Was Miko treated unfairly by the narrative?

[TidePriestess]

Personally, I would say yes. I don't think that her place in the story, and the portrayal of the Order's behavior in regards to her, was exactly fair.

It's true that Miko is socially inept and judgmental, yes (although one would think her Charisma score wouldn't be that bad, but maybe she thought she didn't need it because she started out as a monk)--rather like, in fact, Vaarsuvius except that Miko's area of interest is alignment and divine favor as opposed to arcane power. But the trouble is that she's a genuinely good person by definition--she is, in fact, a morally better person than at least a third of the Order, and probably half when you consider that Haley was wavering between good and neutral at the time. Her foibles of being blunt and impatient don't nearly stack up to Vaarsuvius' disregard for collateral damage and murderous streak, or Belkar's... absolutely everything. Durkon was the only person (aside from Elan, who... well, is just Elan) who ever tried to treat her respectfully, and she was only ever a jerk to Roy because Roy was being a sexist ass; we can confirm this by her actually warming up to him briefly after his apology in strip #250... before he blows it all by going into sexist insults as opposed to sexist flirting (plus one slam on her appearance, nicely enough).

So really, she had no reason to trust any of the Order of the Stick to begin with, except possibly Durkon. And she gets continually screwed over for it, placed into increasingly bad positions, and Roy gets away with favoring Belkar over her. I like Miko's character and find it quite interesting, but I hate the way her arc was handled.

[Keltest]

Its more than just her lack of trust. She takes (or took, we don't know if that was a regular problem with her) a conclusion and tried to make the evidence she had fit into it, rather than forming a conclusion from the evidence. Reasonable suspicion is one thing, but everything seems suspicious if you automatically ascribe it to some unknown sinister goal. While Roy going off on her didn't help her opinion of him, he had some very real grievances with her.

I do think it was a brilliant move by the Giant to include the one scene of her trying to be friendly with the other paladins and them snubbing her though. It changes her from a pretty unlikable "wrong-way-to-play-a-paladin" character to someone who is fairly sympathetic, even when she gets a bit unhinged.

[TidePriestess]

Its more than just her lack of trust. She takes (or took, we don't know if that was a regular problem with her) a conclusion and tried to make the evidence she had fit into it, rather than forming a conclusion from the evidence. Reasonable suspicion is one thing, but everything seems suspicious if you automatically ascribe it to some unknown sinister goal. While Roy going off on her didn't help her opinion of him, he had some very real grievances with her.

I do think it was a brilliant move by the Giant to include the one scene of her trying to be friendly with the other paladins and them snubbing her though. It changes her from a pretty unlikable "wrong-way-to-play-a-paladin" character to someone who is fairly sympathetic, even when she gets a bit unhinged.
I'd find anyone who hung out willingly with Belkar to be deeply suspicious, personally. And to be frank, I'd have no problem with Roy's hypothetical of slitting his throat in the night (or not much of one, at any rate--it'd be one arguably evil act that would cancel everything that happened later of Roy aiding and abetting an evil character, so it might still fit). And his grievances were for things ultimately far smaller than much of what his own party did, so my sympathy for him is little.

[Keltest]

I'd find anyone who hung out willingly with Belkar to be deeply suspicious, personally. And to be frank, I'd have no problem with Roy's hypothetical of slitting his throat in the night (or not much of one, at any rate--it'd be one arguably evil act that would cancel everything that happened later of Roy aiding and abetting an evil character, so it might still fit). And his grievances were for things ultimately far smaller than much of what his own party did, so my sympathy for him is little.

He willingly puts up with his party because A: he literally asked them to be there and B: they didn't assault him then try to kidnap him. That sort of thing tends to breed antagonism into most people.

As I said, Miko shot herself out of a cannon past the threshold of "reasonable suspicion" shortly before she came back from the dwarven lands.

"The lich we didn't know about until they told us isn't actually dead? They must have lied to us, tricked my detect evil, and snuck into the city that I demanded they come to in order to do some nefarious goal im unaware of!"

[Koo Rehtorb]

Pretty much. She was justified in nearly all of what she did until she went off the deep end, and she wasn't the one who sabotaged relations with the Order.

Edit - she got treated like an NPC, if that makes any sense. PCs are willing to put up with most horrible flaws in their own party, but lash out at any filthy outsider NPCs who tell them what to do.

[TidePriestess]

He willingly puts up with his party because A: he literally asked them to be there and B: they didn't assault him then try to kidnap him. That sort of thing tends to breed antagonism into most people.

As I said, Miko shot herself out of a cannon past the threshold of "reasonable suspicion" shortly before she came back from the dwarven lands.

"The lich we didn't know about until they told us isn't actually dead? They must have lied to us, tricked my detect evil, and snuck into the city that I demanded they come to in order to do some nefarious goal im unaware of!"
B wasn't exactly Miko's fault; she was ordered to do so by Lord Shojo and even admitted that the Order probably wasn't guilty of any ancillary crimes.

And I'm not saying she didn't screw up... but I will say that the narrative unfairly kicked her around.

[Keltest]

B wasn't exactly Miko's fault; she was ordered to do so by Lord Shojo and even admitted that the Order probably wasn't guilty of any ancillary crimes.

And I'm not saying she didn't screw up... but I will say that the narrative unfairly kicked her around.

I though the comic made it pretty clear that given the circumstances of Shojo's orders, she was being entirely overzealous. Heck, she even lampshades it as one point when she kills the bandits.

Rich deliberately wrote her as an unpleasant character, yeah, but from an in-story PoV she was basically asking for bad things to happen to her. As I said, I think it was beautiful how he turned her from completely unlikable to fairly sympathetic with a single panel, but ultimately the things that happened to her are a direct result of her own poor judgment.

[TidePriestess]

I though the comic made it pretty clear that given the circumstances of Shojo's orders, she was being entirely overzealous. Heck, she even lampshades it as one point when she kills the bandits.

Rich deliberately wrote her as an unpleasant character, yeah, but from an in-story PoV she was basically asking for bad things to happen to her. As I said, I think it was beautiful how he turned her from completely unlikable to fairly sympathetic with a single panel, but ultimately the things that happened to her are a direct result of her own poor judgment.
And Shojo's deceptions, and Roy being heinously obstinate, and Belkar being Belkar (while Roy should have gotten rid of him long ago, and should never have defended him from Miko). I would have found her sympathetic either way (and I think I somehow missed that one panel you're talking about; which strip is it in?).

And it was Belkar who should have died then.

[Keltest]

And Shojo's deceptions, and Roy being heinously obstinate, and Belkar being Belkar (while Roy should have gotten rid of him long ago, and should never have defended him from Miko). I would have found her sympathetic either way (and I think I somehow missed that one panel you're talking about; which strip is it in?).

And it was Belkar who should have died then.

In a perfect world, people like Belkar and Xykon would not exist. Its not a perfect world though, and Belkar does exist. Roy is correct in stating its better to have him (inadvertently, true) work for good than it is to leave him on his own. And you know what? Belkar WAS going to face the consequences for what he did, until that whole "Invasion of countless goblinoids and undead" thing happened, and more pressing concerns came up.

If you don't mind, show me where you think Miko's only option was failure as a result of the narrative (ie not her own fault). Meanwhile, ill look for that panel.

[Koo Rehtorb]

I though the comic made it pretty clear that given the circumstances of Shojo's orders, she was being entirely overzealous.

In the orders of a crazy guy that said his cat wanted her to try hard to take them alive. It is entirely reasonable for one person up against an entire party of (as far as she knew) dangerous well armed criminals set on destroying the world, to not bend over backwards trying to capture them alive because someone said that their cat said to.

Frankly, asking them to surrender before attacking at all showed remarkable restraint.

[TidePriestess]

In a perfect world, people like Belkar and Xykon would not exist. Its not a perfect world though, and Belkar does exist. Roy is correct in stating its better to have him (inadvertently, true) work for good than it is to leave him on his own. And you know what? Belkar WAS going to face the consequences for what he did, until that whole "Invasion of countless goblinoids and undead" thing happened, and more pressing concerns came up.

If you don't mind, show me where you think Miko's only option was failure as a result of the narrative (ie not her own fault). Meanwhile, ill look for that panel.
I'm not saying that it wasn't her fault, per se. I'm saying that the narrative puts her actions and thought processes in an unjustly worse light.

And... really, Roy should have just killed Belkar. In actual combat if doing so from surprise wasn't an option. Either that or actually try to redeem him specifically (there are rules for that in the BoED) instead of just bringing him around and vaguely hoping that good would rub off on him.

[Keltest]

I'm not saying that it wasn't her fault, per se. I'm saying that the narrative puts her actions and thought processes in an unjustly worse light.

And... really, Roy should have just killed Belkar. In actual combat if doing so from surprise wasn't an option. Either that or actually try to redeem him specifically (there are rules for that in the BoED) instead of just bringing him around and vaguely hoping that good would rub off on him.

Its not like he was just letting Belkar do his own thing. He had a metaphorical squirt bottle for the Halfling. Especially once the Mark of Justice was installed.

[TidePriestess]

Its not like he was just letting Belkar do his own thing. He had a metaphorical squirt bottle for the Halfling. Especially once the Mark of Justice was installed.
Which turned out to be completely inadequate? Especially when that one cleric was pushed into removing it. And he had been letting Belkar do far too much of his own thing for quite a long time. The only things that differentiate him from Xykon are class, level, and mental ability scores.

[Keltest]

Which turned out to be completely inadequate? Especially when that one cleric was pushed into removing it. And he had been letting Belkar do far too much of his own thing for quite a long time. The only things that differentiate him from Xykon are class, level, and mental ability scores.

And the fact that Roy has him on a leash. The MoJ stopped working effectively once Roy died. As a rule, that negatively impacts anyone's ability to influence someone.

[jidasfire]

I would say Miko was treated perhaps harshly by the narrative, in the sense that mostly no one really liked her, and even on those occasions where she wasn't being unpleasant, she received comeuppance for her unpleasantness. This ultimately changed her from a zealous yet forthright individual to a murderous fanatic who bent reality to suit her emotional states and justified any action she committed. Now, was that fair? I don't know. The author decided on a trajectory for the character and let it play out, tragically in the main. Tragedies usually aren't fair, but at the same time, a good tragedy isn't just blind unfairness so much as bad luck, faulty information, and damning choices. Certainly Miko's tale had all three of those. Suffice it to say, when the going got rough, she did not get going. You can say a lot about the lack of general competence of the Order of the Stick, especially in those earlier days, but on the whole, when confronted with situations where they were forced to grow, they have done so. Miko did not, and she not only died for it, but one could argue she took her city with her when she fell.

[Ryuka Tana]

I would say Miko was treated perhaps harshly by the narrative, in the sense that mostly no one really liked her, and even on those occasions where she wasn't being unpleasant, she received comeuppance for her unpleasantness. This ultimately changed her from a zealous yet forthright individual to a murderous fanatic who bent reality to suit her emotional states and justified any action she committed. Now, was that fair? I don't know. The author decided on a trajectory for the character and let it play out, tragically in the main. Tragedies usually aren't fair, but at the same time, a good tragedy isn't just blind unfairness so much as bad luck, faulty information, and damning choices. Certainly Miko's tale had all three of those. Suffice it to say, when the going got rough, she did not get going. You can say a lot about the lack of general competence of the Order of the Stick, especially in those earlier days, but on the whole, when confronted with situations where they were forced to grow, they have done so. Miko did not, and she not only died for it, but one could argue she took her city with her when she fell.

This is a very good way to describe it. In the end, Miko chose a certain path, and whatever came before it, by the end she was absolutely to blame for the actions she took there. Causality is a bitch, either one is to blame for their actions or no one is to blame for anything. If Miko is not to blame because she was treated harshly, all of the people who treated her harshly are not to blame for that because of their histories (much like how abusive parents are usually victims of abuse).

Is there plenty of blame to go around? Absolutely, but Miko takes the brunt of it in the moments leading to her fall.

As for Belkar, people must be judged for both action and intent. Belkar is a bad person, but ultimately, if the Order stops Xykon, Belkar will have had a hand in saving the world (even if he's dead by then, the Order would have failed without him up until this point). Good intentions are meaningful, but all the good intentions in the world mean nothing if your actions lead to catastrophic results. I would not remotely describe Miko's intentions as good, and her actions were definitely catastrophic.

[TidePriestess]

I would say Miko was treated perhaps harshly by the narrative, in the sense that mostly no one really liked her, and even on those occasions where she wasn't being unpleasant, she received comeuppance for her unpleasantness. This ultimately changed her from a zealous yet forthright individual to a murderous fanatic who bent reality to suit her emotional states and justified any action she committed. Now, was that fair? I don't know. The author decided on a trajectory for the character and let it play out, tragically in the main. Tragedies usually aren't fair, but at the same time, a good tragedy isn't just blind unfairness so much as bad luck, faulty information, and damning choices. Certainly Miko's tale had all three of those. Suffice it to say, when the going got rough, she did not get going. You can say a lot about the lack of general competence of the Order of the Stick, especially in those earlier days, but on the whole, when confronted with situations where they were forced to grow, they have done so. Miko did not, and she not only died for it, but one could argue she took her city with her when she fell.
Plain and simple, the fact is that she was less unpleasant than two to three members of the Order itself and was unjustly punished for it where they would not have been. I didn't find it at all a satisfying arc.


As for Belkar, people must be judged for both action and intent. Belkar is a bad person, but ultimately, if the Order stops Xykon, Belkar will have had a hand in saving the world (even if he's dead by then, the Order would have failed without him up until this point). Good intentions are meaningful, but all the good intentions in the world mean nothing if your actions lead to catastrophic results. I would not remotely describe Miko's intentions as good, and her actions were definitely catastrophic.
If your intent is bad, your actions cannot be good-aligned. And Miko's intentions were good, just badly misguided--she was still a good person at heart, moreso than Vaarsuvius or Belkar.

[Keltest]

Ok, Ive got nothing on that panel with the paladins being rude to Miko. Am I being crazy, or just incompetent?

[Keltest]

Plain and simple, the fact is that she was less unpleasant than two to three members of the Order itself and was unjustly punished for it where they would not have been. I didn't find it at all a satisfying arc.


If your intent is bad, your actions cannot be good-aligned. And Miko's intentions were good, just badly misguided--she was still a good person at heart, moreso than Vaarsuvius or Belkar.


Miko is a paladin. She has actual standards of behavior she needs to follow. Literally *needs* to follow. And yes, good can absolutely come from evil actions (See: Lord of the Rings and Gollum for an out of universe example). As for good intentions, the road to hell is paved with them, as the saying goes. They mean practically nothing if you end up making things worse.

[An Enemy Spy]

Plain and simple, the fact is that she was less unpleasant than two to three members of the Order itself and was unjustly punished for it where they would not have been. I didn't find it at all a satisfying arc.


If your intent is bad, your actions cannot be good-aligned. And Miko's intentions were good, just badly misguided--she was still a good person at heart, moreso than Vaarsuvius or Belkar.

I get the feeling that you've already arrived at a conclusion and are only willing to accept evidence that fits into your chosen narrative of what happened. I suppose that's fitting, considering what character this thread is about.

[TidePriestess]

Miko is a paladin. She has actual standards of behavior she needs to follow. Literally *needs* to follow. And yes, good can absolutely come from evil actions (See: Lord of the Rings and Gollum for an out of universe example). As for good intentions, the road to hell is paved with them, as the saying goes. They mean practically nothing if you end up making things worse.
Good can come from evil intent (which is what I think you meant to say), but it doesn't make the person with the intent any better. And... well, I like Miko and I believe that she deserved a longer arc and some time to find redemption, at least as much as any of the PCs.

[Keltest]

Good can come from evil intent (which is what I think you meant to say), but it doesn't make the person with the intent any better. And... well, I like Miko and I believe that she deserved a longer arc and some time to find redemption, at least as much as any of the PCs.

The story isn't about Miko though. She was, quite frankly, a secondary antagonist to the order's story for the duration of that book.

[137beth]

I get the feeling that you've already arrived at a conclusion and are only willing to accept evidence that fits into your chosen narrative of what happened. I suppose that's fitting, considering what character this thread is about.
Threadwinner!


Miko was not being treated unfairly. As Roy said, Miko was not Good. She followed the letter of the alignment while ignoring its intent. She did not have respect for the dignity of fellow beings.

[TidePriestess]

The story isn't about Miko though. She was, quite frankly, a secondary antagonist to the order's story for the duration of that book.
Regrettably.


Threadwinner!


Miko was not being treated unfairly. As Roy said, Miko was not Good. She followed the letter of the alignment while ignoring its intent. She did not have respect for the dignity of fellow beings.
But if she wasn't good, she couldn't have been a paladin. And does very frequently risk herself to protect innocents, so... I don't think poor manners really count as something that can shift alignment (Roy's dad was actually cited on that in the afterlife, but it wasn't enough to keep him from getting to Celestia; only the Blood Oath did that).

[Keltest]

Regrettably.


But if she wasn't good, she couldn't have been a paladin. And does very frequently risk herself to protect innocents, so... I don't think poor manners really count as something that can shift alignment (Roy's dad was actually cited on that in the afterlife, but it wasn't enough to keep him from getting to Celestia; only the Blood Oath did that).

The degree to which a paladin can stay a paladin varies depending on the specific act. She isn't going to fall for being not-nice, because frankly it would be petty and stupid to do that. Roy's grief wasn't that she wasn't literally (as in, character sheet) good, simply that she was good to the letter of the alignment and not the intent. Ditto and especially with lawful.

[TidePriestess]

The degree to which a paladin can stay a paladin varies depending on the specific act. She isn't going to fall for being not-nice, because frankly it would be petty and stupid to do that. Roy's grief wasn't that she wasn't literally (as in, character sheet) good, simply that she was good to the letter of the alignment and not the intent. Ditto and especially with lawful.
That does seem to be an extremely common phenomenon with this series, given the conduct of Azure City re: goblins, not to mention the gods creating goblins as XP fodder and still remaining allegedly good in some cases. But I don't know if I buy the "letter and not intent" part; alignment systems are far more flexible than individual laws, as a single alignment contains an enormous number of qualifiers and descriptors.

[Ryuka Tana]

But if she wasn't good, she couldn't have been a paladin.

Who defines good? What is the alignment controlled by?

Presumably, in the the OotS-verse it's the gods, they were the ones who decided she should fall. So far, we have pretty strong proof that the gods are fallible (in fact, most of the pantheons are absolutely based on pantheons chock full of fallible deities).

So what we know is that fallible entities, who are presumably also not omniscient, deemed her 'good'. We don't know the criteria except by D&D rules, about probably the most vague and indefinite concept that the rules cover. Rich has also stated plenty of times that what's good for the story always trumps the rules.

So, no, your statement is simply based on a false premise. It does, however, follow with this idea:


I get the feeling that you've already arrived at a conclusion and are only willing to accept evidence that fits into your chosen narrative of what happened. I suppose that's fitting, considering what character this thread is about.

[TidePriestess]

Who defines good? What is the alignment controlled by?

Presumably, in the the OotS-verse it's the gods, they were the ones who decided she should fall. So far, we have pretty strong proof that the gods are fallible (in fact, most of the pantheons are absolutely based on pantheons chock full of fallible deities).

So what we know is that fallible entities, who are presumably also not omniscient, deemed her 'good'. We don't know the criteria except by D&D rules, about probably the most vague and indefinite concept that the rules cover. Rich has also stated plenty of times that what's good for the story always trumps the rules.

So, no, your statement is simply based on a false premise. It does, however, follow with this idea:
I thought it was decided by the other Outer Planes outsiders, who don't seem to be tied to the gods per se, judging by a lot of the scenes from Roy's afterlife.

[Koo Rehtorb]

Yeah I don't think the gods have control over alignment.

[Ryuka Tana]

We don't know the criteria except by D&D rules, about probably the most vague and indefinite concept that the rules cover. Rich has also stated plenty of times that what's good for the story always trumps the rules.

This statement is still applicable either way.

[Koo Rehtorb]

Everything Miko did until she killed Shojo was justified and correct. People just didn't like her because she was kind of a jerk about it.

[Keltest]

Everything Miko did until she killed Shojo was justified and correct. People just didn't like her because she was kind of a jerk about it.

Except the part where she blamed the order for the blowing-up of that inn, and accused them of being terrible people for not sleeping in the dirt. And various other off-screen-but-claimed attacks on their dignity.

[Themrys]

So really, she had no reason to trust any of the Order of the Stick to begin with, except possibly Durkon. And she gets continually screwed over for it, placed into increasingly bad positions, and Roy gets away with favoring Belkar over her. I like Miko's character and find it quite interesting, but I hate the way her arc was handled.


I agree. She's disliked because her poor manners seem more real, I think. Most people don't know a psychopathic halfling ranger in real life, but a person with no social kills. Belkar's evilness is new and entertaining, Miko's lack of social skills is not.

(Compare how Dolores Umbridge in Harry Potter is hated, and how much less hated Lord Voldemort is. Even though murder is clearly worse, mundane evilness, making everyday life difficult for the main characters, will result in more negative emotions in the readers than murder.)

[Jaxzan Proditor]

Personally, I don't like Miko because of how she tried to force her own moral code on everyone else and looked down on those who failed to meet that standard.

[TidePriestess]

Except the part where she blamed the order for the blowing-up of that inn, and accused them of being terrible people for not sleeping in the dirt. And various other off-screen-but-claimed attacks on their dignity.
All right, but those were both one action, more or less. Which was stupid but minor.


(Compare how Dolores Umbridge in Harry Potter is hated, and how much less hated Lord Voldemort is. Even though murder is clearly worse, mundane evilness, making everyday life difficult for the main characters, will result in more negative emotions in the readers than murder.)
But Umbridge has also tried to commit murder multiple times, or at least soul-destruction. She's every bit as bad as Voldemort, she just works within the system.

[Keltest]

All right, but those were both one action, more or less. Which was stupid but minor.


But Umbridge has also tried to commit murder multiple times, or at least soul-destruction. She's every bit as bad as Voldemort, she just works within the system.

youre missing the point. Its not any specific action, its the fact that they made a complete jerk out of themselves for no particular reason. Miko at least had the flimsy excuse of having the paladin code to follow, but its the fact that its "stupid but minor" that gets on everyone's nerves. Theyre like that annoying kid that keeps getting underfoot no matter how many times you tell them leave.

[Koo Rehtorb]

Except the part where she blamed the order for the blowing-up of that inn, and accused them of being terrible people for not sleeping in the dirt. And various other off-screen-but-claimed attacks on their dignity.

Yeah she... made a few snarky comments about how people should lead a simple life (while paying for everything, including multiple expensive perks, herself). What a monster.

[Keltest]

Yeah she... made a few snarky comments about how people should lead a simple life (while paying for everything, including multiple expensive perks, herself). What a monster.

based on everything that had been said to and by her up to that point, she was being entirely serious.

[Koo Rehtorb]

based on everything that had been said to and by her up to that point, she was being entirely serious.

Which, if so, falls under the category of "being kind of an unpleasant jerk." You'll notice that she didn't actually try to drag them away from the inn and did, in fact, pay for their stay herself.

