken]

I see what you mean, and yeah, there is a similarity there. Although I'd have thought the whole Watch thing was more of Carrot's doing.


Paragraphs are fun.

What?

[Shadow of the Sun]

Carrot with his incredible "krisma" managed to inspire Vimes into reforming the Watch, but it is Vimes who did all of that stuff. Carrot would make a competent leader of the Watch, but as Vimes says, he isn't enough of a bastard to do so as well as Vimes.

[SITB]

And as Carrot said: "People should not do things because Carrot tells them to, just because Carrot is good at being obeyed".

Also, the definition of the purpose of the Law and it's watchmen(Or paladins as it may be), is different between Miko and Vimes. Vimes sees it as protecting the innocent, Miko sees it as punishing the guilty.

Edit:Taken straight from here -http://www.lspace.org/books/apf/night-watch.html

[Erk]

You are right. They are good opposites. Both are lawful good, but the approach it from the opposite directions. I like this analogy and present you with a cookie.

[Green Bean]

As of 406, Miko has murdered Shojo and taken the law into her own hands. This reminds me of Terry Pratchett's Sam Vimes. Ever time Vimes has come close to taking the law into his own hands (Carcer, Dr. Cruces) he has chosen to follow the law and attemped to take them into custody, while Miko obviously did not. Miko thinks her ruler is trying to make the organazation she serves impotent. At the start Vimes was leader of an organazation his leader HAD made impotent, the Night Watch. While Miko is of noble birth and respects nobles, Vimes hates the nobility, despite over the course of events marrying the richest woman in the city, becoming a knight, and then a Duke. Both have rulers who skillfully use politics to protect their cities. Someone suggested that Xykon may have used a special Crystal Ball to influence Miko in Shojo's murder, probably wrong and I think they said so, But Vimes has been influenced by and BEAT a gun, and a millenia old quasi-demonic entity.Vimes also took the Watch from 4 guys with no will to fight crime (except Carrot) to a large organazation across the continent, possibly the world. Miko may well be in the process of accidentally destroying the Sapphire Guard.

That's a very good point. :miko: and Vimes are very similar, but their behaviour is totally different. Perhaps :miko: is more likely to listen to 'the Beast'?

[Sage in the Playground]

And as Carrot said: "People should not do things because Carrot tells them to, just because Carrot is good at being obeyed".

Also, the definition of the purpose of the Law and it's watchmen(Or paladins as it may be), is different between Miko and Vimes. Vimes sees it as protecting the innocent, Miko sees it as punishing the guilty.

Edit:Taken straight from here -http://www.lspace.org/books/apf/night-watch.html

Forgot about that one.

[Amon Star]

Totally agree. Also, as I said in a different Thread, there's a parellel between what :miko: did and what Vimes's ancestor, Old Stoneface, did. They both slew a perceived evil monarch because they believed the legal system wouldn't bring justice. The difference being, Old Stoneface was right, but :miko: was very wrong.

[Sage in the Playground]

Totally agree. Also, as I said in a different Thread, there's a parellel between what :miko: did and what Vimes's ancestor, Old Stoneface, did. They both slew a perceived evil monarch because they believed the legal system wouldn't bring justice. The difference being, Old Stoneface was right, but :miko: was very wrong.

I forgot to put that in there.

[The Hammer of Thor]

That's a very good point. :miko: and Vimes are very similar, but their behaviour is totally different. Perhaps :miko: is more likely to listen to 'the Beast'?

Good thinking. But while Vimes occaisionally uses 'the beast' to his advantage (in Night Watch and in Thud, I think), Miko never shows that she has a watchman inside her which she keeps restrained. She seems more like Vimes when he has 'the gonne' and thinks about shooting Dr. Cruces, except she applies those principals to everything and everyone.

[Sage in the Playground]

Good thinking. But while Vimes occaisionally uses 'the beast' to his advantage (in Night Watch and in Thud, I think), Miko never shows that she has a watchman inside her which she keeps restrained. She seems more like Vimes when he has 'the gonne' and thinks about shooting Dr. Cruces, except she applies those principals to everything and everyone.

Thats why they're opposites.

[Sage in the Playground]

Now that Miko has fallen, both Stoneface and Miko have had horrible consequences for their actions. Only Miko wasn't dismembered and buried in several graves.

