Why are Miko's parents dead?

[Lacuna Caster]

This just occurred to me a few days ago. Why are Miko's parents dead?

I don't mean 'how did they die?', exactly, I mean 'why are they still dead?' Miko was presumably acquainted with at least one high-level cleric that can cast Resurrection, which allows you to revive someone dead for up to 10 years/level- and if she doesn't have the cash for diamonds herself she could probably beg a favour off Shojo.

As I see it, the potential explanations are (1) her parents were killed and their bodies destroyed specifically to prevent revival, (2) their bodies decomposed rather rapidly (https://www.quora.com/How-long-do-bones-last-after-they-are-buried) after death, (3) either Miko or Shojo is for some reason uninterested in raising them, or (4) they are unwilling to return.

Huh. ...Thoughts?

[Darth Paul]

The simple explanation is that they died of old age, like Eugene, which can't be solved by any kind of Resurrection. Quite possible. Maybe Miko was a late child just like Roy.

Or maybe they died in such a way that their bodies couldn't be recovered. (Eaten by monsters, storm at sea, washed away in a flood... I can go like this for a while...) And since Rich has stated that the True Resurrection doesn't exist or at least isn't going to appear in OotS, it certainly wasn't going to be used for her parents.

Also, Miko seems like she took a vow of poverty. She wouldn't readily accumulate 10,000 gp and then use it for the selfish goal of rezzing her own parents. More likely she would donate it to the Guard in the person of Lord Shojo.

I consider the latter most likely. Selflessness is a core principle for the paladin. Begging a resurrection for one's own parents is about as selfish as it gets. She would probably treat this desire like the Jedi in Star Wars- mere family attachments are secondary to her duty as a paladin. (Getting in early with the Star Wars reference!)

[Peelee]

This just occurred to me a few days ago. Why are Miko's parents dead?

I don't mean 'how did they die?', exactly, I mean 'why are they still dead?' Miko was presumably acquainted with at least one high-level cleric that can cast Resurrection, which allows you to revive someone dead for up to 10 years/level- and if she doesn't have the cash for diamonds herself she could probably beg a favour off Shojo.

As I see it, the potential explanations are (1) her parents were killed and their bodies destroyed specifically to prevent revival, (2) their bodies decomposed rather rapidly (https://www.quora.com/How-long-do-bones-last-after-they-are-buried) after death, (3) either Miko or Shojo is for some reason uninterested in raising them, or (4) they are unwilling to return.

Huh. ...Thoughts?

I think it's a simpler explanation; no access to the bodies. It's not like she'd dig up a graveyard, I don't think. Or, if you want to explore (3) more, by the time she had any pull or sway with powerful clerics, she'd figured that a divine reward of the afterlife would be something she shouldn't deprive them off. Probably a little of both.

[mjasghar]

If True Ressurection isn’t going to appear then there’s going to be a problem since Durkon had his body turned into dust

[hamishspence]

If True Ressurection isn’t going to appear then there’s going to be a problem since Durkon had his body turned into dust

Resurrection works on dust:

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/resurrection.htm

So long as some small portion of the creature’s body still exists, it can be resurrected, but the portion receiving the spell must have been part of the creature’s body at the time of death. (The remains of a creature hit by a disintegrate spell count as a small portion of its body.)

You can resurrect someone killed by a death effect or someone who has been turned into an undead creature and then destroyed.

[The Pilgrim]

(4) they are unwilling to return.

Must really damage your self-steem when you realize your parents prefer to remain dead rather than having to bear you.

[mjasghar]

Must really damage your self-steem when you realize your parents prefer to remain dead rather than having to bear you.
In a world where the afterlife is real and speak with the dead etc and people do go to real paradises - why would someone who has earned their reward want to return?
That was, after all, a key factor in the whole Durkon and his mother and the money thing

[Grey Watcher]

Also, Miko seems like she took a vow of poverty. She wouldn't readily accumulate 10,000 gp and then use it for the selfish goal of rezzing her own parents. More likely she would donate it to the Guard in the person of Lord Shojo.

I think this is probably the main reason, with a side order of Miko assuming their deaths are the will of the Gods somehow. We are talking about a woman who (in one of the print compilation bonus strips) interpreted a mysteriously vanished plum stain on her shirt as a message of divine import reaffirming the righteousness of her self-imposed quest to find an excuse to bring the Order to "justice."

