PDA

View Full Version : Why Shojo is not a bad ruler



Hazel Firewolf
2007-02-01, 01:00 AM
"According to Machiavelli, moral principles must yield to every circumstance, especially in such cases where sordid, inhumane actions may be required. It is imperative that the prince be willing to do anything necessary to maintain power; however, Machiavelli asserts strongly that above all, the prince must not be hated." -Wikipedia on The Prince

It's the only way to protect everyone is to have your hand in everything. The overhand, and the underhand. He needs to break the laws in order to do true good. He has come to accept that he couldn't respect the law.

Hinjo's mom would have understood (as Shojo stated before) because she knew what it takes to be a leader.

It would be easier and nicer if everyone played by the rules, but bad guys don't play by the rules therefore there are no rules.

Talya
2007-02-01, 01:02 AM
Was.

Why Shojo WAS not a bad ruler.

Brianish
2007-02-01, 01:04 AM
Traditionally, comparing a ruler to Machiavelli is not the ideal way to extol his or her virtues.

Hazel Firewolf
2007-02-01, 01:04 AM
Sorry, I can't fix it now. I'm a psych major, not english.

J_Muller
2007-02-01, 01:05 AM
Quite true. Shojo realized that when dealing with events threatening all existence, the ends justify the means.

EDIT: Though I agree that comparing rulers to one of the most arrogant, self-serving, sneaky b***ards in all history is not exactly, shall we say, flattering.

Hazel Firewolf
2007-02-01, 01:05 AM
Traditionally, comparing a ruler to Machiavelli is not the ideal way to extol his or her virtues.

He was doing it for the greater good.

Talya
2007-02-01, 01:05 AM
Traditionally, comparing a ruler to Machiavelli is not the ideal way to extol his or her virtues.


True. I'm a big fan of the ethics of utilitarianism, however, so I like the post!

Hazel Firewolf
2007-02-01, 01:12 AM
Before she went on her psycho spree, Miko followed the "rules" do you think she was doing it for the greater good? An argument can be made that bad intentions can be achieved using good intentioned laws...please don't get me started with American politics...

Charles Phipps
2007-02-01, 03:36 AM
He was doing it for the greater good.

So was [insert unpleasant real world person of choice]!

Shojo did what he thought was right but he was a complete ass about it. Many people would take it less hard if his followers weren't religiously devoted to him.

battleburn
2007-02-01, 04:02 AM
Hazel firewolf, you were being sarcastic, right?

Pvednes
2007-02-01, 09:29 AM
Machiavelli was just a minor public servant, but The Prince is an excellent work on how a monarch should act.

Hazel Firewolf
2007-02-01, 01:39 PM
Hazel firewolf, you were being sarcastic, right?

sarcastic about which part?

Grunjon
2007-02-01, 01:43 PM
Was.

Why Shojo WAS not a bad ruler.


Still could be if those clerics come along that were gonna fix up the drunk wizard, and they do Shojo instead. :smallsmile:

the_tick_rules
2007-02-01, 01:45 PM
has anyone accused him of being one?

Rainspattered
2007-02-01, 07:44 PM
He's accused of being a dictator all the time, which is interesting, since the only thing we see him do as a leader is not get people thrown in jail.
Utilitarian ethics notwithstanding, the fact is that he lied to law-bound figures to serve good. It is not an issue of greater or lesser good, it is an issue of being bound to law or good. Miko, and most of the paladins, evidently, are bound to law. Shojo instead acts for good, without regard to the law. However, to get away with doing this, he has to lie to the law, otherwise it would depose and probably kill him. That's paranoid, you say? Miko just cut him in half, I say, so hiding it was pretty reasonable. Maybe if he had told them from the start she wouldn't have, but I really don't think so.

Greebo
2007-02-01, 07:50 PM
He's accused of being a dictator all the time, which is interesting, since the only thing we see him do as a leader is not get people thrown in jail.
Dictator != putting people in jail all the time.

He may very well be a dictator - that is, the sole ruler with whom ultimate authority exists without checks and balances. However, Hinjo implies that he can be tried, which means there probably were checks and balances.


Utilitarian ethics notwithstanding, the fact is that he lied to law-bound figures to serve good. It is not an issue of greater or lesser good, it is an issue of being bound to law or good. Miko, and most of the paladins, evidently, are bound to law. Shojo instead acts for good, without regard to the law. However, to get away with doing this, he has to lie to the law, otherwise it would depose and probably kill him. That's paranoid, you say? Miko just cut him in half, I say, so hiding it was pretty reasonable. Maybe if he had told them from the start she wouldn't have, but I really don't think so.

Odds are if he'd told them or her from the start, she would have opposed his investigation, in accordance with her oath.

Demented
2007-02-01, 08:21 PM
Imagine if some Paladins believed the oath should be revoked, and some shouldn't.
It would be CIVIL WAR!

Mwahahah! That would be too good not to try!

...

Oh wait, he didn't.

Damn.

SmartAlec
2007-02-01, 08:28 PM
Utilitarian ethics notwithstanding, the fact is that he lied to law-bound figures to serve good. It is not an issue of greater or lesser good, it is an issue of being bound to law or good. Miko, and most of the paladins, evidently, are bound to law. Shojo instead acts for good, without regard to the law.

I'd imagine he has plenty of regard for it, as he doesn't ignore it - he works within it and around it. He tries to achieve his aims without leaving Azure City a lawless mess.

Justinian
2007-02-01, 08:33 PM
Er? Shojo came off as a rather terrible ruler, deceptive and paranoid. We know his intentions were good, but his actions were stupid. The narrative is what it is, and his ineptitude played its role in the story well, but as a character, Shojo was not a good ruler.