[Keltest]

Which, if so, falls under the category of "being kind of an unpleasant jerk." You'll notice that she didn't actually try to drag them away from the inn and did, in fact, pay for their stay herself.

and youll note that, at the time, that's all that Roy was going after her for.

[Koo Rehtorb]

and youll note that, at the time, that's all that Roy was going after her for.

Then why did you bring it up in the first place? People may not like an unpleasant jerk, but that doesn't make them an awful person.

[Gift Jeraff]

Miko did nothing wrong.

[UsaSatsui]

Miko was a bully who pushed her worldview and morality onto other people whether they accepted it or not, using force if necessary. She held herself to very high standards and pretty much told everyone around her, "If you don't do the same, you're worthless". She carried herself with an attitude that she was totally, 100%, in every single situation right and if you disagreed with her, not only were you wrong, but probably evil. And she was someone who believed it was perfectly okay to murder someone just because they glowed red when she looks at them with her evil-detecting powers.

These are all traits that are in evidence long before she falls. And these are the traits that led to her fall, and later to her death, the destruction of the gate, and her lack of redemption. So no, I don't think the narrative treated her "unfairly". She got what she deserved.

By the way, I take issue with the idea that it's okay as a good character to murder an evil character (specifically Belkar) simply because they are evil. That's the worst kind of rationalization for your actions.

[Benthesquid]

Was Miko treated unfairly by the narrative? No. Because the narrative, and by extension, the writer, doesn't owe Miko, a fictional character of his creation, anything. Because she's not real. It's like asking "Was Calvin's Dad treated unfairly by Bill Waterson?"

Now, within the context of the story, was Miko treated unfairly by the Order of the Stick? Yes, probably.

[Keltest]

Then why did you bring it up in the first place? People may not like an unpleasant jerk, but that doesn't make them an awful person.
because it was relevant to the comment. she was NOT justified or correct in her every action up to killing Shojo. That was just where she snapped. Furthermore, her early unpleasantness led to greater conflict between her and the order, which basically led her to conclude the order was evil, and therefore Shojo was evil. the unpleasantness and poor judgment built upon itself.

[Loreweaver15]

Miko is an example of what happens when somebody Lawful Neutral is told, "you must be Good now". She didn't really get Good--she had her own ideas about it and followed other peoples' standards of Good to the letter while generally treating other people like crap. Whether her unpleasantness is justified by the other paladins' treatment of her or not...well, I haven't read the extra book strips that show that, but something tells me it was a) somewhat a result of her own attitudes alienating them first and b) still on each of us to treat others with dignity and respect, not on other peoples' treatment of us to determine how we treat the world.

All of this, of course, still puts her, technically, in the Lawful Good alignment, but her psychotic obsession with forcing the facts to conform to her opinion of the Order of the Stick was, in a word, insane, and it eventually drove her to commit an overtly Chaotic Evil act: killing her defenseless, geriatric liege lord in cold blood because she wouldn't accept that she was wrong. For all the questionable things Shojo did, he did them out of a genuine desire to protect the people under his charge.


Personally, I don't like Milo because of how she tried to force her own moral code on everyone else and looked down on those who failed to meet that standard.

Personally, I don't like Milo because he dragged Otis all over creation and it took them like two years to get home again.

[Morty]

I'd like to know how you arrived at the conclusion that Miko treated Roy like dirt because he was sexist. He was sexist, obviously, but Miko treated him in the exact same manner even when he wasn't. His attempts to reason with her met a stone wall.

[TidePriestess]

I'd like to know how you arrived at the conclusion that Miko treated Roy like dirt because he was sexist. He was sexist, obviously, but Miko treated him in the exact same manner even when he wasn't. His attempts to reason with her met a stone wall.
Because she was much nicer to him immediately after his apology for it.

[killallgoblins]

rich only hated her because she's a strong independent womyn of color

[Koo Rehtorb]

because it was relevant to the comment. she was NOT justified or correct in her every action up to killing Shojo. That was just where she snapped. Furthermore, her early unpleasantness led to greater conflict between her and the order, which basically led her to conclude the order was evil, and therefore Shojo was evil. the unpleasantness and poor judgment built upon itself.

Paying for their rooms herself was the action, her attitude about it made her kind of a jerk. If she had physically tried to stop them or ordered them not to stay in the inn that would be one thing, but she didn't.

And the Order was every bit as responsible for the friction between them as she was, maybe more. Half the party was overtly hostile from the very beginning because "We're the PCs and we resent an NPC telling us what to do."

[Koo Rehtorb]

and it eventually drove her to commit an overtly Chaotic Evil act: killing her defenseless, geriatric liege lord in cold blood

Lawful Evil.

[Keltest]

Paying for their rooms herself was the action, her attitude about it made her kind of a jerk. If she had physically tried to stop them or ordered them not to stay in the inn that would be one thing, but she didn't.

And the Order was every bit as responsible for the friction between them as she was, maybe more. Half the party was overtly hostile from the very beginning because "We're the PCs and we resent an NPC telling us what to do."

she tried it, sort of. She didn't order them, per se, but she protested.


Because she was much nicer to him immediately after his apology for it.

wouldn't you be inclined to look more favorably upon a person who wants you to think well of them when they stop doing the things that drive you away from them and apologize for it?

[UsaSatsui]

And the Order was every bit as responsible for the friction between them as she was, maybe more. Half the party was overtly hostile from the very beginning because "We're the PCs and we resent an NPC telling us what to do."
Forget PC vs NPC. Someone shows up, tries to kill you and your friends, adopts a smug and superior attitude, and demands that you accompany them to face legal charges in a foreign land.

Are you inclined to be nice to this person?

[Jaxzan Proditor]

Miko was a bully who pushed her worldview and morality onto other people whether they accepted it or not, using force if necessary. She held herself to very high standards and pretty much told everyone around her, "If you don't do the same, you're worthless". She carried herself with an attitude that she was totally, 100%, in every single situation right and if you disagreed with her, not only were you wrong, but probably evil. And she was someone who believed it was perfectly okay to murder someone just because they glowed red when she looks at them with her evil-detecting powers.

These are all traits that are in evidence long before she falls. And these are the traits that led to her fall, and later to her death, the destruction of the gate, and her lack of redemption. So no, I don't think the narrative treated her "unfairly". She got what she deserved.

By the way, I take issue with the idea that it's okay as a good character to murder an evil character (specifically Belkar) simply because they are evil. That's the worst kind of rationalization for your actions.
This is exactly how I fell as well. You said it much better than I did though.

Miko is an example of what happens when somebody Lawful Neutral is told, "you must be Good now". She didn't really get Good--she had her own ideas about it and followed other peoples' standards of Good to the letter while generally treating other people like crap. Whether her unpleasantness is justified by the other paladins' treatment of her or not...well, I haven't read the extra book strips that show that, but something tells me it was a) somewhat a result of her own attitudes alienating them first and b) still on each of us to treat others with dignity and respect, not on other peoples' treatment of us to determine how we treat the world.

All of this, of course, still puts her, technically, in the Lawful Good alignment, but her psychotic obsession with forcing the facts to conform to her opinion of the Order of the Stick was, in a word, insane, and it eventually drove her to commit an overtly Chaotic Evil act: killing her defenseless, geriatric liege lord in cold blood because she wouldn't accept that she was wrong. For all the questionable things Shojo did, he did them out of a genuine desire to protect the people under his charge.
Again, how I feel. Thank you for expressing it much better than I could.


Personally, I don't like Milo because he dragged Otis all over creation and it took them like two years to get home again.

Damn my autocorrect.:smallfurious: I have no idea what you're referencing, by the way. :smalltongue:

[Emperordaniel]

Personally, I don't like Milo because he dragged Otis all over creation and it took them like two years to get home again.

That brought back some childhood memories. :smallbiggrin:

(To the previous poster: Loreweaver's referencing The Adventures of Milo and Otis, a Japanese live-action film narrated in the English-language version by Dudley Moore, about a tabby kitten and a pug puppy who are born on a farm and quickly become friends. I used to watch it all the time when I was younger, though I haven't seen it in some time. :smalltongue:)

[Somensjev]

Lawful Evil.

at what point is killing you just leader a lawful act?
sure he was chaotic, but he was a good person, i can't remember if he was Good, but he was Neutral minimum, and i'm pretty sure he was Good
so at what point is killing a Good or Neutral leader of a city/area, a Lawful act?
pretty sure Regicide, or the equivalent, is Chaotic Evil, Neutral Evil at least

anyway, on topic of Miko, i don't think she was treated unfairly at all, i think she deserved everything that happened to her, i mean, she seems to be inclined to use Detect Evil, on any passerby who disagrees with her world view

iirc, the order did try to be civil with her, some of them only once, some of them often, yet she was convinced they were evil and were tricking her Detect Evil somehow, does that really sound like a lawful good person to you?
if she was a PC in a campaign i ran i'd warn her to act closer to her alignment or she'd fall, and she'd have fallen before they got to shojo, but that's just my opinion, and people will disagree

miko is the kind of person who can't be reasoned with, and follows her interpretation of the laws to the letter, but her interpretations seem horribly flawed, and she doesnt try to understand other peoples views of her rules, since they likely disagree with her, and are therefore probably evil to her

[Porthos]

*checks calendar*

Strange. I'm pretty sure it doesn't say 2008 on it. :smalltongue:

Been a long long looooooooooooooong time since we had a skirmish in the Miko Wars, in other words. :smallwink:

----

As for the central thread premise? No, no the narrative did NOT treat Miko unfairly, whatever that means. If anything it bent over backwards to actually give her motivations and/or justifications (choose whichever word one prefers) for her actions.

...

Until she pretty much snapped that is. Then it was a one way ticket to crazy town.

If the character acts true to itself, then it really can't be 'treated unfairly' by the narrative, again whatever that means. And I think Miko, who has been analyzed to death and back here, pretty much acted true to herself. The one thing we didn't know about her, as readers, until later on in the narrative is that she LITERALLY thought that she had sanction from the gods to do whatever she pleased (paraphrasing slightly). IF she wanted to do something, then by gum, the gods must have wanted her to do it.

That sort of outlook can be a dangerous one when one of the people you looked to as a Father Figure turns out to be...... Slightly not what one thought. :smalltongue:

[Jaxzan Proditor]

That brought back some childhood memories. :smallbiggrin:

(To the previous poster: Loreweaver's referencing The Adventures of Milo and Otis, a Japanese live-action film narrated in the English-language version by Dudley Moore, about a tabby kitten and a pug puppy who are born on a farm and quickly become friends. I used to watch it all the time when I was younger, though I haven't seen it in some time. :smalltongue:)

Ah, I see. Checking the release date, that would have been before my time.

[theNater]

Miko did nothing wrong.
It appears not everyone agrees with your analysis. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0407.html)

Should we go down the list?

She kidnaps the Order. They are not legally obligated to go with Miko to Azure City. They are not beholden to its legal system or the Sapphire Guard's.

She expects the Order to obey her commands without giving them any reason to do so. She treats them the way Redcloak treats undead, as tools to be used to achieve her goals. This is a severe violation of concern for the dignity of sentient beings.

She decides to take the law into her own hands with the execution of Belkar. The correct course of action is have Belkar tried and punished for what he did, but she intends to kill him herself without trial.

She straight-up murders Shojo.

She attempts to kill Hinjo when he legally arrests her. Note that she, unlike the Order, is beholden to Azure City's legal system.

And, of course, she destroys the gate, rather than destroying the creatures threatening it. Note that this is exactly the crime she believes the Order to be guilty of from the start; yet she expects to be praised for it.

She's a jerk, a bully, a murderer, and a hypocrite.

[Koo Rehtorb]

at what point is killing you just leader a lawful act?

When evidence comes up that your leader is a traitor. At that point you have two lawful ways to deal with it.

Hinjo's Lawful Good - "You will be arrested and tried for your crimes."
or
Darth Vader's Lawful Evil - "You have failed me for the last time."

[Porthos]

I will point out one other thing. Miko wasn't 'unfairly treated' by the narrative anymore than V, Roy, Durkon, or any other number of characters whose actions could be said to contribute to their own problems.

See, the thing is, Miko had a couple of pretty huge character flaws (in the RL sense of the term, not the RPG mechanical). Now in most 'normal' situations, she was fairly functional. However when she was put into the crucible and had 'the narrative' test who she really was at her core, she came up wanting. To put it another way, she succumbed to her inner demons.

Would she have if she hadn't been in such dire straights? No, probably not. But then again, if she hadn't been put in a massively dramatic situation that tested who she really was as a person, what good would she have been to the story?

The whole point of her character was to be a good-aligned antagonist. Not much use if she isn't, well, an antagonist, no?

That she remained a fairly two or three dimensional character throughout and even after bisecting her liege in twain she STILL had her defenders says to me that 'the narrative' treated her just fine.

Why?

Because 'the narrative' made her a memorable character that aroused the passions of the readers, made them think, and, yes, made some of the readers defend her long past the point most characters would get a shot.

Being one of the most controversial and memorable characters in a 11+ year and counting work of art?

Seems to me the narrative treated her just fine. After all, what more can a character from a work of art ask for than to be memorable and worthy of passion? :smallsmile:

[Koo Rehtorb]

She kidnaps the Order. They are not legally obligated to go with Miko to Azure City. They are not beholden to its legal system or the Sapphire Guard's.
Arrested the Order. The twelve gods are not limited in their legal jurisdiction and neither are the Sapphire Guard. They were under no legal obligation to go with her, but neither was she in the wrong for placing them under arrest.


She expects the Order to obey her commands without giving them any reason to do so. She treats them the way Redcloak treats undead, as tools to be used to achieve her goals. This is a severe violation of concern for the dignity of sentient beings.
The arresting officer expects the captured fugitives to obey her commands. Shocking.


She decides to take the law into her own hands with the execution of Belkar. The correct course of action is have Belkar tried and punished for what he did, but she intends to kill him herself without trial.
There's a reason why suspects who are armed and dangerous are sometimes killed. Because they're armed and dangerous and the officer arresting them is under no obligation to put their own lives at risk trying to subdue and capture a dangerous violent criminal.


She straight-up murders Shojo.

She attempts to kill Hinjo when he legally arrests her. Note that she, unlike the Order, is beholden to Azure City's legal system.

And, of course, she destroys the gate, rather than destroying the creatures threatening it. Note that this is exactly the crime she believes the Order to be guilty of from the start; yet she expects to be praised for it.

She's a jerk, a bully, a murderer, and a hypocrite.

I don't think anyone is disputing that she eventually went off the rails. Everything up to that point, though, was perfectly justfied.

[Porthos]

Everything up to that point, though, was perfectly justfied.

Just because she was 'justified' in her actions (a highly highly HIGHLY debatable point, as The Great Miko Wars proved) doesn't mean that other folks weren't justified in opposing her actions.

The Order had just as much 'justification' to tell Miko to stuff it as she did in trying to do what she wanted.

That's one of the central points of the whole deal. Both sides had reasonable(-ish) reasons to do things. Just one side went a wee bit too far in enforcing their worldview. :smallwink:

[Keltest]

Arrested the Order. The twelve gods are not limited in their legal jurisdiction and neither are the Sapphire Guard. They were under no legal obligation to go with her, but neither was she in the wrong for placing them under arrest.
The Twelve Gods have no authority in the Northern Continent, which is where the party was. Nor is the Sapphire Guard recognized as having any authority over what goes on there, even (and especially) with regards to the gates.

Even then, the gods have no more "Legal" authority than Belkar does. If they have any, its only because its in an area where those who grant it choose to give it to them.



The arresting officer expects the captured fugitives to obey her commands. Shocking. They were following her voluntarily, not as "captured fugitives" so yes. That was out of line.



There's a reason why suspects who are armed and dangerous are sometimes killed. Because they're armed and dangerous and the officer arresting them is under no obligation to put their own lives at risk trying to subdue and capture a dangerous violent criminal. Unless the criminal in question is in fact already subdued, as Belkar was when she tried to execute him. Use of lethal force is generally frowned upon in a officer of the law when the victim cant fight back, criminal or not.


I don't think anyone is disputing that she eventually went off the rails. Everything up to that point, though, was perfectly justfied.

Justification implies a perfectly rational and reasonable explanation for something. Besides that, justification does not excuse one from the consequences of their actions.

[David Argall]

Except the part where she blamed the order for the blowing-up of that inn, and accused them of being terrible people for not sleeping in the dirt. And various other off-screen-but-claimed attacks on their dignity.
Well, the Order knew from the start that its actions were endangering the inn and those in it, and when the risk became clearer, continued to push actions that increased the danger. Now it ultimately was an accident they didn't intend to have happen, but it was still a danger they knew of and chose to increase. So they are worthy of some degree of blame here.
Nor does the Order escape censor for wanting to stay at the inn instead of some ditch [when they are doing so at somebody else's expense]. Indeed, they are highly willing to acknowledge their behavior as not up to the highest standards.


Personally, I don't like Miko because of how she tried to force her own moral code on everyone else and looked down on those who failed to meet that standard.
I think this is a common flaw, not liking Miko and thus being willing and even eager to deem the worst is true no matter how likely. Really, we do not have near enough justification of her going off the rails as she did, but this is routinely passed over with reasoning that amounts to "She was an annoying jerk and so of course she would do anything that puts her in a bad light."


Lawful Evil.
Chaotic. She was in the jurisdiction of lawful courts whose judgements she was sworn to uphold. Instead, she chose to impose her own opinion, which was supported by such weak evidence that we can label it a mere excuse, not the actual reason she killed him [which was that he had been exposed as having lied to her, and wholesale. It doesn't get much more chaotic than that.

[UsaSatsui]

Arrested the Order. The twelve gods are not limited in their legal jurisdiction and neither are the Sapphire Guard. They were under no legal obligation to go with her, but neither was she in the wrong for placing them under arrest.
"The gods gave me jurisdiction" is a rather flimsy justification for it, and seeing as how it came from "Crazy Cat Lord" Shojo (who was using the whole thing as an excuse to contact the order anyways), I'm not sure how well it holds up.


The arresting officer expects the captured fugitives to obey her commands. Shocking.
Placing someone under arrest does not place them under your command. [/quote]



There's a reason why suspects who are armed and dangerous are sometimes killed. Because they're armed and dangerous and the officer arresting them is under no obligation to put their own lives at risk trying to subdue and capture a dangerous violent criminal.
Except at that point, Belkar was subdued. Belkar was under control, no longer actively resisting, and could have very easily been taking into custody. Miko had simply put taken it upon herself to kill him because she believed he was evil - and it was not the first time (Roy) she tried to kill someone simply because of their perceived alignment. And there is strong evidence that not only does she do this all the time, she considers it perfectly normal (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0228.html).

I'd also like to point out that Belkar, the supposed murderous psychopath, had a perfect chance to actually kill Miko while she was chasing him, but didn't.

[TidePriestess]

I will point out one other thing. Miko wasn't 'unfairly treated' by the narrative anymore than V, Roy, Durkon, or any other number of characters whose actions could be said to contribute to their own problems.

See, the thing is, Miko had a couple of pretty huge character flaws (in the RL sense of the term, not the RPG mechanical). Now in most 'normal' situations, she was fairly functional. However when she was put into the crucible and had 'the narrative' test who she really was at her core, she came up wanting. To put it another way, she succumbed to her inner demons.

Would she have if she hadn't been in such dire straights? No, probably not. But then again, if she hadn't been put in a massively dramatic situation that tested who she really was as a person, what good would she have been to the story?

The whole point of her character was to be a good-aligned antagonist. Not much use if she isn't, well, an antagonist, no?

That she remained a fairly two or three dimensional character throughout and even after bisecting her liege in twain she STILL had her defenders says to me that 'the narrative' treated her just fine.

Why?

Because 'the narrative' made her a memorable character that aroused the passions of the readers, made them think, and, yes, made some of the readers defend her long past the point most characters would get a shot.

Being one of the most controversial and memorable characters in a 11+ year and counting work of art?

Seems to me the narrative treated her just fine. After all, what more can a character from a work of art ask for than to be memorable and worthy of passion? :smallsmile:
I would find your premise perfectly acceptable if she hadn't gotten killed when and how she did. Her death was... as Soon said, only adequate dramatically, and I would have liked to see more of her, especially if we could somehow unravel her psyche more.

[Keltest]

I would find your premise perfectly acceptable if she hadn't gotten killed when and how she did. Her death was... as Soon said, only adequate dramatically, and I would have liked to see more of her, especially if we could somehow unravel her psyche more.

well, again, its not her story. Its perfectly OK to like her as a character, and had the Giant kept her in the story as a B-plot working for redemption (or not working), I think I would be OK with that. But her narrative role was over.

[TidePriestess]

well, again, its not her story. Its perfectly OK to like her as a character, and had the Giant kept her in the story as a B-plot working for redemption (or not working), I think I would be OK with that. But her narrative role was over.
It may have been. But I would have preferred a different narrative in that case.

[Jaxzan Proditor]

I'd also like to point out that Belkar, the supposed murderous psychopath, had a perfect chance to actually kill Miko while she was chasing him, but didn't.

Of course, this was because he wanted Miko to kill him while he was subdued and then Fall for it. His actions aren't really that much better here.

As for Miko's actions being justified, it is a very debatable point whether or not that is so. In any case, being justified doesn't make her actions correct. After, Redcloak's actions are arguably justified and yet that doesn't make them okay.

And I think this conversation has rapidly slipped into dangerous grounds, so here is where I cut out.

[Porthos]

I would find your premise perfectly acceptable if she hadn't gotten killed when and how she did. Her death was... as Soon said, only adequate dramatically, and I would have liked to see more of her, especially if we could somehow unravel her psyche more.

Whereas I think her death was very dramatic and memorable. :smallsmile: So much so that some people on the board at the time actually changed their minds about her and mourned her passing. She isn't on the "Alas, Poor Scrappy" (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/AlasPoorScrappy) page over at TV Tropes for nothing, you know. :smallwink:

She burned bright and fast to use another metaphor.

And if you wanted to see more of her? Well, as the old phrase in show business goes, "Always leave the audience wanting more." :smallsmile: That you wanted to see more of her after she was gone kinda shows that Rich achieved one of his goals, no?

[TidePriestess]

Whereas I think her death was very dramatic and memorable. :smallsmile: So much so that some people on the board at the time actually changed their minds about her and mourned her passing. She isn't on the "Alas, Poor Scrappy" (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/AlasPoorScrappy) page over at TV Tropes for nothing, you know. :smallwink:

She burned bright and fast to use another metaphor.

And if you wanted to see more of her? Well, as the old phrase in show business goes, "Always leave the audience wanting more." :smallsmile: That you wanted to see more of her after she was gone kinda shows that Rich achieved one of his goals, no?
I thought the ideal wasn't to have the audience be actually angry at you for not giving them enough. In any case, that saying was about a different medium that wasn't narrative; I'd much rather have a story end where I'm satisfied with the ending and believe it was all enough.

[Keltest]

I thought the ideal wasn't to have the audience be actually angry at you for not giving them enough. In any case, that saying was about a different medium that wasn't narrative; I'd much rather have a story end where I'm satisfied with the ending and believe it was all enough.

ok, if you don't like the story, fine. Its your opinion. But its been done for years and years now; griping about it isn't going to do much but annoy people.