[Warpfire]

Now that Miko has fallen, both Stoneface and Miko have had horrible consequences for their actions. Only Miko wasn't dismembered and buried in several graves.

Hey, it could happen. :smallwink:

[Yzorth]

I don't see the connection.

[Chaos Fire]

Well, remember that Vimes is Lawful Good, in a sense. He sees the law, but upholds it in whatever way is the "good" fashion.

:miko:, on the other hand, I suspect is Lawful Neutral. If she was LG, she would have at least had Shojo tried. However, since she has displayed the ability to willingly choose what she considered "good" laws, she must be LN.

[Pvednes]

Totally agree. Also, as I said in a different Thread, there's a parellel between what :miko: did and what Vimes's ancestor, Old Stoneface, did. They both slew a perceived evil monarch because they believed the legal system wouldn't bring justice. The difference being, Old Stoneface was right, but :miko: was very wrong.

"Lorenzo the Kind"?

[CardinalFang]

"Lorenzo the Kind"?

He was just CALLED Lorenzo the Kind. I don't have the quotes on me, but he was definitely UNkind, especially to little children. Although, in a kind of twisted way, I suppose you could say he WAS kind to them. At least, that's what's implied. I believe there was a mention of torture chambers found in the palace after he was beheaded, as well. The whole "Lorenzo the Kind" name is part of the whole point of how people (at least in Ankh-Morpork) don't like to think ill of monarchs, because they're the king/queen. Plus, of course, it's just general Pratchett irony that the evil monarch was called "the Kind." That's why Vetinari is so good for them, though...they CAN think "wow, he's a devious bastard," and that motivates social change as people plot against him/each other.

[MReav]

"Lorenzo the Kind"?

He was "kind" to children.

[Igan]

Wow...
That's some pretty convincing stuff.
I guess the big difference between Miko and Vimes is Vimes' own fear of doing wrong. I think there's a Pratchett quote about Vimes being, fundamentally, a person. He's afraid he may be a bad person because he knows what he thinks as well as what he does, so he tries to act like a good person when there isn't a clear guide. Miko, as Redcloak pointed out, is immune to all forms of fear, including the one of being wrong.
Vimes won't let out the Beast until he's sure he's right in doing so, and he accepts that he is not the ultimate judge.
Miko goes into 'righteous fury' at the drop of a hat and assumes the judge's mantle so that the verdict she thinks is right will be assuredly delivered--no second-guessing, no calm to calm down and think it over with a slightly cooler head...

[SITB]

There are some differences between Miko and "Old Stoneface", namely the fact that Stoneface excuted the king because no one else would. No willing jury could be found so he did the deed.

Miko murdered Shojo outright without trying to put him on trial, not willing to adhere to the law because of the excuse "I'm a paladin, if I'm wrong the gods will strip me of my powers", and that excuse backfired on her.

[Amon Star]

"Lorenzo the Kind"?

That's the bunny. For some reason Ludwig the King was stuck in my head, but I new it was wrong.


There are some differences between Miko and "Old Stoneface", namely the fact that Stoneface excuted the king because no one else would. No willing jury could be found so he did the deed.

Miko murdered Shojo outright without trying to put him on trial, not willing to adhere to the law because of the excuse "I'm a paladin, if I'm wrong the gods will strip me of my powers", and that excuse backfired on her.

Actually, :miko:'s reasoning, if you can call it that, was that she assumed Shojo's curruption had already tainted the system so that he would be found innocent regardless. There are simarlarities, except that Stoneface gave the system a chance first. Of course, the fact that :miko: was incapable of thinking she could ever be wrong had a strong influence on her actions.

[Green Bean]

Well, remember that Vimes is Lawful Good, in a sense. He sees the law, but upholds it in whatever way is the "good" fashion.


I think he's more than lawful good 'in a sense'. He's the epitome of LG. He shakes of the control of the gonne because shooting him would violate the law. He refuses to kill an unarmed man because it compromises his principals, even though a quasi-demonic entity possessed him and tried to force him to do it. He didn't kill Carcer, even though he deserved it, in order to give him a trial. He's 'uber-lawful'

[AKA_Bait]

Wow... are you folks wrong about Vimes. I don't really want to derail this thread but he has killed people when he ought to have taken them in. Sometimes he chooses to follow the law, sometimes he takes the law into his own hands. Examples of the latter:

When he kills Angua's brother.