Amusingly eccentric? Sure! Why not? I'll give him that.

Of course, someone mentioned utilitarianism, and I think I gave my treatise on utilitarianism / paladins earlier. >_> Let's just say the arguments being made here so far are having the opposite-as-desired
effect. I think referencing "The Prince" put things off to a bad start.

Mr Teufel
2007-02-01, 08:51 PM
Justinian, at least link to your arguments. Just because you posted them elsewhere doesn't mean we should accept your word that they're better than what has been posted here.

Steward
2007-02-01, 09:01 PM
I thought that Shojo was a pretty good ruler, considering what he was dealing with. He was able to rein in the aristocracy and managed to arrange for the Order to have an easier time fighting Xykon and the Linear Guild. I don't recall him actually hurting anyone and doing anything that was really evil. I think he tried to follow the law as best he could, but he just couldn't put it above the safety of the universe.

Justinian
2007-02-01, 09:16 PM
Justinian, at least link to your arguments.

I made a post here, http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1899058#post1899058, the gist of which was related to that topic, i.e. Paladins shouldn't be trying to think of things from a utilitarian perspective.

The gist was that a Paladin can't do a little evil to do a greater good. If presented with two bad options, they have to go with option c, and they can't rightfully or justifiably sacrifice anyone but themselves to achieve their goals.

There was another thread that went off-topic to Watchmen, where I stated that if presented with a scenario where all things being equal, all victims being equal and innocent third parties, I could save 1000 men by diverting their doom to one, I would not do it. The only way I see there even being a valid option was if I myself were the one, otherwise, I'm killing an innocent.

Both statements demonstrate my healthy disdain for utilitarianism.

* * *

At any rate, Shojo could have been honest and straightforward in his dealings with his people, and instead he chose to deceive everyone close to him. Anti-meatloaf day ninjas? Heighten security. Threat to the gates? Call a war council with Hinjo, Miko, and all the other top paladins, convince them that after conversing with Roy's father (remember, Shojo met him before hatching this whole crazy plan), and knowing that there was an evil lich trying to destroy the gates, the gates must be protected more heavily and aid must be sought.

Of course, that's only what a Lawful Good, honest, effective ruler would have done. Shojo hid behind fake trials, fake dementia, and a cat. He was a kooky old man, and an amusing character, but that's some kind of awful leadership he had going there.

slayerx
2007-02-01, 09:19 PM
Considering Shojo's situation, i'd say he was a pretty good ruler...
when it comes to lying in order to protect the gates... that was perefectly fine since the oath prevents him placing any amount of trust in his paladins... The paladins would never even allow him to suggest taking actions that go against the oath... he HAD to lie in order to protect Azure city and the world

though, i'm not sure about the dishonesty of him acting senile, i mean, he could have just increased his guards to protect him from such attacks, and try to investigate and find out which nobles were trying to kill him and have them arrested...

Also, i still think though Hinjo would be right for arresting Shojo for his lying... Despite his reasons, Shojo DID break the laws of the city and must be questioned and tried on those grounds... however, how the lawful good judge would judge Shojo, is something i'm uncertain


Imagine if some Paladins believed the oath should be revoked, and some shouldn't.
It would be CIVIL WAR!
I think it might be a very short civil war... afterall, the 12 gods might smite (well, un-paladin) the paladins that were wrong.


Before she went on her psycho spree, Miko followed the "rules" do you think she was doing it for the greater good? An argument can be made that bad intentions can be achieved using good intentioned laws...please don't get me started with American politics...
Actually it's a little bit backwards... Miko WAS doing everything for the greater good; Her intenstions were good, not evil, however her errored way of thinking caused her to take all of the wrong actions, and thus though her intentions were good and true, she ended up doing bad things.

Talya
2007-02-01, 09:21 PM
Lawfulness is a liability, however. It's not a "positive" trait in a ruler. It's necessary, for paladins, but it is of no use in governing a city. If you're a smart leader, you use lawful people without being lawful yourself. (You also won't be chaotic...you have use for the law, you just don't feel bound by it.) Lawfulness is good for minions, not the ones in charge.

Elliot Kane
2007-02-01, 10:12 PM
I think Shojo was/is LG. 'Law' in D&D has nothing whatsoever to do with criminal law - it's about planning, looking to the long term rather than the short term and having a personal code to which one adheres.

Shojo's code was not identical to that of the paladins who serve him, which means that sometimes he has to work around them rather than through them. There's no part of that which says he is either not Lawful or not Good - just that his own code of ethics is very different to that of his paladins.

As he says before dying, everything he has done is for the good of his people. He is putting their needs above his own, and even above his family (Look at his face when he's confessing to Hinjo & Miko. He hates that he hurt them). That's Lawful Good, however you cut it - benefit to greatest number of people in the long term.

Shojo is an autocratic ruler, but that is no impediment to him being a good and just ruler.

Hazel Firewolf
2007-02-01, 11:33 PM
Actually it's a little bit backwards... Miko WAS doing everything for the greater good; Her intenstions were good, not evil, however her errored way of thinking caused her to take all of the wrong actions, and thus though her intentions were good and true, she ended up doing bad things.

She did everything for herslef; never once has she actually protected someone just her "ideals"

slayerx
2007-02-01, 11:51 PM
I think Shojo was/is LG. 'Law' in D&D has nothing whatsoever to do with criminal law - it's about planning, looking to the long term rather than the short term and having a personal code to which one adheres.