[hamishspence]

In a world where the afterlife is real and speak with the dead etc and people do go to real paradises - why would someone who has earned their reward want to return?

The Giant had a reason:


Except, of course, that you will never improve at any skill you know, never have a say in what happens in the world, never have children if you haven't already, never talk to anyone with a different point of view, never experience any real risk, never visit anywhere else, and never see any friends or family members who did not share the exact same shade of alignment as you. Oh, and you can still be destroyed by evil adventurers, but you never get any better at defending yourself.

And that's the Lawful Good afterlife. Roy is talking about the entire world here, many of whom might be headed for less cushy situations.

Analogy time! If you were to take the National Football League and disband it, forcibly retiring everyone who plays, you would objectively be improving the long-term health prognosis of almost every player as well as giving them oodles of free time to study basketweaving and poetry. And yet every player would resist if they could, because playing football is important to their identity. Sure, they all know they will have to stop someday anyway, but all the more reason to treasure the playing time they have left.

I could easily see people who have "died early" being eager to get back the remainder of their allotted time on the Material Plane - feeling that they have lots of things left undone.

[Resileaf]

Miko's personal code, even above the paladin code she followed in the first place, made her be entirely opposed to gathering wealth for herself. She would have most likely reasonned that raising her parents would have been selfish. After all, she would be using that money to raise her own parents out of sentimentality, while there are countless people who lose their parents each year, and they'll never get the money to raise them.

[woweedd]

In a world where the afterlife is real and speak with the dead etc and people do go to real paradises - why would someone who has earned their reward want to return?
That was, after all, a key factor in the whole Durkon and his mother and the money thing
Because they have unfinished business back on Earth? Or they just want to see their family again, sooner rather then later?

Must really damage your self-steem when you realize your parents prefer to remain dead rather than having to bear you.
Yeah. It would probably give the poor kid massive trust issues, and an inability to properly express warmth or affection towards other people...Wait.

[Gift Jeraff]

And since Rich has stated that the True Resurrection doesn't exist or at least isn't going to appear in OotS, it certainly wasn't going to be used for her parents.

True resurrection does exist, though, since Dorukan said he had clerics trying to resurrect Lirian.

[woweedd]

True resurrection does exist, though, since Dorukan said he had clerics trying to resurrect Lirian.
It exists, but it's so rare that it might as well not, unless you have your friendly neighborhood Epic-level foot the bill.

[The Pilgrim]

Yeah. It would probably give the poor kid massive trust issues, and an inability to properly express warmth or affection towards other people...Wait.

Suddently I'm viewing Miko on a whole diferent way...

Guess The Giant was right when he wrote that it was better not to explore Belkar's infancy.

[Kish]

You might notice that while Eugene and Sara tried to have Eric resurrected immediately after he died, it never occurred to Roy to tell him, "So when I get back to the world of the living, I'll get Durkon to resurrect you, so make sure you accept the resurrection this time." It would be well within Durkon's power.

Most people who die in the OotS universe stay dead. Miko was an orphan. She was semi-adopted into the royal family. Resurrecting her parents was never a goal she had. That's not an anomaly that needs to be explained.

[Resileaf]

You might notice that while Eugene and Sara tried to have Eric resurrected immediately after he died, it never occurred to Roy to tell him, "So when I get back to the world of the living, I'll get Durkon to resurrect you, so make sure you accept the resurrection this time." It would be well within Durkon's power.

Most people who die in the OotS universe stay dead. Miko was an orphan. She was semi-adopted into the royal family. Resurrecting her parents was never a goal she had. That's not an anomaly that needs to be explained.

Technically she was put in a monastery for a large part of her life (presumably, since she must have at least 2 levels of monk according to the geekery thread), before she was recruited to the paladin order. I would assume that she was not really adopted in that case.

[Rrmcklin]

In a world where the afterlife is real and speak with the dead etc and people do go to real paradises - why would someone who has earned their reward want to return?
That was, after all, a key factor in the whole Durkon and his mother and the money thing

It was a key factor for Durkon and his Mother because of the specific, unfair arrangement dwarves have. Other people don't have to worry about having a ****ty afterlife even if they've been a good person just because of the way they died.