[Porthos]

I thought the ideal wasn't to have the audience be actually angry at you for not giving them enough. In any case, that saying was about a different medium that wasn't narrative; I'd much rather have a story end where I'm satisfied with the ending and believe it was all enough.

*shrug*

In that case, I'll fall back to the "You can please some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can't please all of the people all of the time" truism. All I know is, at the time, her death was seen as a very satisfactory way to handle her character arc by a vast majority of the readership. If the reactions at the time and since are any indication, at least.

Might not have worked for everyone, as your own posts show. But I think it was near impossible to create an ending for Miko Miyazaki that EVERYONE was 100% happy with. She was just too polarizing of a character. That her death still somehow managed to find the sweet spot for most of the pro- and anti-Miko groups says to me that Rich succeeded in a very difficult maneuver, artistically speaking.

...

Even if you personally would knock a few points on your own scorecard. :smallwink:

[TidePriestess]

*shrug*

In that case, I'll fall back to the "You can please some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can't please all of the people all of the time" truism. All I know is, at the time, her death was seen as a very satisfactory way to handle her character arc by a vast majority of the readership. If the reactions at the time and since are any indication, at least.

Might not have worked for everyone, as your own posts show. But I think it was near impossible to create an ending for Miko Miyazaki that EVERYONE was 100% happy with. She was just too polarizing of a character. That her death still somehow managed to find the sweet spot for most of the pro- and anti-Miko groups says to me that Rich succeeded in a very difficult maneuver, artistically speaking.

...

Even if you personally would knock a few points on your own scorecard. :smallwink:
Well, it wouldn't be the first time where I had a highly uncommon thought process. But I still don't quite get it; even Soon outright said that her death was sort of lame, and she never had a chance for any character development at all.

[Kish]

Soon did not say that her death was lame.

Her character developed; it didn't develop in a positive direction, but it certainly developed. Ultimately, you're treating an antagonist like she was a protagonist.

[super dark33]

Well, it wouldn't be the first time where I had a highly uncommon thought process. But I still don't quite get it; even Soon outright said that her death was sort of lame, and she never had a chance for any character development at all.

Because any charecter development would have to be done after Soon himself explained Redamption to her.

And that did happen, while she bled to death.

[zimmerwald1915]

Ok, Ive got nothing on that panel with the paladins being rude to Miko. Am I being crazy, or just incompetent?
You're probably looking in the strong place. The strip you're looking for is bonus strip 313a, and appears only in the print version of War and XPs.

...and I think I'll limit my participation in this thread to providing citations. For now.

[Keltest]

You're probably looking in the strong place. The strip you're looking for is bonus strip 313a, and appears only in the print version of War and XPs.

...and I think I'll limit my participation in this thread to providing citations. For now.

Thank you! I knew im not crazy!

[Porthos]

Well, it wouldn't be the first time where I had a highly uncommon thought process. But I still don't quite get it; even Soon outright said that her death was sort of lame

In as much as she pretty much failed at her duty as a paladin. And in that case, it was 'sort of lame'. But as for impact on both the story and the audience at large?

I'll just say I disagree and leave it at that. :smallsmile:


and she never had a chance for any character development at all.

This I dispute, strongly. Take a look at the Miko Miyazaki of the early, mid, and late part of her arcs. She under goes tremendous character development as we learn just what makes her tick, and what can, literally, push her buttons.

A flat, one dimensional character, she ain't (jokes about :miko: SLASH SLASH SLASH notwithstanding). But as Kish said, it wasn't positive development.

Remember, "character devlopment" doesn't necessarily mean "become a better person". Hell, it doesn't even necessarily mean the character changes. At its most base, "character devlopment" is the process that occurs as we learn more about a character. The character is 'devloped' in that we find out, as I said above, what makes them tick and what they do in various situations. "Fleshed Out" might be a better way of terming it.

Yes, she never got around to admitting to herself that she ****ed up. And ****ed up hard. But, then again, not everyone gets that opportunity. And who knows whether or not Miko ever would. If personally getting fired by the Twelve Gods because she (paraphrasing the words of Rich slightly) "messed up THAT badly" didn't get it into her head that maybe she should step back and reassess her choices in life up to that point, I'm not quite sure what would have. :smallwink:

[denthor]

Tide priestess:

I for one saw Miko as Rich stated she was the way not to be a Paladin.

She was good only in the sense that her alignment made her.

She wavered on the line of good and nuetral. When she made the choice to kill her Lawful Lord on his throne in a room concecrated to Law order and good. She lost her Lawfulness at worst her goodness in the extreme.

She went in my view to True Nuetral in one swipe.

She was not treated badly by the narrative she was fullfiling her role in destroing a kingdom. Then she compounds her mistake by again attempting to kill Belkar who was also unarmed and unable to defend himself.

She was so Lawful she snapped and did not think. Had Hino not stepped between she would have been Evil. Rejecting Sabines offer she stayed Nuetral

[TidePriestess]

In as much as she pretty much failed at her duty as a paladin. And in that case, it was 'sort of lame'. But as for impact on both the story and the audience at large?

I'll just say I disagree and leave it at that. :smallsmile:



This I dispute, strongly. Take a look at the Miko Miyazaki of the early, mid, and late part of her arcs. She under goes tremendous character development as we learn just what makes her tick, and what can, literally, push her buttons.

A flat, one dimensional character, she ain't (jokes about :miko: SLASH SLASH SLASH notwithstanding). But as Kish said, it wasn't positive development.

Remember, "character devlopment" doesn't necessarily mean "become a better person". Hell, it doesn't even necessarily mean the character changes. At its most base, "character devlopment" is the process that occurs as we learn more about a character. The character is 'devloped' in that we find out, as I said above, what makes them tick and what they do in various situations. "Fleshed Out" might be a better way of terming it.

Yes, she never got around to admitting to herself that she ****ed up. And ****ed up hard. But, then again, not everyone gets that opportunity. And who knows whether or not Miko ever would. If personally getting fired by the Twelve Gods because she (paraphrasing the words of Rich slightly) "messed up THAT badly" didn't get it into her head that maybe she should step back and reassess her choices in life up to that point, I'm not quite sure what would have. :smallwink:
Well, she still made it into the Celestial Realm, from all evidence that I can assess. I suppose that's an acceptable consolation prize.

I have other issues with Tsukiko, but that's a different thread, I think.

[theNater]

Well, it wouldn't be the first time where I had a highly uncommon thought process. But I still don't quite get it; even Soon outright said that her death was sort of lame, and she never had a chance for any character development at all.
She did have chances to improve, though. Roy points out (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0223.html) to her that she should treat people with respect, and she responds with "A paladin never compromises". Shojo points out (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0285.html) that the proper treatment of a helpless criminal is to take him into custody for trial. Yet the very next time she has a helpless criminal... (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0406.html) Even afterwards, Hinjo suggests (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0409.html) she take this very clear sign from the gods as a learning opportunity. Her response? "NO!"

A large part of her problem was the fact that she was convinced of her own moral superiority. She refuses to improve because she's convinced that she's always right.

[Loreweaver15]

Once again, people are missing the point of Soon's monologue; the point was not "This is a lame death and you never got a chance at redemption."

The point was "You got about eight million chances at redemption and you continuously refused them."

[TidePriestess]

Once again, people are missing the point of Soon's monologue; the point was not "This is a lame death and you never got a chance at redemption."

The point was "You got about eight million chances at redemption and you continuously refused them."
Strictly speaking, she didn't need redemption until after falling, and there was only one chance after that; after being captured by Hinjo, her chances were basically nil.

[Loreweaver15]

Strictly speaking, she didn't need redemption until after falling, and there was only one chance after that; after being captured by Hinjo, her chances were basically nil.

Her need for redemption came from about the point where she went nuts obsessing over the Order for defying her. Post-arrest, admitting that she had made a mistake at literally any point would have been her opportunity for redemption :P

[Kish]

Strictly speaking, she didn't need redemption until after falling, and there was only one chance after that; after being captured by Hinjo, her chances were basically nil.
I think a number of her fellow paladins would have considered, for much of her career, that it would be redemption if she quit throwing around orders and lecturing them on not being good enough.

And even if you presume that Soon Kim and Rich Burlew meant strictly "becoming an unfallen paladin again" by redemption--quite aside from the fact that I think you're wrong if you presume that--it's not true that she only had one chance. Remember when Soon said he could instruct the first human to enter the throne room on the particulars of destroying Xykon's phylactery?

Who was the next human to enter the throne room after that? Miko had, not only a chance for redemption, but a chance to actually be the hero of the comic, not only in her own mind, if she hadn't blown it by ignoring the fight to focus on smashing the sapphire. Roy's resurrection could have been followed by him hearing that Miko Miyazaki had destroyed Xykon while he was dead.

[TidePriestess]

I think a number of her fellow paladins would have considered, for much of her career, that it would be redemption if she quit throwing around orders and lecturing them on not being good enough.

And even if you presume that Soon Kim and Rich Burlew meant strictly "becoming an unfallen paladin again" by redemption--quite aside from the fact that I think you're wrong if you presume that--it's not true that she only had one chance. Remember when Soon said he could instruct the first human to enter the throne room on the particulars of destroying Xykon's phylactery?

Who was the next human to enter the throne room after that? Miko had, not only a chance for redemption, but a chance to actually be the hero of the comic, not only in her own mind, if she hadn't blown it by ignoring the fight to focus on smashing the sapphire. Roy's resurrection could have been followed by him hearing that Miko Miyazaki had destroyed Xykon while he was dead.
Why do you disagree with me on that? I seriously doubt that a single evil act would be enough for an alignment shift, given that it was done out of extreme misguidedness rather than active malice--and the threshold of a single act causing an alignment shift has to be high enough that Vaarsuvius' Familicide didn't cross it, which is pretty damned high. So given that her alignment was probably still lawful good, and that Soon's response came directly after her asking him if she could be a paladin again, I'm fairly sure that the thing about redemption applied to that alone.

In any case, she didn't hear Soon's speech on the phylactery and had no idea that the ghost-martyrs existed, so that wasn't a moral issue.

[Keltest]

Why do you disagree with me on that? I seriously doubt that a single evil act would be enough for an alignment shift, given that it was done out of extreme misguidedness rather than active malice--and the threshold of a single act causing an alignment shift has to be high enough that Vaarsuvius' Familicide didn't cross it, which is pretty damned high. So given that her alignment was probably still lawful good, and that Soon's response came directly after her asking him if she could be a paladin again, I'm fairly sure that the thing about redemption applied to that alone.

In any case, she didn't hear Soon's speech on the phylactery and had no idea that the ghost-martyrs existed, so that wasn't a moral issue.

redemption can apply to more than game mechanics. Even if it was out of misguidedness, Miko botched things up badly. Her alignment may have technically remained Lawful Good (or Lawful Stupid depending on who you ask) but she still did something terrible.

[LuisDantas]

Personally, I would say yes. I don't think that her place in the story, and the portrayal of the Order's behavior in regards to her, was exactly fair.

Oh, it definitely wasn't. It was very sad to see Roy drop the ball in his last speech balloon in #250 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0250.html). There were other stances as well.

However, as others noted, hardly anyone is treated fairly in the story, even among the villains.

Redcloak, for one, has got an arguably far rougher deal than Miko, yet people don't argue that he is good at heart.



It's true that Miko is socially inept and judgmental, yes (although one would think her Charisma score wouldn't be that bad, but maybe she thought she didn't need it because she started out as a monk)--rather like, in fact, Vaarsuvius except that Miko's area of interest is alignment and divine favor as opposed to arcane power. But the trouble is that she's a genuinely good person by definition--she is, in fact, a morally better person than at least a third of the Order, and probably half when you consider that Haley was wavering between good and neutral at the time.

That is just not what we were shown, however. Miko believes herselft to be a Paragon of virtue, and that is one of the main reasons why even her basic alignment is at doubt. Her behavior from #460 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0460.html) to #464 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0464.html) was utterly self-serving and unrepentant, and betrays a lack of basic understanding of the nature of her own supposed alignment.

At that point, I couldn't fully believe that Rich saw her as Lawful Good. I most certainly did not. I actually wonder how come she became a Paladin at all.



Her foibles of being blunt and impatient don't nearly stack up to Vaarsuvius' disregard for collateral damage and murderous streak, or Belkar's... absolutely everything. Durkon was the only person (aside from Elan, who... well, is just Elan) who ever tried to treat her respectfully, and she was only ever a jerk to Roy because Roy was being a sexist ass; we can confirm this by her actually warming up to him briefly after his apology in strip #250... before he blows it all by going into sexist insults as opposed to sexist flirting (plus one slam on her appearance, nicely enough).

You're forgetting how little regard Miko had for life even in her earliest appearances; how she valued pride over honor; and how casually she expected others to bend for her expectations.

It is not too inaccurate to say that she made a habit out of hiding behind her supposed alignment and her status as a Paladin. A very dangerous habit for a LG character to develop.



So really, she had no reason to trust any of the Order of the Stick to begin with, except possibly Durkon. And she gets continually screwed over for it, placed into increasingly bad positions, and Roy gets away with favoring Belkar over her. I like Miko's character and find it quite interesting, but I hate the way her arc was handled.

Me too, but apparently for different reasons.



I would say Miko was treated perhaps harshly by the narrative, in the sense that mostly no one really liked her, and even on those occasions where she wasn't being unpleasant, she received comeuppance for her unpleasantness. This ultimately changed her from a zealous yet forthright individual to a murderous fanatic who bent reality to suit her emotional states and justified any action she committed. Now, was that fair? I don't know. The author decided on a trajectory for the character and let it play out, tragically in the main. Tragedies usually aren't fair, but at the same time, a good tragedy isn't just blind unfairness so much as bad luck, faulty information, and damning choices. Certainly Miko's tale had all three of those. Suffice it to say, when the going got rough, she did not get going. You can say a lot about the lack of general competence of the Order of the Stick, especially in those earlier days, but on the whole, when confronted with situations where they were forced to grow, they have done so. Miko did not, and she not only died for it, but one could argue she took her city with her when she fell.

Very well said.


Strictly speaking, she didn't need redemption until after falling, and there was only one chance after that; after being captured by Hinjo, her chances were basically nil.

That is a very partial reading IMO. Miko was very conflicted for a good while before killing Shojo. Most of the fault is in fact Shojo's and not her own, but still, she lacked no opportunity to consider the wisdom of her actions before falling. And her worst moments are in fact #460-#464, when she again chose pride over redemption and arguably also over sanity.

She got a raw deal, no doubt. But so did many others, even Belkar.


redemption can apply to more than game mechanics. Even if it was out of misguidedness, Miko botched things up badly. Her alignment may have technically remained Lawful Good (or Lawful Stupid depending on who you ask) but she still did something terrible.

Myself, I call her Neutral Self-Serving. It became obvious in #460, but it was probably true much earlier. She was incredibly self-important and arrogant since #406 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0460.html) at the very least.

There is a fine story waiting to be told about how Miko became a Paladin quite despite herself.

[TidePriestess]

Redcloak, for one, has got an arguably far rougher deal than Miko, yet people don't argue that he is good at heart.
Redcloak has a tragic backstory, but pretty much everything he's done since Azure City has been a victory, aside from losing his eye, and he was able to eke some benefit even out of that.


That is just not what we were shown, however. Miko believes herselft to be a Paragon of virtue, and that is one of the main reason why even her basic alignment is at doubt. Her behavior from #460 to #464 was utterly self-serving and unrepentant, and betrays a lack of basic understanding of the nature of her own supposed alignment.

At that point, I couldn't fully believe that Rich saw her as Lawful Good. I most certainly did not. I actually wonder how come she became a Paladin at all.
One may question the how, but we cannot question the what: namely that she was a paladin, hence was LG and hadn't committed any evil acts until killing Lord Shojo.


You're forgetting how little regard Miko had for life even in her earliest appearances; how she valued pride over honor; and how casually she expected others to bend for her expectations.

It is not too inaccurate to say that she made a habit out of hiding behind her supposed alignment and her status as a Paladin. A very dangerous habit for a LG character to develop.
How does she value pride over honor, precisely? And her regard for life isn't that lacking; she's always willing to help out the helpless in need, hates seeing innocents be screwed over and was even concerned about the death of a random dragon for a moment.


She got a raw deal, no doubt. But so did many others, even Belkar.
I cannot think of anything that Belkar has gotten that wasn't wholly self-inflicted.

[denthor]

Why do you disagree with me on that? I seriously doubt that a single evil act would be enough for an alignment shift, given that it was done out of extreme misguidedness rather than active malice--and the threshold of a single act causing an alignment shift has to be high enough that Vaarsuvius' Familicide didn't cross it, which is pretty damned high. So given that her alignment was probably still lawful good, and that Soon's response came directly after her asking him if she could be a paladin again, I'm fairly sure that the thing about redemption applied to that alone.

In any case, she didn't hear Soon's speech on the phylactery and had no idea that the ghost-martyrs existed, so that wasn't a moral issue.

V is held to different standard than a Paladin.


Paladins are different in the respect that they must be held to higher standard of conduct.

V was Neutral not Nuetral (good or Evil)

Miko was Lawful and Good even Belkar says if he can do evil under her nose it will make her fall or just traveling with her could make her fall from Paladin hood (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0206.html)

See comic 206. How do you lose status or a class by association, if there is not a high bar to maintain in the first place.

Just so everybody is clear I play this game and can not stand Paladins nor am I compentant in playing them since it is so hard to maintain.

[Keltest]

Myself, I call her Neutral Self-Serving. It became obvious in #460, but it was probably true much earlier. She was incredibly self-important and arrogant since #406 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0460.html) at the very least.

There is a fine story waiting to be told about how Miko became a Paladin quite despite herself.

I wouldn't consider her particularly self-serving. While I have no doubt she would think that whatever course she decided on was the right one, self-serving implies that she was doing it for personal gain. She *thought* she was doing the will of the 12 gods, and while her facts were brutally mixed up, she did what she thought was the right thing to do in that situation.


Just so everybody is clear I play this game and can not stand Paladins nor am I compentant in playing them since it is so hard to maintain.

I disagree. A paladin traveling with someone like Belkar would be difficult. A paladin traveling with anyone else isn't that different from any other character. Youre still allowed to prioritize your goals (greater good and all that) and as long as you aren't outright antagonistic to anybody who didn't initiate it, you can get away with most anything any other Lawful Good character could. The only real difference between the paladins in my parties and the rest of the players is that instead of asking "whats in it for us" they say "its the right thing to do, lets go" whenever the exposition NPC tells them the quest. Actually a lot easier from the DM's perspective.

[LuisDantas]

Redcloak has a tragic backstory, but pretty much everything he's done since Azure City has been a victory, aside from losing his eye, and he was able to eke some benefit even out of that.

Ouch. You are rough with poor Redcloack!



One may question the how, but we cannot question the what: namely that she was a paladin, hence was LG and hadn't committed any evil acts until killing Lord Shojo.

I don't know about "one". I most definitely do question it.

How come she is a Paladin then? Beats me. But I will not simply label everything she did until Shojo's slaughter "non-evil" just because.


How does she value pride over honor, precisely?

By putting the OOtS under risk due to not being aware in advance of her tactics against the Ogres;
by putting such a proud face while speaking in condescension to Hinjo in #406;
and with every single belief and decision that she makes in #460-464, where she basically decides that she is the Chosen One despite having all the evidence she could have that she was on the wrong path.



And her regard for life isn't that lacking; she's always willing to help out the helpless in need, hates seeing innocents be screwed over and was even concerned about the death of a random dragon for a moment.

She isn't a complete monster like Belkar, sure. That is very faint praise, though.



I cannot think of anything that Belkar has gotten that wasn't wholly self-inflicted.

He did deserve worse than he got, for sure.

[DaggerPen]

Re: the reasonability of Miko's actions:

I would say that going after the people who destroyed a Gate buttressing the fabric of reality for unknown reasons to bring them in for questioning, even though they are well out of your jurisdiction, is completely reasonable for a paladin. This is someone knocking out a pillar holding up the fabric of reality in question here. Jurisdictional boundaries are beside the point.

Vowing to kill said individuals without the slightest knowledge of their motivations is not reasonable.

Slicing down someone who is attacking you is reasonable (Samantha and her father), but Miko's fairly consistent failure to use the least amount of force possible is not.

Resorting to lethal force when faced with what you believe to be a group of dangerous criminals who have failed to surrender is reasonable. Falling to clearly identify yourself as a paladin in the first place and specify the crimes for which they are being taken in is not.

Being frosty towards a man who sexually harasses you, even during moments when he is not actively doing so, is reasonable, as is being so to other party members who have actively antagonized you. Moralizing at them and telling cooperative prisoners you will have to keep code watch on them in the future to prevent them from straying from your personal moral code in ways irrelevant to their custody is not, and is pretty generally jerky.

I am going to say that Miko dragging the Order back by force was reasonable, because, again, paladin, fabric of creation. But she didn't need to push things to that point in the first place, even if the party was being awful to her. Also, lecturing Hinjo about being friendly with the prisoners was not remotely reasonable.

Losing yourself in the heat of battle with a murderer who has escaped custody and written taunting messages to you in the blood of a slain guard and continuing to attack when he's lying on the ground, seemingly helpless (but still conscious and in positive HP, which doesn't impair his ability to fight) is... well, it's not the pinnacle of goodness, but I'm not convinced Miko would have Fallen for it. Fighting the Order when they defended him... eh. From what she knew of the situation, I would say attacking the people who were preventing you from getting to a murderer is reasonable before Shojo stepped in. Obsessing over the Order as she did, however, is definitely not reasonable, and , well, it was all downhill from there, wasn't it?

I would say that Miko was not any more flawed than any of the other Order members, Durkon possibly excepted. But unlike the Order, when put to the test, Miko failed to grow and overcome her flaws. Even Vaarsuvius, whose Family code reaction was... well, without starting up THAT debate, I would say that calling it a Miko level overreaction would not be overstating the case... was able to realize how awful vir actions were when faced with evidence and begin to atone. Miko, when faced with the gods literally smacking her down for her failures, was unable to accept that she had messed up.

Miko was no more flawed than the rest of the Order as a whole. But she was less able to change than they were, and that led to her downfall.

To quote from elsewhere in the comic - evolve or die. The Order evolved. Miko died.

(I am on my phone, apologies for any autocorrect failures.)

[LuisDantas]

I wouldn't consider her particularly self-serving. While I have no doubt she would think that whatever course she decided on was the right one, self-serving implies that she was doing it for personal gain. She *thought* she was doing the will of the 12 gods, and while her facts were brutally mixed up, she did what she thought was the right thing to do in that situation.

I don't know why that would even be a disagreement, really.

Most self-serving people have themselves convinced that they are serving the greater good. Is there any particular reason to expect Miko to be an exception?

[Keltest]

I don't know why that would even be a disagreement, really.

Most self-serving people have themselves convinced that they are serving the greater good. Is there any particular reason to expect Miko to be an exception?

its not like she was seeking greater power to "rule the world and eliminate all sin" or something silly like that (that we know of). She seemed more concerned with her rank as an indication of her favor with the gods than as power for the sake of it. She seemed to view her dismissal as "Hinjo is trying to impede my ability to serve the gods" rather than as "Hinjo has taken my power!" And certainly she put aside her personal vendettas in an attempt to protect something that she (correctly, for once) knew was important, and her duty to protect.