Actually, Shojo admits that he isn't lawful... so i'd say he's Neutral good


She did everything for herslef; never once has she actually protected someone just her "ideals"
She was lawful GOOD, her "ideals" were all about protecting the poeple of azure city, fighting the good fight, fighting for justice and fighting for her gods... really everything she did (though her thinking was mistaken), and though her methods were a bit extreme, all pretty amounted to just that... Her desire to seek atonement in this lastest chapter is the first time she has ever been shown wanting to do something for herself

Elliot Kane
2007-02-01, 11:53 PM
Actually, Shojo admits that he isn't lawful... so i'd say he's Neutral good

Ah. In that case, I'd say you were right :smallsmile:


She was lawful GOOD, her "ideals" were all about protecting the poeple of azure city, fighting the good fight, fighting for justice and fighting for her gods... really everything she did (though her thinking was mistaken), and though her methods were a bit extreme, all pretty amounted to just that... Her desire to seek atonement in this lastest chapter is the first time she has ever been shown wanting to do something for herself

Agreed.

Hazel Firewolf
2007-02-02, 12:31 AM
Actually, Shojo admits that he isn't lawful... so i'd say he's Neutral good


She was lawful GOOD, her "ideals" were all about protecting the poeple of azure city, fighting the good fight, fighting for justice and fighting for her gods... really everything she did (though her thinking was mistaken), and though her methods were a bit extreme, all pretty amounted to just that... Her desire to seek atonement in this lastest chapter is the first time she has ever been shown wanting to do something for herself

her actions were to uphold the law, she's never been seen actually protecting the innocent, but instead harassing people about trivial laws (matress tag for a silly example)

and she's wanted to kill people before with her unreasonable accusations, or at least make some really unneeded threats thinking she is an almighty power to lord on everyone.

Charles Phipps
2007-02-02, 12:41 AM
I don't see a man who takes a Little Girl from a monastary to turn her into a servant of a deity he doesn't believe in as 'Good'

Neutral is fine for him.

Mr Teufel
2007-02-02, 02:23 AM
Shojo believes in the 12. He just doesn't believe in a particular oath.

Demented
2007-02-02, 02:36 AM
I don't see a man who takes a Little Girl from a monastary to turn her into a servant of a deity he doesn't believe in as 'Good'

Neutral is fine for him.

If I were a Shojo-fan, I'd argue that one action does not define an alignment.
But I know better. Skill Focus (Sarcasm) has a prerequisite of Evil. :biggrin:

NecroPaladin
2007-02-02, 02:40 AM
Consider that supposedly Shojo is the fascist when you have people like Miko refusing to listen to Redcloak because he's a goblin, and in turn Redcloak terrorizing Hobgoblins because they're hobgoblins. On the long line of intolerant characters, Shojo's one of the dots that contributes to graphing error.

berrew
2007-02-02, 02:54 AM
I don't see a man who takes a Little Girl from a monastary to turn her into a servant of a deity he doesn't believe in as 'Good'

Neutral is fine for him.
Where does it say that he "took" her (as in forcibly removed her) from a monastary? And where do you get the idea that he "turned her" into a servant of the gods (that he most *certainly* believes in)? What's more, he was right. She had the potential to become a powerful Paladin, and she became one. Who do you think wrote this story line, Dickens?

Unless, of course, you actually *believe* Miko's bizarre illogical mis-connections of irrelevant facts.

Wyborn
2007-02-02, 02:58 AM
Shojo wasn't a decent ruler, or a not-bad ruler, he was a great ruler. He maintained order and peace in his lands above and beyond what he would have been capable of if he restrained himself with the paladin's code, he honestly cared for the people beneath him so that even though he had the authority to act outside of their code he hid it from them so they wouldn't be upset by it, he lessened conflict between the noble houses, he was loved by his people, and, let's not forget, he was willing to do things that put his life and his power at risk in order to save the world.

[Scrubbed]

Elliot Kane
2007-02-02, 03:48 AM
Shojo wasn't a decent ruler, or a not-bad ruler, he was a great ruler. He maintained order and peace in his lands above and beyond what he would have been capable of if he restrained himself with the paladin's code, he honestly cared for the people beneath him so that even though he had the authority to act outside of their code he hid it from them so they wouldn't be upset by it, he lessened conflict between the noble houses, he was loved by his people, and, let's not forget, he was willing to do things that put his life and his power at risk in order to save the world.

I completely agree.

Charles Phipps
2007-02-02, 04:31 AM
Shojo wasn't a decent ruler, or a not-bad ruler, he was a great ruler. He maintained order and peace in his lands above and beyond what he would have been capable of if he restrained himself with the paladin's code, he honestly cared for the people beneath him so that even though he had the authority to act outside of their code he hid it from them so they wouldn't be upset by it, he lessened conflict between the noble houses, he was loved by his people, and, let's not forget, he was willing to do things that put his life and his power at risk in order to save the world.

Anybody who says Shojo was a bad ruler is off their rocker.

*cough*

Not to disabuse the ideal of Shojo for President Campaign but

1. He maintained order and peace in his lands above and beyond what he would have been capable of if he restrained himself with the paladin's code

He's about to be invaded by a Lich King's army, he's utterly failed to protect the gate, he demoralized his guard, and he ended up assassinated. Plus, he had to fear assassination from his nobility to the point that he had to space 24/7 playing the part of a harmless madman.

Azure City one presumes was probably controlled by the Paladins since most of his orders were demented.

2. He honestly cared for the people beneath him so that even though he had the authority to act outside of their code he hid it from them so they wouldn't be upset by it

Caring for the people beneath him seems to be throwing his weight around the Order of the Stick including ordering Miko to kidnap them. Also, scaring the Hell out of them with a false trial. Also countlessly verbally abusing his loyal staff whom carried out his orders despite the fact they believed he was demented.

We're talking "madness of King George" levels of abuse.

3. he lessened conflict between the noble houses

Obviously to the point he felt safe to reveal himself...oh wait.