You shouldn't apply the dwarves way of thinking to everyone else, it's been shown that not all of the people of the world think that way.

[hamishspence]

Technically she was put in a monastery for a large part of her life (presumably, since she must have at least 2 levels of monk according to the geekery thread), before she was recruited to the paladin order. I would assume that she was not really adopted in that case.

She left the monastery at 13.

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0209.html

Regarding "adoption" - from The Giant:





Miko is not legally Shojo's daughter, but he did "adopt" her in the sense of taking her under his wing and mentoring her. As was mentioned in the main comic, she was only 13 at the time, so she would have been living under his roof rather than being on her own. As a result, both Miko and Hinjo were told to think of each other as cousins. As adults, they no longer see each other in that light, because they are not actually cousins and Miko's general behavior in the interim has already brought strain to that relationship. I'm sure they had a big falling out at some point, but that's not what the story was about so I didn't show it. And to be clear, I don't feel like I need to spell this out in the text just so that everyone can feel like all the dots connect.

For comparison:


Hinjo is supposed to be around 15-16

and in the story a point is made of how he's not "come of age" yet.

So, it's reasonable for her to, between 13 and 16, be counted as a minor.

[Resileaf]

She left the monastery at 13.

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0209.html

Regarding "adoption" - from The Giant:




For comparison:



and in the story a point is made of how he's not "come of age" yet.

So, it's reasonable for her to, between 13 and 16, be counted as a minor.

Oh, I see. I would have expected that to get those monk levels, she would have had to train as a monk until adulthood. My bad.

[hamishspence]

Oh, I see. I would have expected that to get those monk levels, she would have had to train as a monk until adulthood. My bad.

Keep in mind that in D&D, humans count as adults at 15, and the minimum age you need to be to be a 1st level Monk character is 17.

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/description.htm#age

Miko is about 5 years older than Hinjo - so, about 20 (maybe a very late 19 at the youngest, assuming minimum age for Hinjo) in Scar.

It's possible (maybe even likely) that she spent the 6+ years between leaving the Monastery, and Scar, in continuing her monk training - even if she wasn't in a "monkly environment" she may still have taken levels.

[Resileaf]

Keep in mind that in D&D, humans count as adults at 15, and the minimum age you need to be to be a 1st level Monk character is 17.

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/description.htm#age

Miko is about 5 years older than Hinjo - so, about 20 (maybe a very late 19 at the youngest, assuming minimum age for Hinjo) in Scar.

Good point. Should have remembered to take medieval adulthood into account. That would mean she was already pretty far into her training (I assume that living in a monastery would mean monk training early in her life rather than waiting to get to 15), which would make it natural to continue the training even if she was to become a paladin.

[hamishspence]

That would mean she was already pretty far into her training (I assume that living in a monastery would mean monk training early in her life rather than waiting to get to 15), which would make it natural to continue the training even if she was to become a paladin.

Indeed. it's worth noting that, in Scar, she's still a monk.


(I assume that living in a monastery would mean monk training early in her life rather than waiting to get to 15)

I tend to the view that, for many of the classes, training begins in childhood, and doesn't just take place between adulthood and Minimum Age For Class.


Should have remembered to take medieval adulthood into account.

We know at least that "Coming of Age" is after 15 in Azure City - probably 16 at the earliest.

[Resileaf]

I tend to the view that, for many of the classes, training begins in childhood, and doesn't just take place between adulthood and Minimum Age For Class.

We know at least that "Coming of Age" is after 15 in Azure City - probably 16 at the earliest.

I agree with you. The self-taught classes might be something that starts upon reaching adulthood easily (especially considering some of those, like sorcerers, are innate), but those that require long studies would begin even before adulthood, because to give yourself to such long studies, you'd need to be pretty dedicated about it early in your life.

[hamishspence]

The self-taught classes might be something that starts upon reaching adulthood easily (especially considering some of those, like sorcerers, are innate), but those that require long studies would begin even before adulthood, because to give yourself to such long studies, you'd need to be pretty dedicated about it early in your life.