Misguided, I can accept. Self-serving... its a stretch getting past the "everyone is selfish to some extent, because we need to be" barrier.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

One may question the how, but we cannot question the what: namely that she was a paladin, hence was LG and hadn't committed any evil acts until killing Lord Shojo.

You are wrong.

"contrary to popular belief, only a true switch to a nonlawful alignment will cause a paladin to fall"

Link (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?6202-OOTS-281-The-Discussion-Thread&p=506786&viewfull=1#post506786)

Grey Wolf

[Keltest]

Re: the reasonability of Miko's actions:

I would say that going after the people who destroyed a Gate buttressing the fabric of reality for unknown reasons to bring them in for questioning, even though they are well out of your jurisdiction, is completely reasonable for a paladin. This is someone knocking out a pillar holding up the fabric of reality in question here. Jurisdictional boundaries are beside the point.
Reasonable for a paladin to investigate perhaps, less so for a paladin to arrest them and literally drag them to trial.

Other than that, I agree with pretty much everything you said. She over-reacted to otherwise reasonable provocation, and was overzealous in duties that she bestowed upon herself.

[Koo Rehtorb]

You are wrong.

"contrary to popular belief, only a true switch to a nonlawful alignment will cause a paladin to fall"

Link (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?6202-OOTS-281-The-Discussion-Thread&p=506786&viewfull=1#post506786)

Grey Wolf


One evil act, and you fall; one nonlawful act, and you don't.

Read what you link.

[Jaxzan Proditor]

Re: the reasonability of Miko's actions:

I would say that going after the people who destroyed a Gate buttressing the fabric of reality for unknown reasons to bring them in for questioning, even though they are well out of your jurisdiction, is completely reasonable for a paladin. This is someone knocking out a pillar holding up the fabric of reality in question here. Jurisdictional boundaries are beside the point.

Vowing to kill said individuals without the slightest knowledge of their motivations is not reasonable.

Slicing down someone who is attacking you is reasonable (Samantha and her father), but Miko's fairly consistent failure to use the least amount of force possible is not.

Resorting to lethal force when faced with what you believe to be a group of dangerous criminals who have failed to surrender is reasonable. Falling to clearly identify yourself as a paladin in the first place and specify the crimes for which they are being taken in is not.

Being frosty towards a man who sexually harasses you, even during moments when he is not actively doing so, is reasonable, as is being so to other party members who have actively antagonized you. Moralizing at them and telling cooperative prisoners you will have to keep code watch on them in the future to prevent them from straying from your personal moral code in ways irrelevant to their custody is not, and is pretty generally jerky.

I am going to say that Miko dragging the Order back by force was reasonable, because, again, paladin, fabric of creation. But she didn't need to push things to that point in the first place, even if the party was being awful to her. Also, lecturing Hinjo about being friendly with the prisoners was not remotely reasonable.

Losing yourself in the heat of battle with a murderer who has escaped custody and written taunting messages to you in the blood of a slain guard and continuing to attack when he's lying on the ground, seemingly helpless (but still conscious and in positive HP, which doesn't impair his ability to fight) is... well, it's not the pinnacle of goodness, but I'm not convinced Miko would have Fallen for it. Fighting the Order when they defended him... eh. From what she knew of the situation, I would say attacking the people who were preventing you from getting to a murderer is reasonable before Shojo stepped in. Obsessing over the Order as she did, however, is definitely not reasonable, and , well, it was all downhill from there, wasn't it?

I would say that Miko was not any more flawed than any of the other Order members, Durkon possibly excepted. But unlike the Order, when put to the test, Miko failed to grow and overcome her flaws. Even Vaarsuvius, whose Family code reaction was... well, without starting up THAT debate, I would say that calling it a Miko level overreaction would not be overstating the case... was able to realize how awful vir actions were when faced with evidence and begin to atone. Miko, when faced with the gods literally smacking her down for her failures, was unable to accept that she had messed up.

Miko was no more flawed than the rest of the Order as a whole. But she was less able to change than they were, and that led to her downfall.

To quote from elsewhere in the comic - evolve or die. The Order evolved. Miko died.
This is a GREAT way to show Miko's character and how reasonable/justified she was. This is excellent, DaggerPen. :smallsmile:

[Amphiox]

Miko only STARTED morally better than some of the Order. She eventually dropped down to worse than them all except Belkar.

Miko's story-arc is a tragic-hero story arc. Her character starts out with several ennobling and heroic traits, but also several clear and obvious tragic flaws. Those flaws result in character development, but development in a direction that ultimately leads to self-destruction.

She was "unfairly" treated by the narrative only in the sense that ALL tragic-hero characters are unfairly treated by the narrative, by being given those initial tragic flaws to begin with and placed in narrative situations where those flaws lead to their downfall. She is no more "unfairly" treated by the narrative than Macbeth, or Creon.

[DaggerPen]

Reasonable for a paladin to investigate perhaps, less so for a paladin to arrest them and literally drag them to trial.

It's debatable, I'd say. I keep thinking of it from a plot hook perspective, tbh - you're playing a paladin and your liege lord asks you to bring in a group of adventurers who destroyed a Gate holding up the fabric of reality. You track them down, all the while hearing tales of their misdeeds, and when you arrive, you find a group of moderately incompetent abrasive adventurers who are willing to come along to clear things up.

IMO, the point at which they agreed to cooperate should have been the point at which she stopped treating them like prisoners. But regardless, taking then in after they left? Hard to say.

After reexamining it... I am actually in agreement that dragging them back in chains was out of bounds. Orders or not, she was at that point bringing them back more for trial than anything (so far as she knew), which was technically out of her jurisdiction. "These people might be a threat to existence" is reasonable grounds to drag them back. "These incompetent adventurers did too much damage to a dungeon during a fight with a lich and the Gate went krakakoom" is less so. That was the point at which she should have talked over jurisdictional issues with the rest of the Sapphire Guard, I think.

[Loreweaver15]

It's always fascinating to walk into a thread like this and see how differently other people have been reading this story and these characters.

[theNater]

One may question the how, but we cannot question the what: namely that she was a paladin, hence was LG and hadn't committed any evil acts until killing Lord Shojo.
She hadn't committed any evil acts because other people-most notably Shojo-were working hard to keep her from doing so. She was deliberately sent on long solo missions into the wilderness because her attitude caused problems otherwise. We actually see her being prevented from murder.

Maybe she didn't need redemption until killing Shojo, but she absolutely needed to change for the better, and had many opportunities for that.

I wouldn't consider her particularly self-serving. While I have no doubt she would think that whatever course she decided on was the right one, self-serving implies that she was doing it for personal gain. She *thought* she was doing the will of the 12 gods, and while her facts were brutally mixed up, she did what she thought was the right thing to do in that situation.
Miko's confusion about the facts was all rooted in a single delusion: the belief that the gods have a special plan just for her. Her actions are self-serving in that they exist to feed her ego. Every time she misidentifies "the will of the gods", it's either to believe that she is supposed to do something she wants to do or that she is supposed to be the hero who saves the day.

[Keltest]

Miko's confusion about the facts was all rooted in a single delusion: the belief that the gods have a special plan just for her. Her actions are self-serving in that they exist to feed her ego. Every time she misidentifies "the will of the gods", it's either to believe that she is supposed to do something she wants to do or that she is supposed to be the hero who saves the day.

That just isn't self-serving to me. Egotistical maybe, but self-serving, to me, implies that the benefit to ones self is at the forefront of the motivation behind the action.

[theNater]

That just isn't self-serving to me. Egotistical maybe, but self-serving, to me, implies that the benefit to ones self is at the forefront of the motivation behind the action.
The key element in Miko's thought process is "how does this prove that I am the chosen one?" If you don't want to count being proven to be the chosen one as benefit, then I think we can agree to disagree and move on.

[oppyu]

Miko only STARTED morally better than some of the Order. She eventually dropped down to worse than them all except Belkar.

Miko's story-arc is a tragic-hero story arc. Her character starts out with several ennobling and heroic traits, but also several clear and obvious tragic flaws. Those flaws result in character development, but development in a direction that ultimately leads to self-destruction.

She was "unfairly" treated by the narrative only in the sense that ALL tragic-hero characters are unfairly treated by the narrative, by being given those initial tragic flaws to begin with and placed in narrative situations where those flaws lead to their downfall. She is no more "unfairly" treated by the narrative than Macbeth, or Creon.
This post is a reasonable argument that encapsulates my feelings on the matter. That is all.

[The Giant]

It may have been. But I would have preferred a different narrative in that case.

Well, this is the one you get. This is what I wrote, and if you'd have preferred another narrative for the character, go off and write fanfiction or something.

Miko was an antagonist. By the universal scale of How Antagonists Are Treated by the Stories They're In, I think she came out pretty much ahead of the curve.

[Keltest]

Well, this is the one you get. This is what I wrote, and if you'd have preferred another narrative for the character, go off and write fanfiction or something.

Miko was an antagonist. By the universal scale of How Antagonists Are Treated by the Stories They're In, I think she came out pretty much ahead of the curve.

on a range of Morgoth to Spike from Buffy, id give Miko a solid Darth Vader.

[oppyu]

on a range of Morgoth to Spike from Buffy, id give Miko a solid Darth Vader.
Is Morgoth or Spike the good one? Because I've never heard of Morgoth, and Spike could really go either way. He used to be the TvTropes poster boy for 'This dude used to be a badarse, but now he's a total wuss', but he also became a good guy.

[SaintRidley]

Read what you link.
Read what Rich was actually saying and what Grey_Wolf_c actually said. For a Paladin to fall because of inadequacy on the Lawful-Chaotic axis, they have to stop being Lawful.


Is Morgoth or Spike the good one? Because I've never heard of Morgoth, and Spike could really go either way. He used to be the TvTropes poster boy for 'This dude used to be a badarse, but now he's a total wuss', but he also became a good guy.

Morgoth created Sauron, from Lord of the Rings.

[Jaxzan Proditor]

Is Morgoth or Spike the good one? Because I've never heard of Morgoth, and Spike could really go either way. He used to be the TvTropes poster boy for 'This dude used to be a badarse, but now he's a total wuss', but he also became a good guy.

Morgoth is a character from The Silmarillion. He was one of the Valar (read angels) that helped create the world, but he Fell and became evil. His story doesn't end well, as he is essentially imprisoned outside of the world indefinitely.

[Keltest]

Is Morgoth or Spike the good one? Because I've never heard of Morgoth, and Spike could really go either way. He used to be the TvTropes poster boy for 'This dude used to be a badarse, but now he's a total wuss', but he also became a good guy.

Morgoth is Sauron's boss from Lord of the rings. Over the course of the history of everything he slowly goes crazy and loses his powers/psudo-goodhood, and eventually he "dies" and becomes trapped as a spirit in some sort of empty void until the final battle. Eventually Sauron and Saruman join him when they "die" in LOTR. As for spike, I cant imagine a much better treatment than promotion to protagonist.

[Koo Rehtorb]

Read what Rich was actually saying and what Grey_Wolf_c actually said. For a Paladin to fall because of inadequacy on the Lawful-Chaotic axis, they have to stop being Lawful.



One may question the how, but we cannot question the what: namely that she was a paladin, hence was LG and hadn't committed any evil acts until killing Lord Shojo.

You are wrong.

One evil act, and you fall; one nonlawful act, and you don't.

He was either wrong, or responding to a comment that was never made.

[DaggerPen]

In total honesty, when I find myself discussing issues of Fridging female characters and ways to kill off female characters without it being Fridging, Miko is actually the example I usually use of a major female character death done right. Miko died entirely due to her own actions, and while she was certainly no more flawed than many of the other Order members, she was not unjustly punished for her failings, nor disproportionately punished compared to other characters - she was given the same chance to recognize her own flaws, change, and grow as most of the Order members, and she didn't, and in the end, that's what got her killed.

So while there are definitely situations where characters, protagonist, antagonist or otherwise are treated unfairly by the narrative, often in ways that reflect societal biases and double standards, I think Miko's arc managed to avoid all that and create a pretty powerful story for the right reasons. So yeah, that's my two cents.

*Mind you, I find it unlikely that many of the reactions to Miko were lacking in all kinds of double standards about male vs. female characters, but narratively, I think Miko was well handled.

[zimmerwald1915]

Morgoth created Sauron, from Lord of the Rings.
Careful with the c-word when talking about Tolkien. Morgoth didn't even sub-create Sauron.

[Keltest]

Careful with the c-word when talking about Tolkien. Morgoth didn't even sub-create Sauron.

it could be argued that he "created" him in the sense that he turned him into the Dark Lord jr. that likes to glare at people from towers when he gets adapted into movies.

[Jaxzan Proditor]

Eventually Sauron and Saruman join him when they "die" in LOTR. As for spike, I cant imagine a much better treatment than promotion to protagonist.

Not quite. Sauron is said to have never returned to Middle-earth again, but he was not thrust beyond the Walls of Night like Morgoth was. He died not die, but suffered from massive power loss and become unable to take physical form. Saruman was also not imprisoned in this manner. I suspect he went to the same place Gandalf went to when be died, only Saruman was not sent back.

[Keltest]

Not quite. Sauron is said to have never returned to Middle-earth again, but he was not thrust beyond the Walls of Night like Morgoth was. He died not die, but suffered from massive power loss and become unable to take physical form. Saruman was also not imprisoned in this manner. I suspect he went to the same place Gandalf went to when be died, only Saruman was not sent back.

IIRC it was explicitly mentioned on one of his works published after his death (so teaspoon of salt) that Saruman at least was specifically trapped on middle earth or in that void that Morgoth is in (I forget which), unable to move on to the afterlife or return "home" to the Undying Lands. Stuck in total impotency. Poor sucker.

That said, were arguing semantics at this point. Tolkien Lore aside, people understand that being Morgoth really sucked by the end.

[Jaxzan Proditor]

IIRC it was explicitly mentioned on one of his works published after his death (so teaspoon of salt) that Saruman at least was specifically trapped on middle earth or in that void that Morgoth is in (I forget which), unable to move on to the afterlife or return "home" to the Undying Lands. Stuck in total impotency. Poor sucker.

That said, were arguing semantics at this point. Tolkien Lore aside, people understand that being Morgoth really sucked by the end.

All I remember is that he was unable to go to Middle-earth or Valinor. But, you are correct: we are arguing semantics.

[Ionathus]

I'd just like to chip in with the statement that I wholeheartedly support Miko's character arc. It's brilliant.

What I wish we could have seen, though, would be Roy showing a little compassion right after she fell. I can see the story branching off in that direction: if Roy hadn't immediately insulted and attacked her, could she have been redeemed? It's a question I wish Roy could have had the opportunity to ask himself, but nobody in the Order truly knows the full story of Miko's end, and even if they had learned it, Roy was dead at that point anyway. I accept that it was not his lesson in "forgiving the really annoying condescending antagonist" to learn that day. But I wonder what would have happened if it had been Hinjo and Durkon in that throne room instead. Would a bit more kindness have swayed her?

I might argue that Miko was treated unfairly by Roy, and because the narrative does not condemn Roy for his lack of forgiveness, it makes it seem like the narrative applauds Roy for assaulting her, both physically and emotionally, in her one moment of uncertainty.

The flip side of this is that she had just effectively crippled the city's ability to fight Xykon. If I had been Roy, and after suffering through all of Miko's garbage up to this point, I can't truly claim I would respond with perfect understanding and forgiveness, either.

After all, true compassion is a rare and special thing, as well. It is, as the kids say...Not For Everyone. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0464.html)

See how I brought that full circle?

[TidePriestess]

Well, this is the one you get. This is what I wrote, and if you'd have preferred another narrative for the character, go off and write fanfiction or something.

Miko was an antagonist. By the universal scale of How Antagonists Are Treated by the Stories They're In, I think she came out pretty much ahead of the curve.
Well noted. The fact that you respond to things like this is greatly appreciated.

[LuisDantas]

its not like she was seeking greater power to "rule the world and eliminate all sin" or something silly like that (that we know of). She seemed more concerned with her rank as an indication of her favor with the gods than as power for the sake of it. She seemed to view her dismissal as "Hinjo is trying to impede my ability to serve the gods" rather than as "Hinjo has taken my power!" And certainly she put aside her personal vendettas in an attempt to protect something that she (correctly, for once) knew was important, and her duty to protect.


Misguided, I can accept. Self-serving... its a stretch getting past the "everyone is selfish to some extent, because we need to be" barrier.

I can only assume your reading of #460-464 clashes a whole lot with mine, then.

[veti]

In the orders of a crazy guy that said his cat wanted her to try hard to take them alive. It is entirely reasonable for one person up against an entire party of (as far as she knew) dangerous well armed criminals set on destroying the world, to not bend over backwards trying to capture them alive because someone said that their cat said to.

Frankly, asking them to surrender before attacking at all showed remarkable restraint.

Surely that's what paladins do: they follow orders. It's not her place to question the sanity of the person (or cat) giving the orders, or of the orders themselves - they're lawfully issued by the duly recognised head of her order, speaking to her in person and giving her the very explicit rider to "bring them back alive". And she, just as explicitly, accepted those orders. After that, for her to disregard them - would be an instant-falling offence in any campaign of mine.

To the thread question: I don't think I understand what "unfair" means in this context. By whose standards? I think just about everyone (except possibly Xykon) has some grounds to complain about ordure being heaped upon them that was none of their making.

[Koo Rehtorb]

Surely that's what paladins do: they follow orders. It's not her place to question the sanity of the person (or cat) giving the orders, or of the orders themselves - they're lawfully issued by the duly recognised head of her order, speaking to her in person and giving her the very explicit rider to "bring them back alive". And she, just as explicitly, accepted those orders. After that, for her to disregard them - would be an instant-falling offence in any campaign of mine.

With respect, that's insane.

[Gnoman]

No, that's Lawful. If she were being ordered to do something suicidal (such as invading hell to steal a coal from a Balor to light her lord's campfire), or very clearly morally wrong (such as destroying a town her lord considered an eyesore, including all inhabitants), you would have a point. This isn't the case. The orders were both completely within her power to do so (as she demonstrated later), and were, if anything, more Good that simply killing them. They were inconvienient to her self-image as Grand High Enforcer of the Twelve Gods, so instead of even making a token effort at fufilling the orders she was oath-bound to obey, she attacked from ambush with the clear and deliberate intent of executing the Order on sight. Only after she failed to do so, and doubt was cast on the "holiness" of this cause, did she even attempt any form of reason. Frankly, a paladin in any game I ran would have fallen because of that, let alone her later, increasingly unhinged and irrational, actions.

[veti]

With respect, that's insane.

If she had misgivings about the orders because she doubted Shojo's sanity, or because they were issued by a cat, then she shouldn't have said "As your cat wishes, master". After saying that, she's committed to carry them out to the best of her ability.

Sure, there may be cases for disobeying orders, as Gnoman outlines. But if your only grounds are "because they were issued by an insane old coot with a cat" - then she should just have declined the mission. To accept it, and then deliberately, for no good reason, betray it - that would prove her untrustworthy, unfaithful - in a word, if it is a word, un-paladinic.

[Koo Rehtorb]

If she had misgivings about the orders because she doubted Shojo's sanity, or because they were issued by a cat, then she shouldn't have said "As your cat wishes, master". After saying that, she's committed to carry them out to the best of her ability.
The order was to "try hard". She demanded their surrender before attacking, this qualifies.


for no good reason
She's one person attacking, as far as she knew, a large party of well armed and highly dangerous criminals bent on destroying the entire world. This is reason enough to not sacrifice a tactical advantage by trying to knock them out one by one.

[Loreweaver15]

...Veti's attitudes about paladinhood are pretty much the exact reason I'm writing the Order of the Shining Star as I am. Eesh.

[Keltest]

...Veti's attitudes about paladinhood are pretty much the exact reason I'm writing the Order of the Shining Star as I am. Eesh.

Actually im inclined to agree with him. Not necessarily about the "make her fall then and there" bit, but she did accept the mission, with the condition that she do her best to bring them back alive. A proper paladin would do that to the best of their abilities, not just go "surrender or die!"

[Porthos]

I know some people disagree, but I do think that Miko didn't exactly give the Order much of a chance to find out what was going on.

She ordered them to surrender to her.
When they, quite reasonably, said "What the hell is going on here", she attacked.

That's.... A pretty wide interptation of her standing orders. IMNSHO. :smallsmile:

[Knaight]

It seems like one of the underlying points behind the claim that Miko is treated unfairly by the narrative is a misapprehension as to the nature of said narrative. The Order of The Stick is not a morality play. It's not a story wherein everyone's lives are what they deserve, and acting in a good manner inherently gets good results. Take the commoner Mr. Scruffy killed during his stint as a gladiator - he was almost certainly thrown in prison on some ridiculous pretext, tried to stand up to a bully, and died as a result. Take Right-Eye. Take Shojo, who did the best he could by his city and died because he had the misfortune of Miko overhearing him at the exact wrong time and jumping to conclusions. Take Xykon, who's been living the good life with only the occasional setback despite being the worst person in the entire cast. People routinely don't get what they deserve.

Miko's arc was that of a tragic hero - almost a Byronic hero. She was fundamentally a good person, but her flaws eventually undermined her because she had the misfortune to end up in the exact situation where they would do so. It was entirely reasonable for her to attack the Order, and it was entirely reasonable for the Order to be hostile towards her; nobody involved had perfect information and they did what they could with what they knew. The conclusion that the Order was lying about Xykon was also entirely reasonable, despite being wrong - Xykon was alive. That it was some conspiracy from Shojo wasn't, but it was misfortune that planted the seed of information that caused that screw up, which happened to coincide with one of her flaws. So on and so forth. I don't see anything unfair in this, just a whole lot that's unfortunate.

[Jaxzan Proditor]

I know some people disagree, but I do think that Miko didn't exactly give the Order much of a chance to find out what was going on.

She ordered them to surrender to her.
When they, quite reasonably, said "What the hell is going on here", she attacked.

That's.... A pretty wide interptation of her standing orders. IMNSHO. :smallsmile:

I think that one of Miko's many flaws was being excessively willing to attack without investigating further or being diplomatic and the like. That and being very overzealous in her duties as a Paladin to the point where she was actively betraying her code. And of course, as you pointed out earlier, being unwilling to change or fix these flaws.

...Now that I think about it, Miko had a ton of character flaws.

[Porthos]

It was entirely reasonable for her to attack the Order, and it was entirely reasonable for the Order to be hostile towards her;

She could have at least had the common courtesy to hear what Roy had to say. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0200.html)

:miko:: ORDER OF THE STICK! You have been charged with crimes for which the only possible sentence is death.
:durkon: (aside): Wha tha?
:miko: (continuing): Surrender yourselves or have that sentence carried out immediately. The choice is yours!
:roy: Whoa, whoa, who, what is this all about?
:elan:: See?? I told you, Roy! I told you something was going to happen!
:roy:: Shut up, Elan. And you, buddy, we're not surrendering without a little-
:miko: (interrupts): As you wish.
*:miko: attacks*

Yeah. Perfectly reasonable behavior there, especially given her standing orders (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0290.html). :smalltongue:

I dunno about you, but I wouldn't call that 'trying hard to bring them back alive for trial'. :smalltongue:

[Loreweaver15]

Actually im inclined to agree with him. Not necessarily about the "make her fall then and there" bit, but she did accept the mission, with the condition that she do her best to bring them back alive. A proper paladin would do that to the best of their abilities, not just go "surrender or die!"