4. he was loved by his people

His paladins LOATHED him. They're also the only people we've seen. Even his own family was going to have him put on trial. If the font of good in the world hated him and he feared assassination, what gives you the idea ANYONE liked him?

5. let's not forget, he was willing to do things that put his life and his power at risk in order to save the world

Quite literally, he chose the path that least endangered his position at the expense of others.

Lord Shojo was a selfish manipulative jerk whom believed everything he did was justified because he thought he was smarter than everyone else. His plan to protect himself was not only cruel to his next of kin as well as followers but also fundamentally flawed since it got him killed. Also, none of his plans have thus far managed to do anything to help anyone since the order of the stick saved everyone by themselves.

Cause, God forbid, Shojo suck it up and pardon the Order for their ignorance.

berrew
2007-02-02, 05:20 AM
*cough*

Not to disabuse the ideal of Shojo for President Campaign but

1. He maintained order and peace in his lands above and beyond what he would have been capable of if he restrained himself with the paladin's code

He's about to be invaded by a Lich King's army, he's utterly failed to protect the gate, he demoralized his guard, and he ended up assassinated. Plus, he had to fear assassination from his nobility to the point that he had to space 24/7 playing the part of a harmless madman.Without his own personal strategy and sacrifice, Azure city wouldn't even know that there *was* a lich-king. In fact, it is a result of HIS actions that Azure City has any forewarning at all. He didn't fail to protect the gate - it was still there when he died. By pretending at madness, he has maintained some form of order - probably the best that could be expected with assassins lurking around every corner.
Azure City one presumes was probably controlled by the Paladins since most of his orders were demented.You mean, he made some demented personal orders. I see no evidence that he tried actually making realm-destabilizing orders, and in fact, that seems to be against his character as he is working very hard to keep things on an even keel.


2. He honestly cared for the people beneath him so that even though he had the authority to act outside of their code he hid it from them so they wouldn't be upset by it

Caring for the people beneath him seems to be throwing his weight around the Order of the Stick including ordering Miko to kidnap them. Also, scaring the Hell out of them with a false trial. Also countlessly verbally abusing his loyal staff whom carried out his orders despite the fact they believed he was demented.

We're talking "madness of King George" levels of abuse.I don't agree with the OP, but you are going a bit too far. Sure, he was rough on OoTS. But they wouldn't be of any use to him if they couldn't take abuse now, could they? It was a nice way to stress-test them in a "nondestructive" manner. His biggest mistake was sending out Miko to capture them, knowing her bloodthirsty and heartless streak towards criminals. As for his general actions towards the guard, what did you expect him to do if he is acting senile? Personally, I would say, "act like King George in private, but don't make any tactically horrid requests, and continue to be competant where it matters, unlike King George".

5. let's not forget, he was willing to do things that put his life and his power at risk in order to save the world

Quite literally, he chose the path that least endangered his position at the expense of others.At the expense of who? The OoTS?

If the gates fall, its Game Over for the entire planet. Everyone is at risk. Finding competant, motivated help is a good thing.

Lord Shojo was a selfish manipulative jerk whom believed everything he did was justified because he thought he was smarter than everyone else. His plan to protect himself was not only cruel to his next of kin as well as followers but also fundamentally flawed since it got him killed.Lord Sojo was the RULER of a people who thought his actions were justified because it was HIS JOB, and no one elses. His plan was cruel to his next of kin, but crueller to himself. Also, plans aren't "fundamentally flawed" just because they fail. As a matter of fact, his plans were flawed, because the constraints placed on him by foolish oaths were impossible to work around in any fashion in time to be effective - that's not his fault, but Rich Burlew's :). His plan was, in fact, probably the best one that anyone could have made, but there was no solution available to him.
Also, none of his plans have thus far managed to do anything to help anyone since the order of the stick saved everyone by themselves.Without his plans, the OoTS would have no clue what was going on here, and would have saved nobody. Miko's news about an approaching Lich wouldn't be placed in the proper context.

slayerx
2007-02-02, 05:27 AM
Charles Phipps does make some good points...
Frankly, the acting senile thing is what gets me most... i mean, he should have increased the guards around him and hunted down the nobles trying to kill them. It's obvious that those nobles must have been corrupt in order to go that far and thus should have been taken out of power... Seriously, he was goning to have to pass leadership down to Hinjo someday, and he would have the same problem to deal with. By taking out those corrupt nobles he makes things all the more easier for the leaders to follow him. Not to mention that if Hinjo doesn't do that great of a job, those corrupt nobles could end up getting a certain amount of influence over him... those nobles are a problem for Azure City... a non-corrupt noble would have complaiigned about certain laws, not try to kill the ruler...

Though i still think him lying about the oath and waht not was justified... someone mentioned he could have held a war council with miko, hinjo and Roy concerning the gates... in theory it might work, but it may depend on how strict the oath of non-interference is... i think Shojo mentioned that he must have undeniable proof that for the paladin's to get involved with the other gates... At that point, Roy's testimony and such may not be good enough. The paladin's might question if Roy is actually telling the truth and thus Roy's testimony of the situation would only make them suspect something might be going after the gates, and depending on how strict the oath is, suspician would not be enough for the paladin's to get involved... This could be what Shojo was worried about...


she's never been seen actually protecting the innocent,
Ya, i guess we never did see her do anything like kill a tribe of ogres that were terrorizing a couple of dirt farmers...

seriously, it's rather ridicous to assume such things, that miko never rescued innocent poeple before... Last time i checked, the comic was about the order of the stick, not miko... Miko is only gonna be seen when it's important to the story, and considering how poeple aren't being attacked that frequently, it's highly unlikly that in those story scenes would also be able to include Miko rescuing someone... (not to meniton that you probably wind up killing a lot of monsters when you travel a lot in the Dnd world, and need to do so inorder to become a high level paladin; yelling at poeple over trivial laws probably doesn't earn much exp =P)


or at least make some really unneeded threats thinking she is an almighty power to lord on everyone.
She doesn't believe SHE is almighty power lord over others, but the 12 gods she serves... she fights in the name of the gods not herself

Charles Phipps
2007-02-02, 05:33 AM
My take on Shojo is that he was too clever for his own good. He created elaborate plan after elaborate plan while glorifying in his deceptions because he enjoyed tweaking everyone's nose. I'm not debating he wanted to save the world (he lives there too) or that he thought he was doing everything for his people.