A good example of Rogues who are probably under 16:

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0673.html

[Resileaf]

A good example of Rogues who are probably under 16:

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0673.html

Well, I wouldn't exactly call those studies, but point taken.

[hamishspence]

Well, I wouldn't exactly call those studies, but point taken.

The Oliver movie might be a good gauge of how such training might work in a fantasy world - especially a Genre-Savvy fantasy world.

[Resileaf]

The Oliver movie might be a good gauge of how such training might work in a fantasy world - especially a Genre-Savvy fantasy world.

Never seen it, I'm afraid, so I'll take your word for it.

[hamishspence]

Never seen it, I'm afraid, so I'll take your word for it.

Chief thief puts on a coat with many pockets with hankerchiefs, and the trainees have to pick-a-pocket-or-two without getting caught.

Other fiction has its own variants on "thief training" - generally emphasising that such training is hard work.

[Peelee]

Chief thief puts on a coat with many pockets with hankerchiefs, and the trainees have to pick-a-pocket-or-two without getting caught.

Other fiction has its own variants on "thief training" - generally emphasising that such training is hard work.

Like the bell test from TMNT (the good one)?

[hamishspence]

Like the bell test from TMNT (the good one)?

I've only seen the 1990 movie.

But Mercedes Lackey's Take a Thief, in the Valdemar series, definitely used "dummy with bells" as the pickpocketing training device.

[Resileaf]

Although this is pedantic, doesn't that go against the whole 'self-taught' deal? XD

[hamishspence]

I'm suggesting that Rogues at least can be a good example of the "training begins in childhood, with mentors, rather than being entirely self-taught" class.

Same might apply to some Fighters. Knights, for example, usually begin as pages and then squires.

[Peelee]

I've only seen the 1990 movie.

But Mercedes Lackey's Take a Thief, in the Valdemar series, definitely used "dummy with bells" as the pickpocketing training device.

Huh. Though it was in that one. Apparently it was the second one, Secret of the Ooze. Can't find a clip, but the best description I could find was on TVTropes:

In one scene, Raphael helps Keno cheat his way through a near-impossible test: removing a series of bells from a mannequin while unable to see due to using a smokescreen. In complete silence. As soon as the smokebomb clouds the room, Raph's faint silhouette can briefly be made out, and only the swift movements of his arms can be heard, before the smoke clears and Keno is holding every single bell. The scene expertly demonstrates that while the Turtles may walk around in broad daylight, wear terrible disguises, and ham it up in stealthy situations, they are still trained and professional ninja. Not only that, but the scene also demonstrates that despite his attitude and arguments with Splinter, Raph still takes his training very seriously.

[Ruck]

You might notice that while Eugene and Sara tried to have Eric resurrected immediately after he died, it never occurred to Roy to tell him, "So when I get back to the world of the living, I'll get Durkon to resurrect you, so make sure you accept the resurrection this time." It would be well within Durkon's power.

Most people who die in the OotS universe stay dead. Miko was an orphan. She was semi-adopted into the royal family. Resurrecting her parents was never a goal she had. That's not an anomaly that needs to be explained.

Yeah, exactly. We don't know why her parents died and for all we know she may never have actually known them. Why would that be a priority for her 20 years later-- especially if she didn't know them to the point she didn't know where their remains would be or maybe even who they were enough to target them with a True Resurrection?

[hamishspence]

Huh. Though it was in that one. Apparently it was the second one, Secret of the Ooze.

While I don't remember the details of that one nearly as well as the first - one scene I do think is gloriously quotable in other contexts:


Splinter: Were you seen?
Leonardo: Of course not, Master Splinter.
Donatello: We practiced ninja.
Michelangelo: The art of invisibility.
* Splinter holds up a newspaper with a picture of them on the front cover*
Splinter: Practice harder.

[Resileaf]

While I don't remember the details of that one nearly as well as the first - one scene I do think is gloriously quotable in other contexts:


The quality of a movie can be judged by how quotable it is. *sagenod*

[Ruck]

The quality of a movie can be judged by how quotable it is. *sagenod*

That's why the six best movies of the last 30 years are, chronologically, Wayne's World, Billy Madison, The Big Lebowski, Office Space, Super Troopers, and MacGruber.