I was actually talking about the "never question your orders, carry them out without ever considering the implications of what you've been told to do". Lawful Good doesn't mean you can't think for yourself.

[Keltest]

I was actually talking about the "never question your orders, carry them out without ever considering the implications of what you've been told to do". Lawful Good doesn't mean you can't think for yourself.

that wasn't his point though. Miko didn't question the orders or anything like that, she almost flat out ignored them. I doubt anyone says that "lawful" should take priority over "good" for a paladin, especially because how lawful interacts with different societies changes, while the paladin's perception of good does not.

[UsaSatsui]

In fairness, Miko did go out of her way to nonlethally take down the rest of the Order, aside from Roy.

Of course, she totally tried to kill Roy.

Why?

Because her magic detection eyes mistakenly read him as Evil, so she thought it was okay.

Come to think of it, had she rolled a bit better on her attack roll there, she might have killed Roy, and maybe fallen right there (murdering a Lawful Good person you're supposed to be arresting probably goes against The Code).

[Porthos]

Ironically, I'm neither pro- OR anti-Miko. I recognize both her positive and negative qualities. And I also am admittedly a tad sympathetic toward her at times (while also shaking my head at her elsewhere).

But the thing is, in the specific instance I highlighted above, she ****ed up. Yes, Shojo could have told her more, or given her stronger orders. Yes, Roy could have been a little less brusque in his initial comment. And, yes, the circumstantial evidence conspired more than a little against Miko.

She still ****ed up there.

She decided then and there that she knew better than her liege lord on how to handle things. She decided that after gathering the evidence about the Order and finding out that the leader was 'strongly evil', that she could give a token effort at following her orders and wipe out this threat to civilization herself. Might as well save the taxpayers of Azure City the expense of an open and shut show trial, right?

OK, she could have decided to only beat them within an inch of their lives and drag them back to the Southern Continent (ala what she did in #251). Maybe. But when she says she's gonna carry out the sentence of death then and there if they don't surrender, I'll take the paladin at her word.

Now I wouldn't put ignoring Shojo's orders as a Auto Falling Offense (which is what I believe launched this side conversation [though UsaSatsui's point about killing a good person leading to Falling is a very good one]). But it IS a character establishing moment up the wazoo.

Yes, she listened to reason once the combat came to a temporary halt. Good for her. And I do mean that. But it still doesn't change the fact that she was the one to metaphorically scream "INITIATIVE" when the people she was talking to were trying to figure out what was going on.

[veti]

I was actually talking about the "never question your orders, carry them out without ever considering the implications of what you've been told to do". Lawful Good doesn't mean you can't think for yourself.

That's not even a misrepresentation of what I was saying. It's more like a misrepresentation of a delusion of what someone who vaguely resembled me seemed to be saying in a drunken dream last November.

There's a difference between "think for yourself" and "assume that your personal judgment is a more reliable guide to behaviour than the explicit orders you've accepted from the person you're solemnly sworn to obey".

I don't even get why this is controversial. Paladins, by nature, aren't free to do whatever they think tactically appropriate in every situation. Miko is sworn in general to follow any lawful orders the head of her order - Shojo - sees fit to give her, and she has personally reaffirmed her commitment to follow this order in particular. Heck, that's the only reason she's here in the first place. She needs a very good reason to disregard that commitment.

[Sartharina]

Surely that's what paladins do: they follow orders. It's not her place to question the sanity of the person (or cat) giving the orders, or of the orders themselves - they're lawfully issued by the duly recognised head of her order, speaking to her in person and giving her the very explicit rider to "bring them back alive". And she, just as explicitly, accepted those orders. After that, for her to disregard them - would be an instant-falling offence in any campaign of mine.

To the thread question: I don't think I understand what "unfair" means in this context. By whose standards? I think just about everyone (except possibly Xykon) has some grounds to complain about ordure being heaped upon them that was none of their making.

That is what Paladumbs do, not paladins. Real paladins evaluate all orders they receive to ensure that they are sane and just, and serve Cosmic Good. Paladins are mortal archons, not mindless automatons.

As for receiving orders from someone she's solemnly sworn to obey - She had recently overheard the man admitting that his behavior and orders were made in bad faith, and had been secretly working against the system he was sworn to uphold. Shojo was a traitor to Lawful Good. Unfortunately for Miko, he betrayed the Lawful, not Good, part of Lawful Good - but the damage to society and the system was still evident, and his machinations had left permanent damage that his cousin would need to maintain (Largely by keeping Evil forces appeased and in power, instead of exposed and exterminated).

As for "Forcing her morality on others" - That's what Good is supposed to do. The BoED calls it Redemption, because those that do not abide by Good morality make the world a worse place by definition. The problem is that people have flaws that prevent them from being Cosmic Good.

[Jaxzan Proditor]

As for receiving orders from someone she's solemnly sworn to obey - She had recently overheard the man admitting that his behavior and orders were made in bad faith, and had been secretly working against the system he was sworn to uphold.
Miko was unaware of Shojo's deceptions when she was sent out to bring the Order to Azure City. She had no reason at the time to disobey Shojo's orders.


As for "Forcing her morality on others" - That's what Good is supposed to do. The BoED calls it Redemption, because those that do not abide by Good morality make the world a worse place by definition. The problem is that people have flaws that prevent them from being Cosmic Good.

Miko forced her morality on those who also followed a Good morality. Also, I see no evidence that Miko's values somehow reflect a Cosmic Good. Further, many of Miko's values come from a sense of being Lawful, not being Good (like her stance on gambling), and those who do not abide by a Lawful morality most definitely do not make this world a worse place.

[UsaSatsui]

Good does not force their morality on others. That's a trait of lawful characters (despite what Roy and Durkon might think (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0844.html)).

[Ben Kenobi]

I get the feeling that you've already arrived at a conclusion and are only willing to accept evidence that fits into your chosen narrative of what happened. I suppose that's fitting, considering what character this thread is about.

Elan - son of one of the murderous dictators of the continent. Rides dinosaur ponies, accepts from said dictator gifts, that (on the outset), permit the destruction of one of the Gates that the Paladins are sworn to protect. Has broken into places, sided with an ally of an enemy of the Sapphire guild, and built a monument to her. Founded his own religion, and converted others to its worship. Destroyed a gate.

Hailey - Robbed an exceptional number of people. Killed a personal enemy when said enemy was helpless. Explicitly chaotic. Has lied to further her own goals. Proposed and executed an extortion plan. Long term member and associate of a thieves guild.

Varsuvius - Probably one of the top 5 executioners on the planet. Abandoned her own family. Sold her soul to fiends.

Belkar - Killed a member of the Paladin guild to escape the law. Escaped the law, attacked the sapphire guild. Killed the oracle. Killed a random dwarf for candy.

Roy - Lied to the sapphire guild and misappropriated guild resources to further a personal feud. Destroyed a gate he was sworn to protect. Abandoned a friend engaging in a quest for his personal benefit. Has stolen from others and used the gold for his own benefit. Engaged in fraud, in releasing Belkar, and engaged in fraud in his trial.

And now you have Durkon - Vampire.

These are the Light Warriors? :smallwink:

The point I'm going to hammer home is this. Up until Miko slew Shojo, nothing Miko had done was anything close to what the Order had, or has done. Miko would (depending on how you gage a person as responsible for crimes and actions taken while enslaved to Vampirism), either the most or second most Lawful and Good person in the order.

Remember her choice with the Gates. Compare it with Roy's decision with the Gate in the pyramid. Roy doesn't know what the Gate will do if destroyed, doesn't know if that will even further his own goals, or even the goals of the Sapphire Guild. How does Roy's decision differ from Mikos? Roy's 'solution' to the problem of the Gates was to smack it enough times and hope it goes away.

How does Roy's story end differently from Miko's if he swipes at the Gate and it explodes, brings down the house and collapses on them?

Looking at it objectively, Miko has a point. She might have been an annoying and, ultimately, mistaken character, but Roy's made some huge, huge mistakes too. Was it fair that Miko's explosion resulted in her death and Roy's explosion permitted them to survive, when both were predicate on making decisions based on lack of facts and time pressure?


She decided then and there that she knew better than her liege lord on how to handle things

No. Her failing is when she chose to become the law herself. They have laws. They have ways of dealing with a corrupt official who violates the Paladin code. This is what the nephew said, and stressed. He heard the same things as Miko did, agreed with her that the law had been violated. But he was able to turn over the matter to the legitimate authorities. Just because Miko wasn't justified in executing Shojo, doesn't mean that she wasn't right about the charges against Shojo. Had she leveled the charges and drew her sword and said, "enough blood has been spilled on the part of those who claim to be above the Paladin Code", and sheathed it, how different would the story be? Miko takes a leave from the Paladin order, and the story proceeds with her rushing in.

[Keltest]

Elan - son of one of the murderous dictators of the continent. Rides dinosaur ponies, accepts from said dictator gifts, that (on the outset), permit the destruction of one of the Gates that the Paladins are sworn to protect. Has broken into places, sided with an ally of an enemy of the Sapphire guild, and built a monument to her. Founded his own religion, and converted others to its worship. Destroyed a gate.

Hailey - Robbed an exceptional number of people. Killed a personal enemy when said enemy was helpless. Explicitly chaotic. Has lied to further her own goals. Proposed and executed an extortion plan. Long term member and associate of a thieves guild.

Varsuvius - Probably one of the top 5 executioners on the planet. Abandoned her own family. Sold her soul to fiends.

Belkar - Killed a member of the Paladin guild to escape the law. Escaped the law, attacked the sapphire guild. Killed the oracle. Killed a random dwarf for candy.

Roy - Lied to the sapphire guild and misappropriated guild resources to further a personal feud. Destroyed a gate he was sworn to protect. Abandoned a friend engaging in a quest for his personal benefit. Has stolen from others and used the gold for his own benefit. Engaged in fraud, in releasing Belkar, and engaged in fraud in his trial.

And now you have Durkon - Vampire.

These are the Light Warriors? :smallwink:

The point I'm going to hammer home is this. Up until Miko slew Shojo, nothing Miko had done was anything close to what the Order had, or has done. Miko would (depending on how you gage a person as responsible for crimes and actions taken while enslaved to Vampirism), either the most or second most Lawful and Good person in the order.

im curious that you use as your examples events that happened only AFTER Miko went after them. Elan destroyed the gate accidentally, in conditions which even the paladins agreed were fairly reasonable to do so intentionally.

how does the saying go? "Never assume malevolence when stupidity is a possible explanation."


Remember her choice with the Gates. Compare it with Roy's decision with the Gate in the pyramid. Roy doesn't know what the Gate will do if destroyed, doesn't know if that will even further his own goals, or even the goals of the Sapphire Guild. How does Roy's decision differ from Mikos? Roy's 'solution' to the problem of the Gates was to smack it enough times and hope it goes away.

How does Roy's story end differently from Miko's if he swipes at the Gate and it explodes, brings down the house and collapses on them?

Looking at it objectively, Miko has a point. She might have been an annoying and, ultimately, mistaken character, but Roy's made some huge, huge mistakes too. Was it fair that Miko's explosion resulted in her death and Roy's explosion permitted them to survive, when both were predicate on making decisions based on lack of facts and time pressure?

fair had nothing to do with it. Roy ran and hid. Miko just stood there and took it. Had she gone "oh crap, time to run!" and, say jumped out the window, she may very well have survived to seek redemption (or not).


No. Her failing is when she chose to become the law herself. They have laws. They have ways of dealing with a corrupt official who violates the Paladin code. This is what the nephew said, and stressed. He heard the same things as Miko did, agreed with her that the law had been violated. But he was able to turn over the matter to the legitimate authorities. Just because Miko wasn't justified in executing Shojo, doesn't mean that she wasn't right about the charges against Shojo. Had she leveled the charges and drew her sword and said, "enough blood has been spilled on the part of those who claim to be above the Paladin Code", and sheathed it, how different would the story be? Miko takes a leave from the Paladin order, and the story proceeds with her rushing in.

well obviously it would be completely different. But that's not particularly relevant to the idea that Miko made dumb decisions and it came back to bite her.

[oppyu]

Ironically, I'm neither pro- OR anti-Miko. I recognize both her positive and negative qualities. And I also am admittedly a tad sympathetic toward her at times (while also shaking my head at her elsewhere).

But the thing is, in the specific instance I highlighted above, she ****ed up. Yes, Shojo could have told her more, or given her stronger orders. Yes, Roy could have been a little less brusque in his initial comment. And, yes, the circumstantial evidence conspired more than a little against Miko.

She still ****ed up there.

She decided then and there that she knew better than her liege lord on how to handle things. She decided that after gathering the evidence about the Order and finding out that the leader was 'strongly evil', that she could give a token effort at following her orders and wipe out this threat to civilization herself. Might as well save the taxpayers of Azure City the expense of an open and shut show trial, right?

OK, she could have decided to only beat them within an inch of their lives and drag them back to the Southern Continent (ala what she did in #251). Maybe. But when she says she's gonna carry out the sentence of death then and there if they don't surrender, I'll take the paladin at her word.

Now I wouldn't put ignoring Shojo's orders as a Auto Falling Offense (which is what I believe launched this side conversation [though UsaSatsui's point about killing a good person leading to Falling is a very good one]). But it IS a character establishing moment up the wazoo.

Yes, she listened to reason once the combat came to a temporary halt. Good for her. And I do mean that. But it still doesn't change the fact that she was the one to metaphorically scream "INITIATIVE" when the people she was talking to were trying to figure out what was going on.
Miko was essentially a cop in that situation, according to the justification that she acted on behalf of the Gods to protect the Gates and the Gods don't have jurisdictional issues. If you disagree with her jurisdiction, that's an argument to have with Shojo and not Miko. When a cop says "You're under arrest." and the people they're sent to arrest open with "Listen buddy, we're not surrendering-", the cop doesn't engage with a back-and-forth with the suspected criminals about the lawfulness of the arrest. The cop just arrests them, and if the suspected perpetrators resist the cop reacts with appropriate force to protect themselves. If Miko fell to superior numbers and lost the combat, she had every reason to believe that Roy and co. would have murdered her and escaped justice. So she had to take every option available to her to win the combat and, well, survive.

So in summary, it is my opinion that Miko's actions during the initial encounter were mostly appropriate given her orders and knowledge of the situation. Right up until the instance where she attempted to murder a subdued suspect. But the point is she was justified in attacking first.

[Keltest]

Miko was essentially a cop in that situation, according to the justification that she acted on behalf of the Gods to protect the Gates and the Gods don't have jurisdictional issues. If you disagree with her jurisdiction, that's an argument to have with Shojo and not Miko. When a cop says "You're under arrest." and the people they're sent to arrest open with "Listen buddy, we're not surrendering-", the cop doesn't engage with a back-and-forth with the suspected criminals about the lawfulness of the arrest. The cop just arrests them, and if the suspected perpetrators resist the cop reacts with appropriate force to protect themselves. If Miko fell to superior numbers and lost the combat, she had every reason to believe that Roy and co. would have murdered her and escaped justice. So she had to take every option available to her to win the combat and, well, survive.

So in summary, it is my opinion that Miko's actions during the initial encounter were mostly appropriate given her orders and knowledge of the situation. Right up until the instance where she attempted to murder a subdued suspect. But the point is she was justified in attacking first.

a cop is however required to identify the crimes.

[theNater]

Actually im inclined to agree with him. Not necessarily about the "make her fall then and there" bit, but she did accept the mission, with the condition that she do her best to bring them back alive. A proper paladin would do that to the best of their abilities, not just go "surrender or die!"
In fairness, that may have been the best of her abilities. She's...not good with people.

I don't even get why this is controversial. Paladins, by nature, aren't free to do whatever they think tactically appropriate in every situation. Miko is sworn in general to follow any lawful orders the head of her order - Shojo - sees fit to give her, and she has personally reaffirmed her commitment to follow this order in particular. Heck, that's the only reason she's here in the first place. She needs a very good reason to disregard that commitment.
Being outnumbered 6 to 1 isn't a good reason?

These are the Light Warriors? :smallwink:

The point I'm going to hammer home is this. Up until Miko slew Shojo, nothing Miko had done was anything close to what the Order had, or has done. Miko would (depending on how you gage a person as responsible for crimes and actions taken while enslaved to Vampirism), either the most or second most Lawful and Good person in the order.
"Your record is full of grey spots, but you never stop working at improving it. That's what's important." (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0490.html)

Every member of the Order is willing to improve. Even Belkar, in his own twisted way, is trying to improve himself. Miko, long before we met her, decided she didn't have to improve. That's her greatest failing, and that's the failing the narrative punished her for.

[Loreweaver15]

As for "Forcing her morality on others" - That's what Good is supposed to do. The BoED calls it Redemption, because those that do not abide by Good morality make the world a worse place by definition. The problem is that people have flaws that prevent them from being Cosmic Good.

The BOED also gives us a "Good" flavored affront to all decency in Sanctify the Wicked, which brainwashes a target into following your personal morality whether they want to or not. BOED is not a sane resource for what's Good or not; you're thinking of [Law], not [Good].

I'm sure you're all tired of me harping on about that particular subject, though, so I'll not go further unless others do.

[oppyu]

a cop is however required to identify the crimes.
I presume she would have identified the crimes once they were no longer a threat to her life. Minor changes in the legal procedure of an arrest doesn't change the fact she's a law enforcement officer who is outnumbered, completely without backup and facing a group of (to her knowledge) seriously dangerous people who are actively threatening reality as we know it.

[Keltest]

I presume she would have identified the crimes once they were no longer a threat to her life. Minor changes in the legal procedure of an arrest doesn't change the fact she's a law enforcement officer who is outnumbered, completely without backup and facing a group of (to her knowledge) seriously dangerous people who are actively threatening reality as we know it.

they WERENT a threat though, at least not actively. She engaged the order, not the other way around. She also neglected to identify herself as a law enforcement official, even one outside of her normal territory. No reasonable person is going to just go along with some random stranger who tells them to for no reason at all.

[Jaxzan Proditor]

Elan - son of one of the murderous dictators of the continent. Rides dinosaur ponies, accepts from said dictator gifts, that (on the outset), permit the destruction of one of the Gates that the Paladins are sworn to protect. Has broken into places, sided with an ally of an enemy of the Sapphire guild, and built a monument to her. Founded his own religion, and converted others to its worship. Destroyed a gate.
Only one of these is a crime that happened before Miko arrested them. This is in fact the crime they were charged with. She was still not right in attacking them without provocation.


Haley - Robbed an exceptional number of people. Killed a personal enemy when said enemy was helpless. Explicitly chaotic. Has lied to further her own goals. Proposed and executed an extortion plan. Long term member and associate of a thieves guild.
Being Chaotic is hardly a crime. Killing Crystal was necessary for Haley to defend herself. The rest of the crimes you list amount to theft. A flaw yes, but one that she moved on from.


Varsuvius - Probably one of the top 5 executioners on the planet. Abandoned her own family. Sold her soul to fiends.
Happened after Miko died.


Belkar - Killed a member of the Paladin guild to escape the law. Escaped the law, attacked the sapphire guild. Killed the oracle. Killed a random dwarf for candy.
Happened after they were arrested. Belkar is still a terrible person, but he is changing. Miko didn't


Roy - Lied to the sapphire guild and misappropriated guild resources to further a personal feud. Destroyed a gate he was sworn to protect. Abandoned a friend engaging in a quest for his personal benefit. Has stolen from others and used the gold for his own benefit. Engaged in fraud, in releasing Belkar, and engaged in fraud in his trial.
Roy did not swear an oath to protect the gates. Nor did he knowingly tamper with his trial. All his other actions were either approved by Shojo (still leader of the Sapphire Guard) or were cleared by the Deva.


And now you have Durkon - Vampire.
Quite possibly your worst example yet. This didn't happen until after a long string of events months after Miko's death.


These are the Light Warriors? :smallwink:
No, they are the Order of the Stick.


The point I'm going to hammer home is this. Up until Miko slew Shojo, nothing Miko had done was anything close to what the Order had, or has done. Miko would (depending on how you gage a person as responsible for crimes and actions taken while enslaved to Vampirism), either the most or second most Lawful and Good person in the order.

You keep using future events to validate past events. Roy's actions were still enough for him to go to Celestia, so they weren't that bad. Durkon is still LG. And this still doesn't justify Miko in trying to kill the Order. Not to mention, being Lawful and Good is not necessarily a "good" thing. This Lawful Good Milo was still willing to try and force her morals on others.


Remember her choice with the Gates. Compare it with Roy's decision with the Gate in the pyramid. Roy doesn't know what the Gate will do if destroyed, doesn't know if that will even further his own goals, or even the goals of the Sapphire Guild. How does Roy's decision differ from Mikos? Roy's 'solution' to the problem of the Gates was to smack it enough times and hope it goes away.

If Miko had taken a few seconds to look at the situation, she would have seen that there was an easier solution present: killing Xykon and Redcloak and then destroying the phylactery. Roy, if he had waited, would have probably lost the Gate to Xykon, The Linear Guild, or the Vector Legion. The two situations aren't the same.


How does Roy's story end differently from Miko's if he swipes at the Gate and it explodes, brings down the house and collapses on them?

Looking at it objectively, Miko has a point. She might have been an annoying and, ultimately, mistaken character, but Roy's made some huge, huge mistakes too. Was it fair that Miko's explosion resulted in her death and Roy's explosion permitted them to survive, when both were predicate on making decisions based on lack of facts and time pressure?
Yes, everyone has made mistakes. However, Miko's unwillingness to change or try to redeem herself in anyway meant she kept making mistakes, whereas Roy has changed a lot since then. I'm not quite sure what you mean by "fair". If you mean Miko didn't deserve to die, well who does?


No. Her failing is when she chose to become the law herself. They have laws. They have ways of dealing with a corrupt official who violates the Paladin code. This is what the nephew said, and stressed. He heard the same things as Miko did, agreed with her that the law had been violated. But he was able to turn over the matter to the legitimate authorities. Just because Miko wasn't justified in executing Shojo, doesn't mean that she wasn't right about the charges against Shojo. Had she leveled the charges and drew her sword and said, "enough blood has been spilled on the part of those who claim to be above the Paladin Code", and sheathed it, how different would the story be? Miko takes a leave from the Paladin order, and the story proceeds with her rushing in.
Yes, this is a reason why she fell. She also fell because she refused to change and fix her flaws, and continued to believe that the Twelve had a special destiny for her. And this still doesn't justify her attack on Order.

[oppyu]

they WERENT a threat though, at least not actively. She engaged the order, not the other way around. She also neglected to identify herself as a law enforcement official, even one outside of her normal territory. No reasonable person is going to just go along with some random stranger who tells them to for no reason at all.
Hmm... yes, she should have identified herself as law enforcement. It wasn't great that she only identified herself as Sapphire Guard when she was about to execute Roy.

I still maintain she was justified in attacking first. She screwed up by not identifying herself, but she still had to deliver justice and not be murdered by them. And again, all available intelligence suggested they were bloodthirsty murderers actively threatening the fabric of reality who would not hesitate to murder her.