I'm just going to argue that shojo would have done a lot better job if he'd been a little more lawful and a lot less Thief from 8bit.

SmartAlec
2007-02-02, 05:50 AM
To be fair, whatever Shojo has been doing, it's clearly worked for 47 years.

Demented
2007-02-02, 06:00 AM
His plans of senility hurt those dearest to him.
He's a good-serving old pr*ck with class levels in Artful Codger.

However, beyond his being a level 14 Aristocraft, I don't see him as revelling in his plans. Actually, he struck me as resenting that he has to make plans, when it would have just been easier if the Paladins didn't need to worry about the oath.

----- Collected Thoughts While Replying to Big-A**-Posts -----

His ultimate failing:
His ultimate failing would be his inability to command the Sapphire Guard to guard the other gates. Considering the Sapphire Guard's oath, that means that his failing was an inability to get the evidence required to prove to the Paladins that there was a lich, Xykon, who intended to seize a gate. Here's the rub: The only source he has to begin with is Eugene, an outsider who, let's face it, isn't supposed to be there. It's unlikely the Paladins would believe a ghost who beat the snot out of a planetar for his own selfish purposes. So while there's a valid danger to the gates, the Paladins would be sitting on their fine polished armor, in spite of Shojo's efforts.

Shojo's alternative:
Shojo's alternative is to convince the Paladins to compromise their values and renounce the oath. There's no definitive proof that he tried, but the way he explains the situation, it sounds like they weren't going to listen to him if he didn't have the evidence he couldn't get. So, chances are, he might have tried and it didn't work, or his trying wouldn't have worked anyway. But what fool believes the words coming out of a level 14 Aristocrat's mouth?

There's also the remote possibility that the twelve gods would have frowned upon the paladins renouncing that oath. That would be very bad. Though it would make a neat lightshow.

A slightly light-hearted idea:
Maybe he should've sent his best Paladin to ask the Oracle in order to get the proof he needed, instead of sending her to fetch the OOTS. But what would the question be? And could she have succeeded the test of the heart? High blood pressure and all.

Imagine if she found out the Oracle was evil, being a Kobold. Suppose she smites the Oracle, then leaves. Then she forgets why she left because of the valley's magical enchantment, realizes she never asked the question, and goes back into the valley. She finds the Oracle has been murdered, leaves the valley to tell Shojo, forgets why she left because of the valley's magical enchantment, and goes back into the valley. She finds the Oracle has been murdered, leaves the valley to tell Shojo....

At some point, she'd have to write down "Oracle murdered. Tell Shojo." on her cloak before she leaves the valley again, when she remembers she has left and gone back into the valley several times, with no clue of what transpired between.

Shojo's final gambit
Shojo's only way to stop Xykon, if Xykon went for the other gates, would be to use the OOTS or some other mercenary group. At least to some extent, I'm sure that Eugene's summoning is what led him astray–Up till then, he'd been using his paladins for everything.

When you think about it, though, he could have very well been truly demented and done better. Xykon would be heading for Azure City no matter what happened, and he's better off having the Paladins right there, waiting as they always have been. But how could he have foreseen that? And would it have made for a better story?

He took the only path he had, and it led down a chain of events that eventually killed him.
Fate is fickle sometimes.

Then again, if the Paladins and the city guard aren't enough to stop Xykon and his hobgoblin horde, then all that happened was for the best, and his inevitable death was a minor sacrifice for the greater good, since the OOTS are now in a better position to foresee Xykon's actions.

Mr Teufel
2007-02-02, 08:13 AM
A slightly light-hearted idea:
Maybe he should've sent his best Paladin to ask the Oracle in order to get the proof he needed, instead of sending her to fetch the OOTS. But what would the question be? And could she have succeeded the test of the heart? High blood pressure and all.

Imagine if she found out the Oracle was evil, being a Kobold. Suppose she smites the Oracle, then leaves. Then she forgets why she left because of the valley's magical enchantment, realizes she never asked the question, and goes back into the valley. She finds the Oracle has been murdered, leaves the valley to tell Shojo, forgets why she left because of the valley's magical enchantment, and goes back into the valley. She finds the Oracle has been murdered, leaves the valley to tell Shojo....

At some point, she'd have to write down "Oracle murdered. Tell Shojo." on her cloak before she leaves the valley again, when she remembers she has left and gone back into the valley several times, with no clue of what transpired between.


This is very funny, and totally in character!

Duke of URL
2007-02-02, 08:22 AM
I don't see a man who takes a Little Girl from a monastary to turn her into a servant of a deity he doesn't believe in as 'Good'

Neutral is fine for him.

Huh? Shojo believed in the deities, he just wasn't a Paladin himself. If he didn't believe in the gods, then he wouldn't have been as concerned about a gods-killing Snarl.

AllisterH
2007-02-02, 08:25 AM
Where does it say that he "took" her (as in forcibly removed her) from a monastary? And where do you get the idea that he "turned her" into a servant of the gods (that he most *certainly* believes in)? What's more, he was right. She had the potential to become a powerful Paladin, and she became one. Who do you think wrote this story line, Dickens?