[Peelee]

That's why the six best movies of the last 30 years are, chronologically, Wayne's World, Billy Madison, The Big Lebowski, Office Space, Super Troopers, and MacGruber.

I was about to protest on This is Spinal Tap's behalf, but you just edged it out by a few years.

Also, you should see In Bruges. I suspect you'll enjoy it.

[Jasdoif]

I was about to protest on This is Spinal Tap's behalf, but you just edged it out by a few years.Similarly, The Princess Bride is only a year off from the edge.

[Ruck]

I was about to protest on This is Spinal Tap's behalf, but you just edged it out by a few years.

Also, you should see In Bruges. I suspect you'll enjoy it.


Similarly, The Princess Bride is only a year off from the edge.

I almost said "The last 25 years" but I had to make sure Wayne's World, one of my all-time favorites, was included.

I've heard very good things about In Bruges. I don't make enough effort to watch movies like I used to but I need to check it out.

(Also, everyone should see MacGruber, which tanked at the box office but is indisputably a top-3 SNL movie.)

[Peelee]

I almost said "The last 25 years" but I had to make sure Wayne's World, one of my all-time favorites, was included.

I've heard very good things about In Bruges. I don't make enough effort to watch movies like I used to but I need to check it out.

(Also, everyone should see MacGruber, which tanked at the box office but is indisputably a top-3 SNL movie.)

In Bruges is dark. Like, seriously, it's really dark. It's the darkest comedy I've ever seen. It's also absolutely fantastic.

[Razade]

(4) they are unwilling to return.


This one right here.

The real answer of course is they're not important to the story. Even if they were alive, it wouldn't change their impact on the events that happened during the story. They're Schrodinger's Parents.

[Lacuna Caster]

Most people who die in the OotS universe stay dead. Miko was an orphan. She was semi-adopted into the royal family. Resurrecting her parents was never a goal she had.

I think this is probably the main reason, with a side order of Miko assuming their deaths are the will of the Gods somehow.
Conceivably, but that puts a rather dark spin on the origins of her believing 'everything is the Gods' plan'.


The real answer of course is they're not important to the story. Even if they were alive, it wouldn't change their impact on the events that happened during the story...
The OOTS storyline has gone some distance to emphasize parental influence on several major characters. I happen to think the importance of parenting is greatly exxaggerated (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Nurture_Assumption#Summary), but as far as the internal logic of the stickverse is concerned, it's implausible that radically different rearing conditions would have no impact on Miko's development.

On a related note:

Why did Gin-Jun stay dead? I'd assume his body would be brought back to the city for burial at least, and if he had any surviving family one might imagine, as nobles, they could foot the bill for a Raise Dead spell.

Also, how long were the Sapphire Guard AWOL? Did Shojo not, y'know, get curious about what his 15-year-old adoptive daughter was doing away from home all this time?

[Razade]

I didn't say it wouldn't have impacted Miko differently. I said it'd impact the story not at all. Miko needed to be the character she was to tell the story how it was. Her parents aren't really even mentioned throughout. They're not important to OoTS. They're important (in one sense at least) to Miko but this isn't her story.

Her parents being raised, not raised and why isn't a thing we need addressed. It literally contributes goose egg to the narrative. The fact she didn't have them is all we need to know to establish her life going forward.

[woweedd]

That's why the six best movies of the last 30 years are, chronologically, Wayne's World, Billy Madison, The Big Lebowski, Office Space, Super Troopers, and MacGruber.
Princess. Bride.

[Peelee]

Princess. Bride.
Swing and a miss.



the last 30 years are
I was about to protest on This is Spinal Tap's behalf, but you just edged it out by a few years.
Similarly, The Princess Bride is only a year off from the edge.

[Aeson]

To those saying that Miko could've had her parents resurrected, well, sure, at some point she probably could've had or obtained enough - or been owed enough favors by someone rich enough - to pay for their resurrection, but most likely what she knows of her parents is only what a small child would remember and a young orphan would be told or imagine, and by the time she might personally be able to pay for them to be resurrected she'd've had ten years or more to get used to them being dead. Bringing them back after they'd been dead for so long is a rather naive dream very likely to lead to disappointment when it turns out that Mom and Dad aren't the perfect people you imagined them to be but rather the imperfect people who they actually were.