[Keltest]

Hmm... yes, she should have identified herself as law enforcement. It wasn't great that she only identified herself as Sapphire Guard when she was about to execute Roy.

I still maintain she was justified in attacking first. She screwed up by not identifying herself, but she still had to deliver justice and not be murdered by them. And again, all available intelligence suggested they were bloodthirsty murderers actively threatening the fabric of reality who would not hesitate to murder her.

See, heres the problem with that. If they were capable of and willing to kill her, why would she charge recklessly into battle just to die (and leave her orders unfulfilled)? If they weren't, why would she charge recklessly into battle just to slaughter them against her lord's orders?

[Jaxzan Proditor]

Hmm... yes, she should have identified herself as law enforcement. It wasn't great that she only identified herself as Sapphire Guard when she was about to execute Roy.

I still maintain she was justified in attacking first. She screwed up by not identifying herself, but she still had to deliver justice and not be murdered by them. And again, all available intelligence suggested they were bloodthirsty murderers actively threatening the fabric of reality who would not hesitate to murder her.

I think that she shouldn't have attacked them, at least not in the manner that she did. She should have identified herself as a Paladin (because that might have stopped them from attacking and given her legitimate authority), told them what crime they were accused of (so that instead of having absolutely no idea what's going on, they have some context, and not disobeyed the express orders of her lord. It was not her responsibility to take justice into her own hands.

[oppyu]

See, heres the problem with that. If they were capable of and willing to kill her, why would she charge recklessly into battle just to die (and leave her orders unfulfilled)? If they weren't, why would she charge recklessly into battle just to slaughter them against her lord's orders?
Easy; she's a paladin. She has to engage the enemy, no matter how capable and willing to kill her they are. But just because she has to be Lawful Stupid and engage the horrifyingly powerful criminals by herself, it doesn't mean she has to be Lawful Stupid and fight fair. Thus, picking the most advantageous opportunity to confront them and attacking the instant it seems that combat is inevitable.


I think that she shouldn't have attacked them, at least not in the manner that she did. She should have identified herself as a Paladin (because that might have stopped them from attacking and given her legitimate authority), told them what crime they were accused of (so that instead of having absolutely no idea what's going on, they have some context, and not disobeyed the express orders of her lord. It was not her responsibility to take justice into her own hands.
She should have identified herself and specified what crimes they had committed for which the only possible sentence was death in her dramatic entrance. She failed to do so, and that was a mistake on her part. Attacking was still the best option given her diplomatic failure. If she had stopped to engage with them in a back-and-forth regarding the arrest after her introduction, that could have led to the bloodthirsty killers opening combat and subsequently murdering her. She made mistakes during the confrontation, but opening combat wasn't one of them.

[Keltest]

Easy; she's a paladin. She has to engage the enemy, no matter how capable and willing to kill her they are. But just because she has to be Lawful Stupid and engage the horrifyingly powerful criminals by herself, it doesn't mean she has to be Lawful Stupid and fight fair. Thus, picking the most advantageous opportunity to confront them and attacking the instant it seems that combat is inevitable.

or she could go ask for help...

Heck, if she didn't trust random villagers to form an angry mob with her and/or thought they might all die, she could have paid for a sending scroll to send a message for reinforcements from the Guard.

[Loreweaver15]

Easy; she's a paladin. She has to engage the enemy, no matter how capable and willing to kill her they are. But just because she has to be Lawful Stupid and engage the horrifyingly powerful criminals by herself, it doesn't mean she has to be Lawful Stupid and fight fair. Thus, picking the most advantageous opportunity to confront them and attacking the instant it seems that combat is inevitable.

...No, she really doesn't. A Paladin is not obligated to commit suicide to carry out her orders; she is perfectly able to make a tactical assessment, determine that she is unable to take down the dangerous opponents in a straight-up fight, and use alternative tactics to bring them down--attacking the lone night watchman, for instance, and tying the rest up while they sleep.

[oppyu]

or she could go ask for help...

Heck, if she didn't trust random villagers to form an angry mob with her and/or thought they might all die, she could have paid for a sending scroll to send a message for reinforcements from the Guard.


...No, she really doesn't. A Paladin is not obligated to commit suicide to carry out her orders; she is perfectly able to make a tactical assessment, determine that she is unable to take down the dangerous opponents in a straight-up fight, and use alternative tactics to bring them down--attacking the lone night watchman, for instance, and tying the rest up while they sleep.

Now we're getting into hypotheticals regarding how she may have more effectively neutralised the Order. True, she could have done things smarter (the sending scroll thing wouldn't have been practical though; it took her a really long time to track down the Order. Imagine what harm they could do while she waited for reinforcements.), but the Gods generally don't punish people for effectiveness or lack thereof. Point is, she was a law enforcement officer, they were violent criminals that presented an imminent threat to all that was good and in this reality, she stepped in to prevent them from presenting said threat.

EDIT: And, of course, was justified in using less-than-fair tactics like initiating combat. Wouldn't want to shift the goal posts.

Re-EDIT: And I just realised I used the word 'justified', which is a warning sign of heading into 'morally justified' territory.

[Loreweaver15]

Now we're getting into hypotheticals regarding how she may have more effectively neutralised the Order. True, she could have done things smarter (the sending scroll thing wouldn't have been practical though; it took her a really long time to track down the Order. Imagine what harm they could do while she waited for reinforcements.), but the Gods generally don't punish people for effectiveness or lack thereof. Point is, she was a law enforcement officer, they were violent criminals that presented an imminent threat to all that was good and in this reality, she stepped in to prevent them from presenting said threat.

What she has to do is step in to prevent the Order from hurting innocent people, and find a way to arrest them and bring them before the Sapphire Guard. She has flexibility in how she does this; the actual point of my post is that she is not required to commit suicide to do so until there are other people actively in danger, and even then if she has a world-affecting quest she's not required to die for every farmer she runs across, as much as she may or may not be inclined to.

[Keltest]

Now we're getting into hypotheticals regarding how she may have more effectively neutralised the Order. True, she could have done things smarter (the sending scroll thing wouldn't have been practical though; it took her a really long time to track down the Order. Imagine what harm they could do while she waited for reinforcements.), but the Gods generally don't punish people for effectiveness or lack thereof. Point is, she was a law enforcement officer, they were violent criminals that presented an imminent threat to all that was good and in this reality, she stepped in to prevent them from presenting said threat.

by deliberately construction a scenario where her only option was to go against the spirit and letter of her orders, not to mention ignoring the Order's protests against being apprehended by some anonymous figure in a cloak.

[Jaxzan Proditor]

She should have identified herself and specified what crimes they had committed for which the only possible sentence was death in her dramatic entrance. She failed to do so, and that was a mistake on her part. Attacking was still the best option given her diplomatic failure. If she had stopped to engage with them in a back-and-forth regarding the arrest after her introduction, that could have led to the bloodthirsty killers opening combat and subsequently murdering her. She made mistakes during the confrontation, but opening combat wasn't one of them.

It was a mistake because she did so with intent of disobeying Shojo. If she had tried to subdue the Order, then I would accept it as a reasonable course of action. Since she tried to kill them, she was actively disobeying her liege lord, which is not something she should have done. She was taking justice into her own hands by not giving the Order a proper trial.

[oppyu]

What she has to do is step in to prevent the Order from hurting innocent people, and find a way to arrest them and bring them before the Sapphire Guard. She has flexibility in how she does this; the actual point of my post is that she is not required to commit suicide to do so until there are other people actively in danger.


by deliberately construction a scenario where her only option was to go against the spirit and letter of her orders, not to mention ignoring the Order's protests against being apprehended by some anonymous figure in a cloak.

I do agree that she could have been smarter about how she engaged the Order, and that her less-than-smart tactics were indicative of the character faults that later led to her going completely off the rails, murdering Shojo, and screwing the world over by destroying the Azure City gate.

[Jaxzan Proditor]

I do agree that she could have been smarter about how she engaged the Order, and that her less-than-smart tactics were indicative of the character faults that later led to her going completely off the rails, murdering Shojo, and screwing the world over by destroying the Azure City gate.

I agree with this as well. Miko handled that situation in a way that I think was quite characteristic of her, and what she did in that situation were signs of what she would later do.

I would like to point out that if Miko had made better decisions when confronting the Order she wouldn't've had to attack them, so attacking them was also a mistake in that it resulted from earlier mistakes.

[Keltest]

I agree with this as well. Miko handled that situation in a way that I think was quite characteristic of her, and what she did in that situation were signs of what she would later do.

I would like to point out that if Miko had made better decisions when confronting the Order she wouldn't've had to attack them, so attacking them was also a mistake in that it resulted from earlier mistakes.

heck, she even lampshades her tendency to do this before she even meets the order! Right after she killed the bandit and his daughter, she laments that the death could have been avoided if she just made a gather information check.

[oppyu]

It was a mistake because she did so with intent of disobeying Shojo. If she had tried to subdue the Order, then I would accept it as a reasonable course of action. Since she tried to kill them, she was actively disobeying her liege lord, which is not something she should have done. She was taking justice into her own hands by not giving the Order a proper trial.
Well, that's fair. In Miko's defence, the orders she received were from a cat, and the cat told her to "try hard" to bring them back alive for trial. So it's easy to see where she would decide that her judgment superseded the judgment of the non-sentient creature in regards to protecting the fabric of existence. Plus, she did try to resolve it peacefully... it's just that Miko's interpretation of diplomacy is "SURRENDER OR DIE, EVIL-DOERS!"

[Keltest]

Well, that's fair. In Miko's defence, the orders she received were from a cat, and the cat told her to "try hard" to bring them back alive for trial. So it's easy to see where she would decide that her judgment superseded the judgment of the non-sentient creature in regards to protecting the fabric of existence. Plus, she did try to resolve it peacefully... it's just that Miko's interpretation of diplomacy is "SURRENDER OR DIE, EVIL-DOERS!"

Im not sure that highlighting a character flaw as such helps prove that it isn't a character flaw (or in this case, the result of one)

[Jaxzan Proditor]

Well, that's fair. In Miko's defence, the orders she received were from a cat, and the cat told her to "try hard" to bring them back alive for trial. So it's easy to see where she would decide that her judgment superseded the judgment of the non-sentient creature in regards to protecting the fabric of existence. Plus, she did try to resolve it peacefully... it's just that Miko's interpretation of diplomacy is "SURRENDER OR DIE, EVIL-DOERS!"

Admittedly, most people would have trouble taking orders from a cat. However, I think the point to dispute that would have been with Shojo right then. Of course, Miko learned new things about the Order between then, so she might have not raised a complaint until she was unable to contact Shojo.

And I think Miko's idea of what diplomacy is like is another flaw of hers.

[Grytorm]

I presume she would have identified the crimes once they were no longer a threat to her life. Minor changes in the legal procedure of an arrest doesn't change the fact she's a law enforcement officer who is outnumbered, completely without backup and facing a group of (to her knowledge) seriously dangerous people who are actively threatening reality as we know it.

Would a cops first action without having revealed themselves to be an authority figure to be demand surrender and when the person being attacked refuses immediately open fire?

[Koo Rehtorb]

Would a cops first action without having revealed themselves to be an authority figure to be demand surrender and when the person being attacked refuses immediately open fire?

When the people in question are dangerous well armed terrorists? A cop probably wouldn't ask first at all.

[Keltest]

When the people in question are dangerous well armed terrorists? A cop probably wouldn't ask first at all.

Dangerous is relative. From what weve seen of theSapphire Guard and Azure City, they seem to be the bastion of the 12 Gods' worship. It would not be unreasonable to conclude that as the most powerful paladin in the Sapphire Guard, Miko is one of the highest level paladins in a 3rd or more of the planet. Plus she had a terrain advantage. And of course, she was winning after announcing herself, so whether or not she should have gone for surprise is a moot point, since we know she didn't need it.

[theNater]

See, heres the problem with that. If they were capable of and willing to kill her, why would she charge recklessly into battle just to die (and leave her orders unfulfilled)? If they weren't, why would she charge recklessly into battle just to slaughter them against her lord's orders?
In D&D 3.5, who attacks first has a very significant impact on who wins. It's entirely reasonable for her to believe she can win if she attacks first, but will lose if they attack first.

Would a cops first action without having revealed themselves to be an authority figure to be demand surrender and when the person being attacked refuses immediately open fire?
It's a much more reasonable proposition in D&D 3.5 than in real life. Of particular note is that a paladin's ability to Lay on Hands can be used to keep somebody from bleeding to death from what would otherwise be a fatal injury without causing them to recover to the point where they can resume fighting.

[Keltest]

In D&D 3.5, who attacks first has a very significant impact on who wins. It's entirely reasonable for her to believe she can win if she attacks first, but will lose if they attack first.

Which is why she gave up a sneak attack (not that kind) in favor of what would mechanically be a regular initiative roll, right?

Yeah yeah, paladin, but still. If it came down to an initiative roll either way, wheres the reason not to at least accuse them of a crime before arresting them?

[zimmerwald1915]

Dangerous is relative. From what weve seen of theSapphire Guard and Azure City, they seem to be the bastion of the 12 Gods' worship. It would not be unreasonable to conclude that as the most powerful paladin in the Sapphire Guard, Miko is one of the highest level paladins in a 3rd or more of the planet. Plus she had a terrain advantage. And of course, she was winning after announcing herself, so whether or not she should have gone for surprise is a moot point, since we know she didn't need it.
In the spirit of providing citations...

Miko exhibited the feats Cleave, Exotic Weapon Proficiency (katana), Improved Two-Weapon Fighting, Improved Unarmed StrikeB, Power AttackB, Quick Draw, Stunning FistB, Track, and Two-Weapon Fighting. She would have gotten Improved Unarmed Strike as a Monk bonus feat, and could have chosen Stunning Fist as a monk bonus feat (any additional Monk bonus feats are unknown). One of the remaining feats would have been her Human bonus feat (I've marked Power Attack, but it could also have been Exotic Weapon Proficiency, Track, or Two-Weapon Fighting). But that leaves 6 feats that she would have needed to get from her hit dice, which means she would have needed 15 hit dice, which because she was a humanoid would mean 15 levels.

In other words, at the time of her introduction in No Cure for the Paladin Blues, she had more levels than any individual Order member would have until the start of Blood Runs in the Family, and was a CR 15 threat to them when they were still level 11-13 - that would have made her somewhere between nigh-unbeatable and very dangerous to them, and would have made them only of somewhat of a threat to her (not that either party knew the other's stats).

Also, she beat the Order when they were the aggressors, albeit off-panel. And she beat Redcloak one-on-one when he was something like level 15 or 16. Miko was a powerhouse.

[Grytorm]

When the people in question are dangerous well armed terrorists? A cop probably wouldn't ask first at all.

But she did announce her presence. Maybe I wasn't clear on my point. She demanded surrender but did not identify herself. It would be more understandable if she had just attacked instead of announcing her presence. But by announcing her without trying to legitimate herself it comes off as odd.

[StLordeth]

"The lich we didn't know about until they told us isn't actually dead? They must have lied to us, tricked my detect evil, and snuck into the city that I demanded they come to in order to do some nefarious goal im unaware of!"

This, really.

Miko was out of control from the beginning, and it only got worse. It's a completely different situation than Belkar. Belkar isn't actively going against Roy.

[Porthos]

I feel like you're making my points for me, oppyu, even if you don't realize it. :smalltongue:

That she didn't identify herself makes all the difference in the world. It is a CRITICAL difference, in fact.

What, is the Order supposed to meekly surrender to every passing nutcase out there who ambushes them from the sidelines?

She gave no sign whatsoever establishing her credentials as any sort of law enforcement officer, and it came down to Durkon having to infer it from clues in the battle. And mistaken clues about theology. :smallwink:

The facts are simple:

She did not in fact 'try hard' to arrest them peacefully (remember, her stated goal was to 'bathe her swords in their blood').

She superseded her liege's judgment for her own judgment (whether or not she had 'good reason' is mostly irrelevant in this specific case).

She ordered people to submit to a journey where they were told they would be executed, without any sort of justification or setting of credentials, reasonable or otherwise.

And when the person who she was talking to said, quite naturally, "Hold on brother. We ain't going with you until you tell us who you are and why you are arresting us," she interrupted him and attacked.

She. ****ed. Up. There's no other way to look at this, IMO. Even IF she was right and Roy was 'strongly evil' she did in fact not try hard at all to take all of them in alive. And she in fact did not establish why anyone should think she wasn't just some crazed random encounter along the road. These are all important things that can't just be brushed aside. It isn't resisting arrest if someone doesn't establish that they are in fact the police. Establishing credentials and authority is what separates the police from vigilante gangs. Or adventurers. :smallwink:

Now I won't comment on whether or not Miko was justified in acting that way, because those sorts of comments tend to get threads locked PDQ. :smalltongue: But could one make a case for her acting that way and keeping her paladinhood? Of course. Textev being the number one, two, and three arguments. :smallwink:

However, one can **** up and still remain a paladin. One can **** up and not need to seek atonement. And, yes, one can **** up being a law enforcement officer if one doesn't act like a law enforcement officer.

Did Miko have cause to act in the way she did? Sure. Her problem was, she acted waaaaaaaaaaay too quickly on it. That's pretty much the problem with her all the way around when it comes right down to it.

[Jaxzan Proditor]

Very good arguments

Yes. This is what I've been trying to say for all of this. Thank you for putting it much better than I did. :smallsmile:

[theNater]

Which is why she gave up a sneak attack (not that kind) in favor of what would mechanically be a regular initiative roll, right?
I'm not convinced that she did. Haley got a surprise round against Trigak (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0018.html), even after they'd spoken for a few moments, just by attacking suddenly. The tanglefoot bag could easily have been Miko's surprise round, with initiative rolled afterwards.

She gave no sign whatsoever establishing her credentials as any sort of law enforcement officer, and it came down to Durkon having to infer it from clues in the battle.
It is plausible that she believed her cloak to be sufficient identification. It seems to be a sort of uniform for paladins in Azure City.

She did not in fact 'try hard' to arrest them peacefully (remember, her stated goal was to 'bathe her swords in their blood').
That statement was made prior to being told to take them alive, and she was at no point ordered to take them peacefully.

Trying to bring them in peacefully would have been the smart thing to do, but if we include her ability to judge what's best, she may well have done the best she could.

She superseded her liege's judgment for her own judgment (whether or not she had 'good reason' is mostly irrelevant in this specific case).
In what cases is it relevant? Why is this case different?

[Jaxzan Proditor]

It is plausible that she believed her cloak to be sufficient identification. It seems to be a sort of uniform for paladins in Azure City.
If she was in Azure City that might make sense. When she is in an entirely different continent where most people are unaware of the existence of the city, it doesn't. Especially when the Sapphire Guard is a secret organization.


That statement was made prior to being told to take them alive, and she was at no point ordered to take them peacefully.

Trying to bring them in peacefully would have been the smart thing to do, but if we include her ability to judge what's best, she may well have done the best she could.
She was clearly disappointed with having to take them in alive. Not to mention, she could have tried to subdue the Order, which would fit her orders, rather than kill them.

[Keltest]

I'm not convinced that she did. Haley got a surprise round against Trigak (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0018.html), even after they'd spoken for a few moments, just by attacking suddenly. The tanglefoot bag could easily have been Miko's surprise round, with initiative rolled afterwards.
At that point in the story, Rich had started to move away from the joke-a-day comic style and into the serious character driven story. Im hesitant to accept anything from DCF as a valid prior example because of that. Certainly its a point worth considering.


It is plausible that she believed her cloak to be sufficient identification. It seems to be a sort of uniform for paladins in Azure City.
Well, the Order didn't recognize it, and Haley at least seems rather well traveled even before joining the Order. If it did function as a proper uniform, Elan could also make a Bardic knowledge check, although that of course could happen behind the scenes.


That statement was made prior to being told to take them alive, and she was at no point ordered to take them peacefully. Still, it expresses what her preferred method for dealing with them is.


Trying to bring them in peacefully would have been the smart thing to do, but if we include her ability to judge what's best, she may well have done the best she could.
Im skeptical about that. They mention Miko gets sent on missions like that frequently, and regardless of her ability to find the targets due to tracking, if she botches the actual apprehension, she wouldn't be sent again.

[Sartharina]

How many heroes/player characters identify themselves and announce the crimes of the people they attack over the course of their adventures?

At the time, Miko had no reason to suspect that the party was anything other than a band of marauders on par (Or surpassing) Xykon in wanton malevolence - partially through the "They're tearing apart the world" crime she was initially sent after them on, and later from testimony by others (The weasel, barbarian, store owner (Due to Nale's mistaken identity), bandits, and flumphs). Roy's evil aura was a final damning piece of evidence. Unfortunately, Paladins come with "Detect Evil", not "Discern Alignment"

I wish she had followed through on killing Belkar, though. Sure, you can say 'He should have been tried' - but not in those circumstances. The writing was on the wall.

[Keltest]

How many heroes/player characters identify themselves and announce the crimes of the people they attack over the course of their adventures?
How many of them are legally appointed law enforcement officials who, while technically outside of their domain, do have a duty to obey their orders?

Its not a particularly fair comparison since most PC parties don't consist entirely of lawful good paladins and clerics who all serve one lord.

[Math_Mage]

How many heroes/player characters identify themselves and announce the crimes of the people they attack over the course of their adventures?
Somewhat fewer than are tasked with lawfully apprehending criminals to stand trial.


At the time, Miko had no reason to suspect that the party was anything other than a band of marauders on par (Or surpassing) Xykon in wanton malevolence - partially through the "They're tearing apart the world" crime she was initially sent after them on, and later from testimony by others (The weasel, barbarian, store owner (Due to Nale's mistaken identity), bandits, and flumphs). Roy's evil aura was a final damning piece of evidence. Unfortunately, Paladins come with "Detect Evil", not "Discern Alignment"
Evidence--of what? That they're bad people who have done bad things? That's not enough to attack first and ask questions later.

[Porthos]

How many heroes/player characters identify themselves and announce the crimes of the people they attack over the course of their adventures?

If people want to defend Miko by saying she was acting like an adventurer, fine. Nothing wrong with that. But that's not how many people DO defend her. They point to her status as a lawful enforcer of authority. They point to her status as a champion of the gods, given legal authority by a far away nation. But that's mostly irrelevant here. Because she didn't establish any of that.

She acted more like how a member of a secret police would act. Which, come to think of it.... :smallwink:

When it comes right down to it, she tried to have her cake and eat it too by making a token effort to arrest people in accordance to her standing orders, and then unleashing the holy smackdown that she was convinced these perps deserved.

Remember, as I said above, I ain't anti-Miko. I recognize her good points. And at this point in the narrative, she could still be reasoned with (as seen in the next couple of strips). But the fact remains is that she was extremely trigger happy. And, unfortunately for trigger happy people all across fiction, if you keep up at being trigger happy, sooner or later you might gun down the wrong person.

It's kinda a common caution all across fiction. :smallwink:

Such as it was for Miko. Her tendency to leap to judgement combined with her (as we found out) attitude that she KNEW that the Twelve Gods had a plan for her, and she was acting it out got her eventually into a lot of trouble when she guessed wrong. Because, as it time went on, she started guessing far more than she used to. She gave into her prejudices far more quickly than she did. And, yes, she let her grudges get the better of her.