Unless, of course, you actually *believe* Miko's bizarre illogical mis-connections of irrelevant facts.

Er, Miko was "crying" the first day she was "chosen". She most assuredly didn't have a choice since I know, when I was 12 yrs old and wanted to go somewhere, I didn't cry when I got there....

As for Shojo, someone said it best. He was too smart for his own good.

Take what Shojo did to get the OotS into Azure City. He purposely sent his *most powerful* paladin and let her think that the OotS had destabilized the fabric of the multiverse. Yeah, of course Miko is going to come on like gangbusters.

What I don't understand is this, why didn't he simply tell Miko "Please bring the OotS to Azure City. Roy's father wants to give him some personal info that will help him permanently kill the evil lich Xylon. Roy et al thinks Xylon's dead but he isn't".

Not one single lie and this should've brought Roy running....

berrew
2007-02-02, 11:22 AM
Er, Miko was "crying" the first day she was "chosen". She most assuredly didn't have a choice since I know, when I was 12 yrs old and wanted to go somewhere, I didn't cry when I got there....The first night I was at summer camp, I cried beause I missed my Mommy and Daddy - and I was hardly alone. That doesn't mean that I didn't go there willingly. I can remember the camp counselors telling me how much fun I would have therre the next day, etc. They were right, of course. In fact, I will step out on a huge limb here and say that I find it impossible to imagine how one can abduct children against their will to become paladins. Becoming a paladin isn't thrust upon you, you have to make the choice yourself.

What's more, it's clear from Miko's context that she, from the beginning looked on Shojo as a trusted mentor who cared, thus the betrayal. That makes the forcible abduction unlikely from this side of things (though certainly possible in a strict enough society).

Yeah, Shojo played his cards in an unneccesarily complex manner in some ways - but he HAD to play his cards, as the ruler of Azure City, if he took his duty seriously. He wasn't a Gordian Knot-cutting kind of guy.

chibibar
2007-02-02, 12:58 PM
also you have to consider Shojo's position..... who are these corrupted uspurer? how powerful are they? What kind of influence do they have?

Sometimes it is easier to keep those who are "semi" corrupt under your wing rather than killing them off for treason and have someone worst (who takes over) Shojo did do this for 47 years and doing well. I presume the other lords have influence and such and thus Shojo wants to keep thinking Shojo works in their favor and thus have harmony.

To me, this is not a total dictatorship. It is like a King with many lords and vassals trying to keep the peace among them instead of fighting each other and tearing the city apart.

Elliot Kane
2007-02-02, 01:36 PM
It's also possible that Shojo may have little or no actual evidence against those who want him dead. I really don't see the Sapphire Guard being too thrilled if he had started purging the city of anyone he thought might be an enemy. They clearly have the power to remove him if it comes down to it, and an order of paladins is not likely to be too forgiving of any ruler who starts acting in anything that might be considered an evil fashion.

pere
2007-02-02, 02:18 PM
Lawfulness is good for minions, not the ones in charge.

Only until the "minions" find out the truth. Which will always happen in some way sooner or later. As the saying goes, you can't fool all the people all the time...
And then it gets rather disadvantageous to not have been lawful, to put it in utilitaristic terms.. :smallbiggrin:

EmptyH
2007-02-02, 03:23 PM
Lawfulness is a liability, however. It's not a "positive" trait in a ruler. It's necessary, for paladins, but it is of no use in governing a city. If you're a smart leader, you use lawful people without being lawful yourself. (You also won't be chaotic...you have use for the law, you just don't feel bound by it.) Lawfulness is good for minions, not the ones in charge.

If the motives of ruler in question are "pure" then this is true, but without checks and balances of some sort how do you assure that ruler is acting in accord with the greater good? and who get to define what the greater good is? The concept of the Übermensch (Nietzsche's Superman) is a wonderful idea in theory but in practical application it normally devolves quite quickly into an oppresive despotism or civil war.

A "good" leader must be able to take any action necessary to achieve the best outcome for his/her people, but he/she should also be willing to face the consequences if he/she is wrong! Not a razors edge I would be willing to walk.

MTH

chibibar
2007-02-02, 03:31 PM
It is a rarity to have a good leader with good motives. I am not saying good leader can turn bad, but when you give a leader a tons of power without check and balance. sometimes good intentions may not be good at all (aka Current Miko's situation)

Old saying
"Power corrupes, absolute power corrupts absolutely"

Rainspattered
2007-02-03, 11:21 AM
Dictator != putting people in jail all the time.
Well, yes, but the fact is the only information we have on his rulership, really, is that he did not tell the truth to paladins (a lawful organization), and prevented people from being thrown in jail. Those are hardly dicatatorial hallmarks.


He may very well be a dictator - that is, the sole ruler with whom ultimate authority exists without checks and balances.
That is an absolute autocrat (see: Absolute Monarchy), not a dictator. A Dictator has to take very specific actions of their own to earn the title, not just inherit it.


However, Hinjo implies that he can be tried, which means there probably were checks and balances.
Word. They just aren't used much because they figured a senile leader would work out all right.

My opinion on him as a leader is that he's one of the few I've seen that I don't really despise. He prevents bloody, terrible wars of succession not through tyranny and murder, but convincing everyone he's a senile old man who listens to his cat as decision-making means. He doesn't seem to regulate the lives of people that much, and even throws a wrench in the gears when the paladins have tried to, at least in all the examples we've seen.

Emanick1
2007-02-03, 01:14 PM
Shojo believes in the 12. He just doesn't believe in a particular oath.