More than that, they're ten years or more dead. Any worldly assets that they may have had are long gone - to their heirs, to their creditors, to whoever bought stuff at the estate sale, whatever - and they have no immediate means of supporting themselves. They also lack any particular connection with the modern world - the people that they knew while they were alive have presumably moved on with their lives or passed on, and the world they knew has changed. Bringing them back after they'd been dead so long would mean a lot of work to reintegrate them into society and at the very least someone would need to support them while they got their feet on the ground, because they'd need to rebuild their lives from approximately nothing.


Why did Gin-Jun stay dead? I'd assume his body would be brought back to the city for burial at least, and if he had any surviving family one might imagine, as nobles, they could foot the bill for a Raise Dead spell.
Someone needs to be able and willing to pay before someone gets resurrected, and even Raise Dead costs 5000gp worth of diamonds plus whatever it is to pay the caster for his, her, or its time and spell slot. Having rich relatives is no guarantee of getting resurrected; they also have to like you enough to be willing to drop a small fortune to bring you back - quite possibly without any guarantee of recompense beyond whatever pleasure they, or someone they care about, may gain from seeing you back among the living.

Also, the benefactor's money isn't the only consideration, especially when inheritance and succession are involved. Do I care enough about Dad/Mom/Uncle Bob/Cousin Jane to not only shell out for a Raise Dead or Resurrection or whatever was needed but also to put off inheriting from or succeeding them? Do I dislike Cousin Jane enough to resurrect Uncle Bob just to keep her from inheriting Bob's fortune or taking Bob's title for another few years? Are there special laws in place governing who can have someone resurrected and why, or what happens when the normal progression of inheritance and succession is messed up by someone getting resurrected? The game rules don't cover these kinds of things, but - especially when dealing with large amounts of money or lines of succession to positions of power - these are things that a society in which resurrections are possible would have to be able to deal with.

[Darth Paul]

True resurrection does exist, though, since Dorukan said he had clerics trying to resurrect Lirian.

I'm not 100% clear that a True Resurrection had to be used in that case, since the body was still around, the issue was locating the soul. I don't recall offhand how much time had passed after death, but I don't think it was beyond the reach of high-level clerics. I'm open to being wrong.

It's also possible that some type of house rule could be in effect since the soul in question still hadn't gone to the afterlife, but was right there and ready once a new body could be magically prepared. It was a one-in-a-million situation.

[hamishspence]

On a related note:
how long were the Sapphire Guard AWOL? Did Shojo not, y'know, get curious about what his 15-year-old adoptive daughter was doing away from home all this time?


Going by War & XPs ages at start of book, Miko was 19 going on 20 at minimum, not 15 - since she's 5 years older than Hinjo.

[Darth Paul]

True resurrection does exist, though, since Dorukan said he had clerics trying to resurrect Lirian.

I'm not 100% clear that a True Resurrection had to be used in that case, since the body was still around, the issue was locating the soul. I don't recall offhand how much time had passed after death, but I don't think it was beyond the reach of high-level clerics. I'm open to being wrong.

It's also possible that some type of house rule could be in effect since the soul in question still hadn't gone to the afterlife, but was right there and ready once a new body could be magically prepared. It was a one-in-a-million situation.


That's why the six best movies of the last 30 years are, chronologically, Wayne's World, Billy Madison, The Big Lebowski, Office Space, Super Troopers, and MacGruber.

Seriously?? :smallannoyed:

[RatElemental]

In a world where the afterlife is real and speak with the dead etc and people do go to real paradises - why would someone who has earned their reward want to return?
That was, after all, a key factor in the whole Durkon and his mother and the money thing

I don't see where speak with dead fits in there. The spell doesn't contact the person's soul, it interrogates their body. You can ask it what it knew in life (or undeath) but nothing it has learned since then. mostly because it can't learn anything new.

[Lacuna Caster]

Bringing them back after they'd been dead so long would mean a lot of work to reintegrate them into society and at the very least someone would need to support them while they got their feet on the ground, because they'd need to rebuild their lives from approximately nothing.