All of the above weighed down on her psyche until the person who she trusted most (and by Word of Giant, actually helped mitigate a lot of her negative traits) betrayed her in a most unexpected fashion with her most hated enemies. Thus she snapped like the proverbial twig.

And the rest, as they say, is history.

[theNater]

If she was in Azure City that might make sense. When she is in an entirely different continent where most people are unaware of the existence of the city, it doesn't. Especially when the Sapphire Guard is a secret organization.
Sure, you and I realize that. The question is whether or not Miko would have realized that, which is far less clear.

She was clearly disappointed with having to take them in alive. Not to mention, she could have tried to subdue the Order, which would fit her orders, rather than kill them.
An attempt to subdue through force and an attempt to kill look pretty similar in D&D. It is worth noting that the only member of the Order she even attempted to use lethal force on in that first fight was Roy; everybody else got grappled, ensnared, or stunned.

At that point in the story, Rich had started to move away from the joke-a-day comic style and into the serious character driven story. Im hesitant to accept anything from DCF as a valid prior example because of that. Certainly its a point worth considering.
It was a joke-a-day comic about the D&D 3.5 rules. Those rules haven't changed. If we were talking plot or characterization, I'd be right there with you, but the rules are solid.

Still, it expresses what her preferred method for dealing with them is.
Yes it does, and preferring that method is one of Miko's major flaws. It is not evidence, however, that she didn't try to take them alive as best she could.

Im skeptical about that. They mention Miko gets sent on missions like that frequently, and regardless of her ability to find the targets due to tracking, if she botches the actual apprehension, she wouldn't be sent again.
They mention that Miko gets sent on long missions to far away places frequently. There is no indication that those missions tend to call for apprehending the targets. Indeed, if she was frequently sent for live apprehension, she probably would have gotten out of the habit of proclaiming her intent to kill everyone she was sent after.

[Kish]

Evidence--of what? That they're bad people who have done bad things? That's not enough to attack first and ask questions later.
Not when she'd been specifically ordered to bring them back for questioning, anyway.

And I will add that Miko scanned half the Order, observed 34% evil and 66% not evil, and immediately went, "They're not all nonevil, time for a beatdown" when she should have been both going, "That's funny, from what the people I spoke to said I would expect all of them to be evil," and automatically scanning the rest of the Order. That smacks of the Detect Evil being "will this give me the excuse I want to do what I've decided," rather than, "will this help me decide what to do," to me anyway.

[thereaper]

Here we go...

Miko was technically good by the dictionary definition of the alignment system. However, one of the things Rich has tried to impress upon us with his work is that there are hidden complexities to the alignment system. There are many kinds of Good, and not all of them are necessarily "good" by whatever definition one happens to use (and we also saw the same concepts in play with a character in OtOoPCs).

Miko showed only token concern for the ideals of Good, and used her alignment and status as a way to feel superior to others and bully them when she did not get her way. She cared more about her own ego than she did about the rights or lives of others, and only defended such things because it suited her ego to do so. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0251.html)

Inside, however, Miko was quite clearly psychotic. She considered murder the first and best solution to all problems (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0200.html)(even when ordered to bring perpetrators back alive (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0290.html)). She paid lip service to her supposed principles (principles that aren't even necessary to the LG alignment or Paladin Code) while undermining their purpose (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0215.html). Her narcissism caused her to believe that anyone (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0285.html) who was in opposition to her must have been evil (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0406.html), even when everything she knew (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0202.html) pointed to the (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0211.html) exact opposite (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0212.html).

Moreover, Miko's belief that anything (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0207.html) which was evil deserved death without exception (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0228.html) is also clearly offensive to the moral codes of some. But one of the genius parts of Miko's character is that she exposes this fact; that not all of the interpretations of the Good alignment have to match real world ideas of "good".

The ultimate proof of Miko's delusional nature was her response to an event whose meaning is self-evident: her fall. Instead of recognizing (as was obvious to anyone) that she had strayed (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0408.html), she doubled down on her paranoia and delusions, striking out at those she had just recently considered her allies and saying things that were contradictory at best and nonsensical at worst (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0409.html).

And in the end, Miko was undone by the same flaws (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0462.html) that had caused her to fall in the first place (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0464.html).

She was a terrible person, but an incredible character.

[Jaxzan Proditor]

Sure, you and I realize that. The question is whether or not Miko would have realized that, which is far less clear.
That doesn't make her right in that case. She was still wrong to have assumed it would be recognized and to not check to make sure they were aware.


An attempt to subdue through force and an attempt to kill look pretty similar in D&D. It is worth noting that the only member of the Order she even attempted to use lethal force on in that first fight was Roy; everybody else got grappled, ensnared, or stunned.
And I'm saying that she shouldn't have tried to kill Roy. The fact that she tried to kill him, combined with the fact that she had wanted to kill them earlier seems to indicate she wanted to kill all of them.

[SavageWombat]

In fairness, this is D&D. You defeat someone by reducing them to negative HP. If you're lucky, this doesn't kill them. I'm pretty sure that if, say, Haley or V continued fighting back, she'd have "executed" them as well.

However, a better class of paladin would have attacked to subdue or something.

[Jaxzan Proditor]

In fairness, this is D&D. You defeat someone by reducing them to negative HP. If you're lucky, this doesn't kill them. I'm pretty sure that if, say, Haley or V continued fighting back, she'd have "executed" them as well.

However, a better class of paladin would have attacked to subdue or something.

She could deal non-lethal damage to them.

[theNater]

That doesn't make her right in that case. She was still wrong to have assumed it would be recognized and to not check to make sure they were aware.
Of course she was wrong. But there is a difference between being wrong and being disobedient; that fact that she was one is not evidence of the other.

And I'm saying that she shouldn't have tried to kill Roy. The fact that she tried to kill him, combined with the fact that she had wanted to kill them earlier seems to indicate she wanted to kill all of them.
Wanting to do something and intending to do it are different things. We have seen her refrain from doing things she wanted to due to orders from Shojo; we can't assume she'd behave differently here.

[Koo Rehtorb]

Dealing non-lethal damage is not really an option in a dangerous combat situation with high stakes for the future of the world. You're taking a pretty significant penalty to your combat ability, and if you just knock someone out then you're running the high risk that the rest of the party would just heal them and bring them back into the fight, making you play a game of wack-a-mole.

Killing the (strongly evil aligned) ringleader and demanding that the rest surrender is probably the most realistic option that has a chance of winning at all.

[Jaxzan Proditor]

Of course she was wrong. But there is a difference between being wrong and being disobedient; that fact that she was one is not evidence of the other.
My point is that Miko was in the wrong to attack them. Whether it results from disobedience (which, even if she assumes that the Order could identify her, is still occuring), is not the main point.


Wanting to do something and intending to do it are different things. We have seen her refrain from doing things she wanted to due to orders from Shojo; we can't assume she'd behave differently here.
She is already disobeying her orders by trying to kill Roy. I don't see what's stopping her from going further.

With regards to non-lethal damage: it appears that she subdued the Order later on with despite damage, so I take back my point about using it (regardless of whether or not her intent was to subdue them, she was still able to). She was still disobeying Shojo's orders, since she explicitly said she was going to kill Roy.

[orrion]

Wanting to do something and intending to do it are different things. We have seen her refrain from doing things she wanted to due to orders from Shojo; we can't assume she'd behave differently here.

You mean except for the part where she DID behave differently and tried to kill Roy, even after Roy stopped fighting back and one of the additional party members she had scanned kept telling her to stop?

[UsaSatsui]

Miko was a monk. Doing non-lethal damage isn't really much more dangerous for her than doing lethal damage is. All she needs to do is make that Smite Evil Sword Slash a Smite Evil Nonlethal Kick To The Face, and bam, Roy's subdued.

[Sartharina]

She acted as an adventurer empowered by a higher authority (Deities and Kings) to take action. She's a knight-errant and most powerful Paladin (An adventurer class), not some book-bound beat-cop. While she is sworn to serve Shojo, she also has broad discretionary power over how she handles her mission. She is, for all intents and purposes, an adventurer on a quest.

Had Roy and the party only been guilty of their crimes against existence, she would have arrested them. However, Shojo did not and could not have known about the violations they committed against the Flumphs, weasel, bandits, barbarian guild, and (due to mistaken identity), the crime committed by the Linear Guild against the town blacksmith. Those pushed him over from "Arrested and tried for a crime I cannot determine the guilt of", to "Executed for horrific crimes committed against others gathered from witnesses." Paladins and Samurai are invested with the authority of Judge, Jury, and Executioner due to their unique status. I think the Samurai part played more into it than the Paladin, though: Until Durkon proved Roy's innocence, Roy was subject to "Low Justice" for being a confirmed brigand, marauder, and all around horrible person.

[Koo Rehtorb]

Miko was a monk. Doing non-lethal damage isn't really much more dangerous for her than doing lethal damage is. All she needs to do is make that Smite Evil Sword Slash a Smite Evil Nonlethal Kick To The Face, and bam, Roy's subdued.

She's a monk that specializes in two-weapon sword fighting, of course it's a big drop in combat efficiency if she goes unarmed instead. Roy isn't a commoner who'd go down with a single kick to the face.

[orrion]

Miko was a monk. Doing non-lethal damage isn't really much more dangerous for her than doing lethal damage is. All she needs to do is make that Smite Evil Sword Slash a Smite Evil Nonlethal Kick To The Face, and bam, Roy's subdued.

I don't even know if Smite Evil can deal nonlethal damage. I'd lean toward no.

[FujinAkari]

I don't even know if Smite Evil can deal nonlethal damage. I'd lean toward no.

It cannot. Additionally, the person you are arguing with seems to be ignoring the fact that Flurry of Blows deals roughly 5% as much damage as her swords would have. Although monks do more damage as they level, Miko was still a level 2ish Monk, and her damage capabilities in terms of unarmed attacks reflect this.

Edit: Also, can we please stop pretending that Miko had orders from Shojo not to kill the Order? Those orders quite explicitly came from Mr. Scruffy, whom Miko has sworn no oaths to obey :P

[Domino Quartz]

Paladins and Samurai are invested with the authority of Judge, Jury, and Executioner due to their unique status.

Wait, how do you know this?

[Jaxzan Proditor]

She acted as an adventurer empowered by a higher authority (Deities and Kings) to take action. She's a knight-errant and most powerful Paladin (An adventurer class), not some book-bound beat-cop. While she is sworn to serve Shojo, she also has broad discretionary power over how she handles her mission. She is, for all intents and purposes, an adventurer on a quest.
I don't think she is. She was told to do a specific thing on her mission, to bring them back alive, and she failed to do so.


Had Roy and the party only been guilty of their crimes against existence, she would have arrested them. However, Shojo did not and could not have known about the violations they committed against the Flumphs, weasel, bandits, barbarian guild, and (due to mistaken identity), the crime committed by the Linear Guild against the town blacksmith. Those pushed him over from "Arrested and tried for a crime I cannot determine the guilt of", to "Executed for horrific crimes committed against others gathered from witnesses." Paladins and Samurai are invested with the authority of Judge, Jury, and Executioner due to their unique status. I think the Samurai part played more into it than the Paladin, though: Until Durkon proved Roy's innocence, Roy was subject to "Low Justice" for being a confirmed brigand, marauder, and all around horrible person.
Paladins can circumvent the legal system that they are part of? That doesn't seem to be the case to me in Azure City. I think that failing to obey Azure City law (which pretty clearly allows a trial) is an enormous act against the Paladin Code. Not to mention, by trying to kill the Order without giving them their trial (and for crimes they were not accused of and didn't fall under the Sapphire Guard's jurisdiction), Miko is taking justice into her own hands. Your defense of Miko seems to revolve around the idea that she can execute whoever she wants so long as she has a good reason. However, this clearly goes against Shojo's orders, and it crosses the line in what Miko is allowed to do. I have no idea where you determine that she is "Judge, Jury, and Executioner".

[UsaSatsui]

She's a monk that specializes in two-weapon sword fighting, of course it's a big drop in combat efficiency if she goes unarmed instead. Roy isn't a commoner who'd go down with a single kick to the face.
I didn't mean the whole battle. But at the end, Roy was down, and apparently in a position where a Smite would kill him if he was actually evil. That's the point she could have applied the knockout kick instead.


I don't even know if Smite Evil can deal nonlethal damage. I'd lean toward no.
I don't see any reason why it can't. Simply choose to apply the Smite to a nonlethal attack.


Edit: Also, can we please stop pretending that Miko had orders from Shojo not to kill the Order? Those orders quite explicitly came from Mr. Scruffy, whom Miko has sworn no oaths to obey :P
You really think Shojo gave instructions to kill them, and then had to be "corrected" by his cat? It's far more likely that he ordered their arrest, Miko declared she was going to kill them, and then Mr. Scruffy "commented" to clarify the order.

Also, do you really think Miko actually believed that the order really was coming from the cat and not her (supposedly) addle-brained lord, and therefore she could safely ignore it?

[Jaxzan Proditor]

lYou really think Shojo gave instructions to kill them, and then had to be "corrected" by his cat? It's far more likely that he ordered their arrest, Miko declared she was going to kill them, and then Mr. Scruffy "commented" to clarify the order.

Also, do you really think Miko actually believed that the order really was coming from the cat and not her (supposedly) addle-brained lord, and therefore she could safely ignore it?
In addition, it is obvious that Mr. Scruffy cannot speak, and that Shojo was making up whatever he said. Therefore, the orders were still coming from Shojo. If Miko believed that it was insane to take orders from someone who erroneously believe that his cat could speak, the time to speak up would have been then, not when she was hundreds of miles away. At the very last, before disobeying Shojo, she could have found some way to contact him, such as finding someone (maybe the priest of Freya) to cast Sending.

[Storm_Of_Snow]

In addition, it is obvious that Mr. Scruffy cannot speak, and that Shojo was making up whatever he said. Therefore, the orders were still coming from Shojo. If Miko believed that it was insane to take orders from someone who erroneously believe that his cat could speak, the time to speak up would have been then, not when she was hundreds of miles away. At the very last, before disobeying Shojo, she could have found some way to contact him, such as finding someone (maybe the priest of Freya) to cast Sending.
In fact, the time to speak up was not then, it was months before when Lord Shojo's illness affected him enough that he was no longer fit enough to properly rule Azure City, and for him to either be replaced or for someone (say Hinjo) to be appointed as his regent.

Of course, that may have happened, but the nobles would have politicked (and assassinated) each other to make sure their candidate was appointed, so Shojo stayed in charge.

[Keltest]

In fact, the time to speak up was not then, it was months before when Lord Shojo's illness affected him enough that he was no longer fit enough to properly rule Azure City, and for him to either be replaced or for someone (say Hinjo) to be appointed as his regent.

Of course, that may have happened, but the nobles would have politicked (and assassinated) each other to make sure their candidate was appointed, so Shojo stayed in charge.

Well by all appearances, its not like he was (frequently) driving the city to ruin or anything.

[Jaxzan Proditor]

Well by all appearances, its not like he was (frequently) driving the city to ruin or anything.

Still, it was pretty clear that, by all appearances, Shojo was unfit for duty. To everyone in Azure City, he seemed pretty clearly insane. I would imagine the only reason that he didn't get replaced is that the nobles found that having an insane ruler made it easier for them to carry on with their schemes and that a more rational person might put a stop to their plotting.

[orrion]

I don't see any reason why it can't. Simply choose to apply the Smite to a nonlethal attack.

It's a Smite. By definition it's supposed to be MORE lethal to the things you use it on than whatever else you choose.



You really think Shojo gave instructions to kill them, and then had to be "corrected" by his cat? It's far more likely that he ordered their arrest, Miko declared she was going to kill them, and then Mr. Scruffy "commented" to clarify the order.

Dude, sarcasm. Seriously, the ":P" wasn't enough to give that away?

[SavageWombat]

Still, it was pretty clear that, by all appearances, Shojo was unfit for duty. To everyone in Azure City, he seemed pretty clearly insane. I would imagine the only reason that he didn't get replaced is that the nobles found that having an insane ruler made it easier for them to carry on with their schemes and that a more rational person might put a stop to their plotting.

Even in a Lawful society, replacing a feudal lord on competence grounds was harder than it would be today. It falls under "not done" territory. I suspect that Hinjo could have done it with the backing of the generals or other nobles, but no one outside the direct succession.

[Jaxzan Proditor]

Even in a Lawful society, replacing a feudal lord on competence grounds was harder than it would be today. It falls under "not done" territory. I suspect that Hinjo could have done it with the backing of the generals or other nobles, but no one outside the direct succession.

Alright, fair enough. The point still stands that if Miko didn't want to follow Shojo's orders because she thought they were insane, she should have brought up that complaint earlier.

And I assumed that FujinAkari was being sarcastic, but I wanted to put in my thoughts in case someone tried to use that as a legitimate argument.

[Keltest]

Even in a Lawful society, replacing a feudal lord on competence grounds was harder than it would be today. It falls under "not done" territory. I suspect that Hinjo could have done it with the backing of the generals or other nobles, but no one outside the direct succession.

Furthering that point, while Shojo was outwardly senile, we have little reason to believe that his apparent senility extended to how he governed the city. The word eccentric might apply better to how he acted.

[Bulldog Psion]

Treated unfairly? Yes, kind of. But you can't have a "tragic fall" story without that happening. So, yes, she was treated unfairly, but she had to be. And the story wouldn't have been as interesting if she hadn't.

[UsaSatsui]

It's a Smite. By definition it's supposed to be MORE lethal to the things you use it on than whatever else you choose.
Or just do more damage. Again, I see nothing that says you can't smite with a nonlethal attack.

Dude, sarcasm. Seriously, the ":P" wasn't enough to give that away?
Apparently not. :smallannoyed:

Still, it was pretty clear that, by all appearances, Shojo was unfit for duty. To everyone in Azure City, he seemed pretty clearly insane. I would imagine the only reason that he didn't get replaced is that the nobles found that having an insane ruler made it easier for them to carry on with their schemes and that a more rational person might put a stop to their plotting.
He wasn't insane, just a bit senile. Why would the nobles want to replace him, when all he needs is the proper "guidance"?

There's no reason at all to remove Shojo, particularly when the replacement waiting in line is the far more competent and less manipulable Hinjo (at least by appearances)?

[Jaxzan Proditor]

Furthering that point, while Shojo was outwardly senile, we have little reason to believe that his apparent senility extended to how he governed the city. The word eccentric might apply better to how he acted.

I doubt he would have been all that much better at government. If someone noticed the discrepancy between how he acted in public and how well he was able to govern I don't think his facade would have lasted very long. And it was more than just eccentricity, since Hinjo described it as a "mental affliction". He was probably only an okay ruler, or at least not one bad enough to be removed.

[Kish]

It occurs to me that it is, at best, problematic for any members of an order of paladins to take orders from a source they do not consider sane.

Never mind the fact that it was Miko, never mind the fact that to what extent she did not obey the orders she disobeyed them to be harsher than ordered, never mind the fact that Shojo was (unknown to all the paladins) faking it: the fact that the members of the Sapphire Guard were willing to go to another country and in any way bother people who had never heard of them on the orders of a nonsapient housecat was indicative of something deeply wrong with the Sapphire Guard. Shojo's deception should have resulted in the Sapphire Guard effectively ceasing to pay any attention whatsoever to his orders, as soon as it became "clear" to them that he was insane.

[Jaxzan Proditor]

He wasn't insane, just a bit senile. Why would the nobles want to replace him, when all he needs is the proper "guidance"?

There's no reason at all to remove Shojo, particularly when the replacement waiting in line is the far more competent and less manipulable Hinjo (at least by appearances)?

That's pretty much what I said.

having an insane ruler made it easier for them to carry on with their schemes and that a more rational person might put a stop to their plotting.

Also, mental senility or dementia can be described as insane, so saying he wasn't insane, just a little insane doesn't make much sense.

[David Argall]

can we please stop pretending that Miko had orders from Shojo not to kill the Order? Those orders quite explicitly came from Mr. Scruffy, whom Miko has sworn no oaths to obey :P
While the reason is invalid, the point is correct. Miko did not have orders not to kill the order. She merely had order to try not to, which, when given to the cop on the scene who can't be supervised, is pretty much meaningless. The cop has to make the call and is not restricted by orders that essentially say "use your best judgement."
Any fault here belongs to Shojo, who knew of Miko's ways and still sent her on the mission. Nor was there any hurry or need as far as he knew. X might have stayed inactive for a decade or more. He was the one who framed them as criminal. Since he sent paladins to investigate the destruction of the previous gate, he could also send them to investigate this destruction, and/or to gather witnesses such as the Order. It would have been inconvenient to his plans possibly, but as it was, he pretty much set them up.
But Miko has been thru this probably several times before. She has been told to go arrest Jones, and when she reported back that Jones had resisted arrest and was then killed, she was told to go and arrest Smith. [Not text of course, but do you see anything in text that makes you doubt this is what happened?] She had solid reason to deem words about "try hard to bring them in alive" to be close to meaningless and the efforts she made with the order fully satisfied her orders.

[theNater]

Okay, first things first. There seems to be a lot of confusion about Miko's obligation here, so let's check the source (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0290.html).

Shojo: Mr. Scruffy says that you should try hard to bring them back alive for trial.
Miko: As your cat wishes, Master, if it is possible.

She has agreed to the orders, so she is obligated to obey. But the orders are not to bring them back alive at all costs. They are to try hard to bring them back alive. These orders absolutely include the leeway to kill some or all of them, if it turns out that bringing them back alive is not realistically feasible.

My point is that Miko was in the wrong to attack them. Whether it results from disobedience (which, even if she assumes that the Order could identify her, is still occuring), is not the main point.
It may not be important to you, but intentional disobedience vs. gross incompetence is a difference that will determine whether she falls in veti's campaign (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?343325-Was-Miko-treated-unfairly-by-the-narrative&p=17344443&viewfull=1#post17344443), so it's well worth considering. If you and I can agree that incompetence is at least a plausible reason for her screw up, then we don't have to hash out whether it was the actual reason or not, if you don't want to.

It occurs to me that it is, at best, problematic for any members of an order of paladins to take orders from a source they do not consider sane.
For a Lawful person, there's some value in supporting the command structure for its own sake. As long as his orders aren't hurting anything, that perceived benefit can outweigh a pretty good amount of embarrassment or inconvenience.

EDIT:

But Miko has been thru this probably several times before. She has been told to go arrest Jones, and when she reported back that Jones had resisted arrest and was then killed, she was told to go and arrest Smith. [Not text of course, but do you see anything in text that makes you doubt this is what happened?]
Yes. The fact that she jumped straight to "my blades will be bathed in the blood of those responsible" rather than something more like "alive or dead?" suggests she doesn't get told to bring them in alive often, if at all.

[Jaxzan Proditor]

But she didn't try very hard. Of the course of a round, she jumped from surrender to attack. Her attempts at diplomacy were non-existent and she didn't even try to subdue Roy.

I will agree with David Argall that Shojo should have made better efforts when framing his orders so that Miko would not have the leeway that she interpreted in his statement and that he probably shouldn't have sent her out. However, fault still falls on Miko for assuming that this situation would be identical to all others and, as I said before, for not even trying to follow Shojo's wishes. Also, the fault falls on Miko, in this hypothetical situation, for being so willing to kill those resisting arrest. The commands of her superiors shouldn't be the only things restraining her.