Hear, hear. There's barely anyone in OOTS, or D&D in general, for that matter, who doesn't believe in gods. There're an accepted part of life. I would hazard a guess that Shojo even agrees with the Twelve Gods' ideals. Whether he actually follows through with all their principles is a different matter.


*cough*

Not to disabuse the ideal of Shojo for President Campaign but

1. He maintained order and peace in his lands above and beyond what he would have been capable of if he restrained himself with the paladin's code

He's about to be invaded by a Lich King's army, he's utterly failed to protect the gate, he demoralized his guard, and he ended up assassinated. Plus, he had to fear assassination from his nobility to the point that he had to space 24/7 playing the part of a harmless madman.

Azure City one presumes was probably controlled by the Paladins since most of his orders were demented.


He maintained it fairly well for the first 47 years of his reign. I don't see the King of Somewhere, or Anywhere, or Nowhere (I forget which one is a democracy) stopping Xykon's army much better. Do you honestly think Rich would spoil the drama by letting Xykon be detected when he's a week's march away from Azure City?
I find it hard to picture a guard of paladins being demoralized by emptying kitty litter enough that they would fight poorly against an army of hobgoblins who were trying to destroy everything and everyone they knew and loved.
The assassination part could not by any stretch of the imagination be expected by the characters. Who (besides the OotS themselves) would have thought Miko would be so unbalanced that she would kill her leader on an insane impulse? Thus, you can hardly put all the blame on Shojo for his death. I do blame him for talking plainly in an unlocked (and possibly wide open) throne room, about so-called "crimes" against his followers. That was stupid.




2. He honestly cared for the people beneath him so that even though he had the authority to act outside of their code he hid it from them so they wouldn't be upset by it

Caring for the people beneath him seems to be throwing his weight around the Order of the Stick including ordering Miko to kidnap them. Also, scaring the Hell out of them with a false trial. Also countlessly verbally abusing his loyal staff whom carried out his orders despite the fact they believed he was demented.

We're talking "madness of King George" levels of abuse.


And how was Shojo supposed to tell them (the OotS) that the trial was a fake beforehand? Belkar, in all likelihood, would have given away his pre-knowledge the instant the trial began, if not before. The only time you see him being cruel in the least (without a good cause) is when he threatened the guard with litter-box duty if he didn't obey. The hardness on Roy and the others is mainly with good cause, as they aren't exactly being cooperative. His sarcasm is rampant, too, but Roy is one of the most sarcastic people in the comic, and I don't see a thread titled "Why Roy is not a bad person" here.
King George's madness induced him to kill thousands of people in a selfish war. Lord Shojo's "madness" induced him to threaten semi-disobedient guards with litter box duty and use sarcasm. See a difference?
In addition, Shojo's "madness" has helped him to avoid death (extra guards won't work forever) and keep his plans for "saving the world" via a capable band of heroes (who are much more effective than his paladins) safe from disruption and destruction.




3. he lessened conflict between the noble houses

Obviously to the point he felt safe to reveal himself...oh wait.


The nobles are obviously quite powerful. Shojo doesn't have ultimate power over the city. I doubt he could weed out the nobles before they eliminated him for his efforts. (Btw, how would he even know which nobles were after him?) Like I said before, extra guards won't keep him absolutely safe.




4. he was loved by his people

His paladins LOATHED him. They're also the only people we've seen. Even his own family was going to have him put on trial. If the font of good in the world hated him and he feared assassination, what gives you the idea ANYONE liked him?


They didn't loathe him. They thought his "madness" was an annoyance which bothered them, but they were too mature to complain about such trifles as "bringing the holy kitty litter" and similar things.
His own family (Hinjo) didn't want to violate the paladin's code. At any rate, from his point of view, it would be impossible to prevent the trial. I don't see Hinjo, of all people, smuggling his uncle out of the palace before a trial to evade justice. Don't forget that Hinjo rushed to his dying uncle's side while Roy and Miko began their fight, and only left so that he could stop his former fellow paladin from murdering a helpless innocent, even if the innocent was an unconvicted murderer (which is a less serious charge in a world when people like that get resurrected).




5. let's not forget, he was willing to do things that put his life and his power at risk in order to save the world

Quite literally, he chose the path that least endangered his position at the expense of others.

Lord Shojo was a selfish manipulative jerk whom believed everything he did was justified because he thought he was smarter than everyone else. His plan to protect himself was not only cruel to his next of kin as well as followers but also fundamentally flawed since it got him killed. Also, none of his plans have thus far managed to do anything to help anyone since the order of the stick saved everyone by themselves.

Cause, God forbid, Shojo suck it up and pardon the Order for their ignorance.

I think you mean this:
"Quite literally, he chose the path that least endangered his life (which was in mortal danger) at the expense of making his paladins clean the litter box and deal with a senile old man, who still made decisions to the best of his judgement, however it appeared." On the whole, that path made no significant difference.
He believed everything he did was justified because he presumably tried to make good decisions, without worrying about what the squabbling nobles thought. He didn't think he was smarter than everyone else, he thought he was in the best position in the city to influence the people in a positive way.
Also, I fail to see how his plan was "cruel to his next of kin", Hinjo, or his followers; cleaning the litter box, as I have stated before, is hardly cruel.
Also, his plan in itself was not fundamentally flawed, besides the fact that the paladins objected. If the paladins hadn't objected, there would be no need for an elaborate plan, perhaps no need for a plan at all. The fatal flaw he made was to talk plainly in an unlocked room, where anyone could hear him. His death was not his fault, it was Miko's fault for going above and beyond anything logical or remotely predictable.
None of his plans have managed to save anybody yet because only one part of it has matured so far: to get the Order of the Stick over there. Which is exactly why the Order of the Stick "saved everyone by themselves."