When he has Dorfl threaten the vampire.

When he flips at the end of Thud.

There are more. Carrot is LG. Vimes is NG.

And, for the record, Miko might now, possibly, be LN, or NG. But she had to be LG until 407 or she would have fallen before.

[Green Bean]

Wow... are you folks wrong about Vimes. I don't really want to derail this thread but he has killed people when he ought to have taken them in. Sometimes he chooses to follow the law, sometimes he takes the law into his own hands. Examples of the latter:

When he kills Angua's brother.

When he has Dorfl threaten the vampire.

When he flips at the end of Thud.

There are more. Carrot is LG. Vimes is NG.

And, for the record, Miko might now, possibly, be LN, or NG. But she had to be LG until 407 or she would have fallen before.

Wait, what flipping at the end of Thud? :smallconfused:

[Nek]

How would Vimes EVER hold Wolfgang in a cell? The man was insane - half man, half wolf. He was more animal than man when Vimes killed "him", and even lept up to 'fetch' a stick thrown at him.

Vimes understands his officers. He knew Dorfl wouldn't kill anyone, or even hurt them, because that way leads to the Dark Side.

He flipped at the end of Thud because he had a booping quasi-Demonic ENTITY possessing him! This same entity was the avatar of VENGEANCE. And he still didn't kill the people responsible for the near-death of his family. To follow the Law.

[AKA_Bait]

How would Vimes EVER hold Wolfgang in a cell? The man was insane - half man, half wolf. He was more animal than man when Vimes killed "him", and even lept up to 'fetch' a stick thrown at him.


Um, if he could hold Wolfgang in a cell or not is beside the point. There is no 'we can't keep him in a cell so we can just kill him now without any sort of due process exception. He threw the stick because he knew Wolfgang would catch it on instinct and it would explode. The fact that Wolfgang was a psycho and a werewolf doesn't change the fact that he was certianly a person under the law.


Vimes understands his officers. He knew Dorfl wouldn't kill anyone, or even hurt them, because that way leads to the Dark Side.

The point of that one is not that Dorfl would kill him but that threatening him, after he knowing he was not touchable by the law, is not exactly lawful.


He flipped at the end of Thud because he had a booping quasi-Demonic ENTITY possessing him! This same entity was the avatar of VENGEANCE. And he still didn't kill the people responsible for the near-death of his family. To follow the Law.

I'm going to leave this one alone for the moment. I haven't read Thud in a while and I'm at the office suffering from a careless self-inflicted blow to the head. (Not kidding about that. I am SO slick.)

[Green Bean]

The point of that one is not that Dorfl would kill him but that threatening him, after he knowing he was not touchable by the law, is not exactly lawful.

He didn't bring Dorfl to threaten the vampire. He brought the golem in as a witness while he tried to trick the vampire into admitting his crimes. The golem was the only thing the Dragon wouldn't have smelled.

[CardinalFang]

The whole point of killing Wolfgang was because he WASN'T in Ankh-Morpork...he COULDN'T arrest him outside of the embassy. He had no authority in Bonk. And he couldn't let Tantony try to arrest him, because he would have gotten killed. I mean, one of the main THEMES of The Fifth Elephant was Vimes carrying the law with him into a lawless country, and Uberwald's evolution from a bunch of warring fiefdoms and clans into a place with real laws and rules. Open up Thud to the very end, when Sally is telling Vimes about joining the "new force" in Bonk and "trying to make a difference." Vimes showing up and impressing Tantony was what brought that change to Uberwald. And besides, as someone pointed out earlier, Vimes sees his duty not as strictly upholding the law, but as using the law to protect the innocent, which he surely did.

And as h_v said, Vimes brought Dorfl to see Dragon King of Arms because Dragon wouldn't be able to smell him, and that way Dorfl (who isn't allowed to lie) would hear his whole confession. And you have the end of Thud pretty wrong...not only did he have the Summoning Dark in his head controlling him, but he resisted it. He was the only person in thousands of years with enough willpower and conviction in his beliefs to resist it.

[Sage in the Playground]

Vimes gave Wolfgang a chance to surrender. He did not beleive for a second Wolfgange would take it, but Vimes still gave him a chance. Technically, he asked several times, as in accordance with the law.

Miko gave Shojo NO chance to surrender.