[UsaSatsui]

Also, mental senility or dementia can be described as insane, so saying he wasn't insane, just a little insane doesn't make much sense.
Simply having a mental illness does not make you "insane". There is no actual medical definition of the term, it's a legal term, and it means your mental state is at a point where you can't function in society or tell right from wrong. Shojo, assuming he actually was senile, is not even close to that point. Maybe he couldn't be the most effective ruler, but hey, those are the breaks in a society with hereditary rule.

Any fault here belongs to Shojo, who knew of Miko's ways and still sent her on the mission. Nor was there any hurry or need as far as he knew.
This is a very good point. It is semi-justified in that Miko is likely the only Sapphire Guard member who is an effective tracker (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0213.html), and it's made pretty clear that she gets chosen for field missions frequently because she's kind of a pain in the ass (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0265.html). But Shojo absolutely knew about Miko's over-zealousness and it doesn't take much to conclude that Miko would try to kill the people he really, really needed to bring in (or even that they might kill her). This was probably a two-Paladin job, and honestly, by sending a second Paladin to assist, maybe all this could have been avoided.

[Koo Rehtorb]

She had no indication from Shojo that the people she was after were anything other than ruthless terrorists.
She had multiple witnesses accounts of various atrocities that the people she was after had committed recently.
She even had Detect Evil confirmation that the leader was strongly evil aligned.

The existence of extremely bad luck does not imply that she did not take reasonable precautions to determine guilt.

[Jaxzan Proditor]

Simply having a mental illness does not make you "insane". There is no actual medical definition of the term, it's a legal term, and it means your mental state is at a point where you can't function in society or tell right from wrong. Shojo, assuming he actually was senile, is not even close to that point. Maybe he couldn't be the most effective ruler, but hey, those are the breaks in a society with hereditary rule.

I would say that Shojo would have difficulty functioning in society if he actually was like how he pretended to be. However, I will concede that calling him insane is a little extreme. Your last point I agree with.

Edit:

She had no indication from Shojo that the people she was after were anything other than ruthless terrorists.
She had multiple witnesses accounts of various atrocities that the people she was after had committed recently.
She even had Detect Evil confirmation that the leader was strongly evil aligned.

The existence of extremely bad luck does not imply that she did not take reasonable precautions to determine guilt.
And I say that those precautions were not enough. First, Shojo did no such thing. All he told Miko was the Redmountain Gate had been destroyed and that Miko knew what needed to be done (she didn't apparently, given Shojo's look of surprise, but that's besides the point. Shojo should have definitely been more specific here, but he didn't cal the Order "ruthless terrorists"). Then, when Miko was collecting witnesses, she never bothered to see the Order's side of the story or to confirm those witnesses*. Finally, the Detect Evil spell, as shown, is not the best way to determine the guilt of someone.

*I'd like to point out how Miko continues to state that Shojo ordered the Order's execution, despite him having done no such thing.

[orrion]

While the reason is invalid, the point is correct. Miko did not have orders not to kill the order. She merely had order to try not to, which, when given to the cop on the scene who can't be supervised, is pretty much meaningless. The cop has to make the call and is not restricted by orders that essentially say "use your best judgement."

Ok, but she didn't "try not to" at all. Even when Roy stopped actively fighting her and the rest of the Order was subdued, she still decided to go for the kill.



Any fault here belongs to Shojo, who knew of Miko's ways and still sent her on the mission. Nor was there any hurry or need as far as he knew. X might have stayed inactive for a decade or more. He was the one who framed them as criminal. Since he sent paladins to investigate the destruction of the previous gate, he could also send them to investigate this destruction, and/or to gather witnesses such as the Order. It would have been inconvenient to his plans possibly, but as it was, he pretty much set them up.

What do you mean there was no hurry or need? Shojo knew 2 of the 5 gates holding a world-eating and god-killing monstrosity (as far as he knew) were down. Of course there was reason to hurry.

[UsaSatsui]

I would say that Shojo would have difficulty functioning in society if he actually was like how he pretended to be. However, I will concede that calling him insane is a little extreme. Your last point I agree with.
He thought his cat was talking to him, and he occasionally took political advice from it. That's about the only outward sign of dementia he shows. And it's harmless. A little embarrassing to the state, maybe, but harmless.

It's not really about the delusion, it's about the behavior. "Mr. Scruffy thinks these people should have a fair trial" is very different from "Mr. Scruffy thinks we should develop nuclear weapons and use them on our enemies". One's quirky, the other is a serious problem.

[Jaxzan Proditor]

He thought his cat was talking to him, and he occasionally took political advice from it. That's about the only outward sign of dementia he shows. And it's harmless. A little embarrassing to the state, maybe, but harmless.

It's not really about the delusion, it's about the behavior. "Mr. Scruffy thinks these people should have a fair trial" is very different from "Mr. Scruffy thinks we should develop nuclear weapons and use them on our enemies". One's quirky, the other is a serious problem.

Fair enough. I can agree with that.

[theNater]

Miko did not have orders not to kill the order. She merely had order to try not to...
Ooh, that's subtle; so subtle I missed it the first time around.

Miko was not directed to try not to kill the Order. She was directed to try to bring them back alive. In reality, that's the same thing, but in a world where Raise Dead exists, it's not.

But she didn't try very hard. Of the course of a round, she jumped from surrender to attack. Her attempts at diplomacy were non-existent and she didn't even try to subdue Roy.
It's true that by any objective measure, her attempts to take them peacefully were laughably feeble. But given her social and psychological shortcomings, they may have been the best she could do.

As for subduing Roy, attacking someone until their HP are in negative numbers is one of the traditional ways of subduing people in D&D. Note that beating him into unconsciousness is more feasible for Miko than for most characters, because she can heal him a bit to keep him from bleeding to death.

She even had Detect Evil confirmation that the leader was strongly evil aligned.
I just want to clarify for those who may not be familiar with D&D rules: a creature which reads as strongly Evil is either extremely high level(like, near Xykon's level) or bolstered by supernatural powers. Creatures which give off such a reading may be much more dangerous than they otherwise appear.

Note that Xykon himself would give off an even greater reading, due to being both high level and bolstered by supernatural powers.

[orrion]

Ooh, that's subtle; so subtle I missed it the first time around.

Miko was not directed to try not to kill the Order. She was directed to try to bring them back alive. In reality, that's the same thing, but in a world where Raise Dead exists, it's not.

It's true that by any objective measure, her attempts to take them peacefully were laughably feeble. But given her social and psychological shortcomings, they may have been the best she could do.

As for subduing Roy, attacking someone until their HP are in negative numbers is one of the traditional ways of subduing people in D&D. Note that beating him into unconsciousness is more feasible for Miko than for most characters, because she can heal him a bit to keep him from bleeding to death.

I just want to clarify for those who may not be familiar with D&D rules: a creature which reads as strongly Evil is either extremely high level(like, near Xykon's level) or bolstered by supernatural powers. Creatures which give off such a reading may be much more dangerous than they otherwise appear.

Note that Xykon himself would give off an even greater reading, due to being both high level and bolstered by supernatural powers.

Ok, but even if Roy tested "strongly evil," Miko scanned Roy, Durkon, and Elan. Roy shows Evil (presumably Lawful), Durkon shows Lawful Good, and Elan shows Chaotic Good. More information required is what I would have thought.

[Jaxzan Proditor]

It's true that by any objective measure, her attempts to take them peacefully were laughably feeble. But given her social and psychological shortcomings, they may have been the best she could do.
Well then, I would say that being unable to make any sort if diplomatic attempts is another large flaw of Miko's. She still didn't seem to try very hard, regardless of whether that was a result of how little she cared to follow commands or how little she was able.


As for subduing Roy, attacking someone until their HP are in negative numbers is one of the traditional ways of subduing people in D&D. Note that beating him into unconsciousness is more feasible for Miko than for most characters, because she can heal him a bit to keep him from bleeding to death.
She was most assuredly not trying to subdue. Her intent was to kill, as expressed by her saying "Die, evildoer!!" and "I execute you for crimes against existence!". I doubt she would have tried to Resurrect* him either, as that wouldn't make this much of an execution.

*Paladins cannot cast Raise Dead or the like, and given their distance from any Clerics at this point it is unlikely they would find any in time to cast it. I would like to point out that coming back from the dead is hardly costless, since (for resurrection) you lose a level, plus the 10,000gp of diamonds lost by the caster. Also, there is no guarantee that all of the Order (especially Belkar) would want to come back to face justice, like Shojo.

[Squark]

Ok, but even if Roy tested "strongly evil," Miko scanned Roy, Durkon, and Elan. Roy shows Evil (presumably Lawful), Durkon shows Lawful Good, and Elan shows Chaotic Good. More information required is what I would have thought.

No, Detect Evil only detects, well, evil. You'd need Detect good to know that half (2-thirds when the crown wasn't on Roy) of the Order is Good. Miko made the not unreasonable assumption that Durkon and Elan were Roy's unscrupulous but not evil accomplices. considering Miko didn't know which member of the order destroyed the gate, she probably assumed Roy was the culprit.

Granted, "One person pinged 'Evil' on my radar!" isn't reason enough to attack, but, then again, that's one of Miko's biggest problems- She's too quick to jump to conclusions.

[Jaxzan Proditor]

No, Detect Evil only detects, well, evil. You'd need Detect good to know that half (2-thirds when the crown wasn't on Roy) of the Order is Good. Miko made the not unreasonable assumption that Durkon and Elan were Roy's unscrupulous but not evil accomplices.

Granted, "One person pinged 'Evil' on my radar!" isn't reason enough to attack, but, then again, that's one of Miko's biggest problems- She's too quick to jump to conclusions.

Yes, this is the main thing that I don't like about Miko's use of detect evil: she used it to jump to the conclusion that everyone on the Order was evil or at least working with evil without trying to make certain this was true. Plus the jumping to conclusions thing.

[theNater]

Ok, but even if Roy tested "strongly evil," Miko scanned Roy, Durkon, and Elan. Roy shows Evil (presumably Lawful), Durkon shows Lawful Good, and Elan shows Chaotic Good. More information required is what I would have thought.
Detect Evil is not Know Alignment. It does not reveal the target's position on the Law-Chaos axis, and it does not distinguish between Neutral and Good on the Good-Evil axis.

Well then, I would say that being unable to make any sort if diplomatic attempts is another large flaw of Miko's.
Yes it is.

She still didn't seem to try very hard, regardless of whether that was a result of how little she cared to follow commands or how little she was able.
Again, we don't have to argue about the whys if you don't want to. You seem to be alternating between not caring as to the whys and wanting to prove it's not because she was unable, which is confusing me.

She was most assuredly not trying to subdue. Her intent was to kill, as expressed by her saying "Die, evildoer!!" and "I execute you for crimes against existence!".
Indeed. She may have concluded he is too dangerous to be taken alive, given how far she'd have to drag him.

I doubt she would have tried to Resurrect* him either, as that wouldn't make this much of an execution.
It is not clear how final an execution has to be, in a world with resurrection. We can't conclude that she must intend his death to be permanent.

Paladins cannot cast Raise Dead or the like, and given their distance from any Clerics at this point it is unlikely they would find any in time to cast it.
The town they left on the way to the forest had a temple to Freya in it (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0137.html). The gentleman manning it is probably a Cleric. Azure City also has clerics who can cast Resurrection, which can work on someone who's been dead for years.

I would like to point out that coming back from the dead is hardly costless, since (for resurrection) you lose a level, plus the 10,000gp of diamonds lost by the caster.
So? She isn't even encouraged to bring them back with all their class levels, or unharmed, or anything. She would presumably pay for the diamonds out of her stipend(or loot confiscated from Roy's corpse).

Also, there is no guarantee that all of the Order (especially Belkar) would want to come back to face justice, like Shojo.
Firstly, you've jumped from "she tried to kill Roy" to "she would obviously kill every member of the Order", and secondly you've forgotten Xykon's "anything to avoid the big fire below" speech (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0652.html). Shojo, of course, was not at any risk of the big fire below, as he was Good.

[Jaxzan Proditor]

Indeed. She may have concluded he is too dangerous to be taken alive, given how far she'd have to drag him. This had nothing to do with how she wanted to capture him. She was explicitly executing him.


It is not clear how final an execution has to be, in a world with resurrection. We can't conclude that she must intend his death to be permanent.
I don't see why she would execute him only to resurrect him to possibly execute him again.


The town they left on the way to the forest had a temple to Freya in it (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0137.html). The gentleman manning it is probably a Cleric. Azure City also has clerics who can cast Resurrection, which can work on someone who's been dead for years.
The town was far away enough at this point that it might as well be Azure City that they travel to.


So? She isn't even encouraged to bring them back with all their class levels, or unharmed, or anything. She would presumably pay for the diamonds out of her stipend(or loot confiscated from Roy's corpse).
Roy wouldn't have 10,000gp of diamonds on him, which is a theoretically high price. It is certainly one that Miko couldn't pay of she could barely afford that inn. My point is that even in this world where Raise Dead exists, there are still costs to killing your prisoners and then raising them.


Firstly, you've jumped from "she tried to kill Roy" to "she would obviously kill every member of the Order", and secondly you've forgotten Xykon's "anything to avoid the big fire below" speech (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0652.html). Shojo, of course, was not at any risk of the big fire below, as he was Good.
I don't see why she would stop at Roy. At the very least, she would presumably move onto Belkar, yet another evildoer. Are you trying to say that Belkar has the same knowledge and goals as Xykon?

Edit: My overall goal in this part of the discussion is to show that Milo messed up in her first confrontation with the Order.

[Gnoman]

Let's put Miko's actions in a more familiar context.

Chief: An important installation was destroyed, this is who we think did it. Take care of it.

Cop: I'll kill them all.

Chief: No, bring them in for trial.

Cop: As you wish.


Cop: I'm looking for this group.

Witness: They're over there.

Cop: DEAD OR ALIVE YOU ARE COMING WITH ME

Party: What? Who are you, and what are you talking about? I have no reason to go with you.

Cop: YOU HAVE CHOSEN "DEAD".

Such a reasonable way to deal with the situation.

[Koo Rehtorb]

Let's put Miko's actions in a more familiar context.

Chief: An important installation was destroyed, this is who we think did it. Take care of it.

Cop: I'll kill them all.

Chief: No, bring them in for trial.

Cop: As you wish.


Cop: I'm looking for this group.

Witness: They're over there.

Cop: DEAD OR ALIVE YOU ARE COMING WITH ME

Party: What? Who are you, and what are you talking about? I have no reason to go with you.

Cop: YOU HAVE CHOSEN "DEAD".

Such a reasonable way to deal with the situation.

Chief: These people blew up a dam, the resulting flooding threatens a sizable metropolitan area.
Cop: I'll kill them all.
Chief: Try to bring them in alive if you can.
Cop: I'm looking for these people.
Witness: They're over there. Also they're guilty of blowing up the dam, kidnapping, and multiple counts of murder.
*cop confronts armed and dangerous criminals, alone*

[veti]

It occurs to me that it is, at best, problematic for any members of an order of paladins to take orders from a source they do not consider sane.

Whatever the answer to that conundrum is, I would assume it's something that the Sapphire Guard had considered and reached a decision about long, long before it became an issue in this case. Let's imagine senior members of the SG getting together, and discussing whether they should continue to take orders from Shojo/Mr Scruffy.

Maybe they considered the orders, rather than the manner in which they were delivered, and found that they were still quite sound. Maybe they just accepted their duty to take the orders in blind faith, and would continue to do so unless they became physically or morally impossible. Maybe they used some sort of magical divination to seek guidance from the Twelve Gods on whether they should replace Shojo, and got the answer "no". We don't know.

But whatever happened, it happened years ago. It's not something that was new in this scenario, and required Miko to make up new policy on the fly.

[super dark33]

Chief: These people blew up a dam, the resulting flooding threatens a sizable metropolitan area.
Cop: I'll kill them all.
Chief: Try to bring them in alive if you can.
Cop: I'm looking for these people.
Witness: They're over there. Also they're guilty of blowing up the dam, kidnapping, and multiple counts of murder.
*cop confronts armed and dangerous criminals, alone*

Cop goes to criminals:

Cop: You are coming with me or you die.

Criminals: On what claims?

Cop: Die!

[Koo Rehtorb]

Cop goes to criminals:

Cop: You are coming with me or you die.

Criminals: On what claims?

Cop: Die!

I don't find that particularly unreasonable? The criminals presumably know that they're guilty of multiple crimes and any attempts at denying it are likely an effort to stall for time while they get ready to murder you or flee the scene. These aren't petty criminals that you're arresting for shoplifting.

Miko really just had extraordinarily bad luck that all the evidence pointed in precisely the wrong direction.

[Jaxzan Proditor]

I don't find that particularly unreasonable? The criminals presumably know that they're guilty of multiple crimes and any attempts at denying it are likely an effort to stall for time while they get ready to murder you or flee the scene. These aren't petty criminals that you're arresting for shoplifting.

Miko really just had extraordinarily bad luck that all the evidence pointed in precisely the wrong direction.

The cop should at least identify themselves as such. Otherwise it looks like a random stranger is telling you to come with them, in which case protesting is quite reasonable.

[Koo Rehtorb]

The cop should at least identify themselves as such. Otherwise it looks like a random stranger is telling you to come with them, in which case protesting is quite reasonable.

Well I agree that something like "FREEZE, POLICE(paladin)!" would probably have been the most correct way to go about it. That's really a pretty minor quibble, though, and easily something overlooked by someone who isn't used to following correct police procedure for arresting people.

[Jaxzan Proditor]

Well I agree that something like "FREEZE, POLICE(paladin)!" would probably have been the most correct way to go about it. That's really a pretty minor quibble, though, and easily something overlooked by someone who isn't used to following correct police procedure for arresting people.

Not really a minor quibble, as it alters the reaction of the targets. And Miko, being the person who usually goes on assignments like this, should know what the proper procedure is.

[Gnoman]

So let me get this straight. If a random person walks up to you and orders you to accompany them or be summarily executed, you actually see any possible way that they are *not* being unreasonable?

[Tengu_temp]

It may not be important to you, but intentional disobedience vs. gross incompetence is a difference that will determine whether she falls in veti's campaign (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?343325-Was-Miko-treated-unfairly-by-the-narrative&p=17344443&viewfull=1#post17344443), so it's well worth considering.

I'd like to point out three things:
1. By the rules, a DND 3e paladin doesn't fall for committing a chaotic act. A paladin falls when s/he commits an evil act, or stops being lawful. A single chaotic act is not enough to stop being lawful, unless it's a really big one.
2. Following your orders is not always lawful, breaking your orders is not always chaotic. Same with the law. Does a paladin have to listen when ordered to kill an innocent, or obey a local law that states jaywalking is punishable by death?
3. Being a paladin is more about being good than being lawful. Lawful is also important, but a paladin for whom being lawful is more important than being good is on a slippery slope towards fall. Hell, this is exactly what happened to Miko.

[super dark33]

Instead of looking at good paladins (Hinjo O-Chul Lien) some people try to make good out of a bad one (Miko Miko Miko).

[Jaxzan Proditor]

One problem with all these cop analogies is that in those analogies, it is not shown how the cop is from an entirely different continent than the people they are arresting. Not only would the arrested people not recognize them as a cop, it is questionable what kind of authority they have.

[Koo Rehtorb]

So let me get this straight. If a random person walks up to you and orders you to accompany them or be summarily executed, you actually see any possible way that they are *not* being unreasonable?

It is conceivable that something unfortunate can happen without it being either side's fault.

[Koo Rehtorb]

One problem with all these cop analogies is that in those analogies, it is not shown how the cop is from an entirely different continent than the people they are arresting. Not only would the arrested people not recognize them as a cop, it is questionable what kind of authority they have.

Sure, agreed. It's more like a soldier killing a group of terrorists. I can think of a certain high profile case in the relatively recent past, that I won't cite specifically.

[David Argall]

Ok, but she didn't "try not to" at all. Even when Roy stopped actively fighting her and the rest of the Order was subdued, she still decided to go for the kill.
Resisting arrest is not limited to actively fighting. In fact doing absolutely nothing is flatly resisting arrest. He was offered the choice of surrender or die, and rejected surrender. His offer of not fighting for a moment, particularly when this seems likely to gain tactical advantage, was not surrender, and not grounds for ending any attack otherwise justified.



What do you mean there was no hurry or need? Shojo knew 2 of the 5 gates holding a world-eating and god-killing monstrosity (as far as he knew) were down. Of course there was reason to hurry.
There was what? 10? 20? years between gate destructions. That is not even strong support for any action at all, much less doing something right away. Indeed, Shojo is proposing a program that is quite inadequate if we assume any kind of rush.


Cop goes to criminals:

Cop: You are coming with me or you die.

Criminals: On what claims?

Cop: Die!
But our criminal did not say that. He said "I am not coming with you..."

[Jaxzan Proditor]

There was what? 10? 20? years between gate destructions.

To be more precise, around 27.

[veti]

So let me get this straight. If a random person walks up to you and orders you to accompany them or be summarily executed, you actually see any possible way that they are *not* being unreasonable?

It's worse than that. The challenge (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0200.html) wasn't "come with me or die", it was "come with me and die".

"ORDER OF THE STICK. You have been charged with crimes for which the only possible sentence is death. Surrender yourselves or have that sentence carried out immediately. The choice is yours!"

If the "only possible sentence" is death, and she considers herself authorised to "carry out" that sentence as if it had already been passed, the reasonable conclusion is that she's offering a choice between (a) fighting to the death here and now and (b) dying in a few strips' time, possibly after some quasi-legal formalities.


I'd like to point out three things:
1. By the rules, a DND 3e paladin doesn't fall for committing a chaotic act. A paladin falls when s/he commits an evil act, or stops being lawful. A single chaotic act is not enough to stop being lawful, unless it's a really big one.
2. Following your orders is not always lawful, breaking your orders is not always chaotic. Same with the law. Does a paladin have to listen when ordered to kill an innocent, or obey a local law that states jaywalking is punishable by death?
3. Being a paladin is more about being good than being lawful. Lawful is also important, but a paladin for whom being lawful is more important than being good is on a slippery slope towards fall. Hell, this is exactly what happened to Miko.

A paladin makes certain commitments, accepts restrictions on their freedom of action, and in return gets certain powers/class features. A paladin who shows that they're not willing to abide by those restrictions and commitments - falls. Simple.

Those restrictions include the bit about being good, yes. But they also, very importantly, include faithfulness. A faithless paladin is no paladin at all. And a paladin who wilfully disobeys their liege-lord - is faithless.

Miko didn't fall for being too lawful - quite the opposite. She fell precisely for considering herself to be above the laws she was sworn to uphold. Hinjo presented the lawful course of action to her, and she rejected it because she "knew better". That's not "too lawful".

[ryuplaneswalker]

But our criminal did not say that. He said "I am not coming with you..."

Well to be fair to Roy the next words out of his mouth were going to be

"I am not coming with you until you answer some questions"

Miko was treated unfairly by many folks, however she treated many of those people unfairly as well. Really the person at fault for all of it was Shojo who sent a paladin who has a history of having a short fuse into a situation he knew very little about.