In short, Shojo is not a bad ruler.

chibibar
2007-02-03, 01:25 PM
The problem is that Shojo is in a rock and a hard place. Let me see if I can explain myself better.

1. Some say add more guards to protect him, well. There suppose to be "harmony" within the city. If Shojo surrounds himself with guards all the time and no one actually "try" to kill him in public then what? The rest of the populus would think Shojo is paranoid and maybe not a good leader to worry more about his own personal safety vs the public.

2. The Senile act - Shojo in a position to do a lot of things BUT at the same time he commands a REALLY rigid group of warriors known as Sapphire Guards who are Paladins. Most of these Paladins have sworn oaths to uphold the laws and promise about the gates. Most of these paladins would rather die than breaking the oath. (breaking an oath is not an evil act is it?) Thus Shojo have to be able to do things to maintain peace and yet able to command the guards to do stuff that they "might not" do if Shojo possess full mental capacity.... imagine this (this is how I think it went down)

scenario 1 (non senile version)
Shojo: There has been reports that two of the gates has been destroy. We should investigate to ensure the safety of the universe.
SGuard: but M'lord, We swore an oath not to interfere, I feel that if we investigate, it would break the oath.
Shojo: but for the sake of the humanity Do it.
SGuard: but sire. I must decline, you are breaking your vows and making us break ours.
(you can go from here what might occur)

Scenario 2 (senile version)
Shojo: Mr. Scruffy feels unsafe knowing the two gates have been destroy. What is that Mr. Scruffy? you want to check it out? but that is against the oath... we should do that.... oh alright Mr. Scruffy.
Shojo: Guards, take two Paladins to check out the situation on the gates, Mr. Scruffy doesn't feel safe since it is destroy. I told him it is against the code but you know Mr. Scruffy.
SGuard: yes sir. We shall do it for Mr. Scruffy.

See?? It can work.

PirateMonk
2007-02-03, 02:30 PM
Justinian, Charles Phipps, and Pere: Lawful Good is NOT the 'best' Good, at least not in all situations. Shojo was a good ruler, though he is kind of a Good Nale.

EvilElitest
2007-02-03, 11:09 PM
"Frankly, the acting senile thing is what gets me most... i mean, he should have increased the guards around him and hunted down the nobles trying to kill them. It's obvious that those nobles must have been corrupt in order to go that far and thus should have been taken out of power... Seriously, he was goning to have to pass leadership down to Hinjo someday, and he would have the same problem to deal with. By taking out those corrupt nobles he makes things all the more easier for the leaders to follow him. Not to mention that if Hinjo doesn't do that great of a job, those corrupt nobles could end up getting a certain amount of influence over him... those nobles are a problem for Azure City... a non-corrupt noble would have complaiigned about certain laws, not try to kill the ruler..."
If you look at any real life culture, nobles weild an over whelming amount of power, and pissing them off could start a war or worst. Also, Shojo need to leave his places sometime, or if he does not, his close relation does, and they could be assianatied. Also, people accuse him of being corrupe. But bear in mind they are in a sociaty were the word of the gods are the words of law. That is not just. He is corrupting an unjust sociaty to work for the greater good, while following his own code of ethics. Bear in mind, while he is not a saint, as long as he does not commite any evil acts or make unjust decsion, he is still a good ruler. The only unjust act he did was fake a trial and that was because the trial was unfair to begine with. Bear in mind that had he not faked the trial, OOTS would be dead for disobaying a law they did not know about for a country they did not belong to.

Steward
2007-02-03, 11:24 PM
Justinian, Charles Phipps, and Pere: Lawful Good is NOT the 'best' Good, at least not in all situations. Shojo was a good ruler, though he is kind of a Good Nale.

That's kind of insulting. I mean, Shojo is a mastermind, while Nale is an arrogant moron. Even Shojo's worst decisions aren't nearly as crude and simplistic as Nale's inventions.

Messenger
2007-02-04, 09:31 AM
At the very least, Shojo was sneaky for the good of people, while most real world politicians are sneaky for their agendas...

But then, no one ever said Shojo was a bad ruler in the first place. :smallconfused:

PirateMonk
2007-02-04, 09:57 AM
That's kind of insulting. I mean, Shojo is a mastermind, while Nale is an arrogant moron. Even Shojo's worst decisions aren't nearly as crude and simplistic as Nale's inventions.

My mistake. Nale is an evil Shojo wannabe.

Talya
2007-02-04, 11:45 AM
If the motives of ruler in question are "pure" then this is true, but without checks and balances of some sort how do you assure that ruler is acting in accord with the greater good? and who get to define what the greater good is? The concept of the Übermensch (Nietzsche's Superman) is a wonderful idea in theory but in practical application it normally devolves quite quickly into an oppresive despotism or civil war.

A "good" leader must be able to take any action necessary to achieve the best outcome for his/her people, but he/she should also be willing to face the consequences if he/she is wrong! Not a razors edge I would be willing to walk.

MTH

See, on another message board, in a discussion about morality in general and politics and the like, I'd wholeheartedly agree with you, because I'm the ultimate moral relativist who doesn't believe in the "greater good." But those discussions are not appropriate here, nor is that type of argument relevant to the D&D alignment system.

This is D&D. Good and evil are absolutes that are set in stone. In a ruler, chaotic good represents altruistic freedom, with individual choice set above all else, lawful evil represents oppressive tyranny of inflexible and harsh rules, lawful good represents an altruistic nanny-state that makes you obey it with your own best interests in mind, chaotic evil represents the despotic tyrant who governs by whim. The neutrals are the blending of the various ideals. It's all pretty cut and dry.