Someone needs to be able and willing to pay before someone gets resurrected, and even Raise Dead costs 5000gp worth of diamonds plus whatever it is to pay the caster for his, her, or its time and spell slot... ...the game rules don't cover these kinds of things, but - especially when dealing with large amounts of money or lines of succession to positions of power - these are things that a society in which resurrections are possible would have to be able to deal with.
I think one can assume that someone capable of scraping together 10,000 gold pieces each would be able to support those people financially for a couple years.

To be fair, we don't really know the circumstances of their death- like Darth Paul suggested, they might just have gone overboard during a storm and got eaten by dire crabs- but we... could be looking at a situation where gender-flipped-fantasy-Batman is somehow indifferent to bringing back back Thomas and Martha.

It's a fair enough point on Gin-Jun, I guess. I'd be inclined to wonder if the Jun Clan didn't send a few assassins after either Miko, Shojo, and/or O-Chul, though.


Going by War & XPs ages at start of book, Miko was 19 going on 20 at minimum, not 15 - since she's 5 years older than Hinjo.
I'm not sure that fits the implied timeline (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0209.html), which suggests that Miko was selected to become a samurai at age 13. (O-Chul also comments "you are a child!", which seems odd if she's visibly adult.) In any case, my point is it would be strange for Shojo to... not know what Miko was doing all this time, or for Miko to embark on a mission that Shojo didn't approve of or know about. One might imagine you'd Send to your daughter now and then and casually ask how her day went.

"Good, good, saw the blue mountains, entered goblin village, wiped out resistance. You? XOXO, Miko"

[goodpeople25]

To be fair, we don't really know the circumstances of their death- like Darth Paul suggested, they might just have gone overboard during a storm and got eaten by dire crabs- but we... could be looking at a situation where gender-flipped-fantasy-Batman is somehow indifferent to bringing back back Thomas and Martha.

On a surface look of that scenario I don't really see much strangness in a man whose eventual response to trauma was dressing up as a bat and beating up criminals appearing/being indifferent to having his parents brought back.

As for a deeper perspective taking in proper consideration of the characters involved.

Miko is Not gender-flipped-fantasy-Batman. So I don't really see the comparison.

[Lacuna Caster]

Miko is Not gender-flipped-fantasy-Batman. So I don't really see the comparison.
You're right. Batman never took a vow of poverty.

[hroþila]

I'm not 100% clear that a True Resurrection had to be used in that case, since the body was still around, the issue was locating the soul. I don't recall offhand how much time had passed after death, but I don't think it was beyond the reach of high-level clerics. I'm open to being wrong.
But Dorukan had no access to Lirian's body because Xykon had zombified it, so Resurrection wouldn't do regardless.

[woweedd]

You're right. Batman never took a vow of poverty.

Isn't Batman generally pretty disdainful of authority?

[hamishspence]

I'm not sure that fits the implied timeline (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0209.html), which suggests that Miko was selected to become a samurai at age 13. (O-Chul also comments "you are a child!", which seems odd if she's visibly adult.)

19 is a child to someone who is over 40.

And "samurai" is her social position, not her class. Plenty of room for her to spend 6-odd years as a Monk with the social position of Samurai.

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0209.html

[KorvinStarmast]

"dummy with bells" as the pickpocketing training device. In the movie Harry in Your Pocket with James Coburn, Katharine Ross, Laurence Olivier, and Michael Sarrazin the bells training method was nicely illustrated.

[Lacuna Caster]

Isn't Batman generally pretty disdainful of authority?
Sure, and Batman is willing to lie but doesn't kill. They are, however both fond of improvised gadgets, tactically astute, relentlessly self-disciplined, often work alone, employ surprise and misdirection, were aristocrats orphaned at a young age, are driven by sublimated anger, defend the helpless, value a code, and are known for being blunt and abrasive. There are some valid points of comparison.

My point being that if- if- Miko's parents died under more than usually tragic circumstances, it is quite easy to imagine that redressing this injustice would be important to her. (And given that she apparently had no relatives or retainers to raise her instead, that's far from impossible.)


19 is a child to someone who is over 40.
Earlier in this thread we were arguing that coming of age happens much sooner in medieval societies. Okay, fine, maybe she stayed a monk for 5 years. Doesn't answer why Shojo doesn't know what's she's doing. Is she not 'a child' in the eye of someone pushing 70?

[Goblin_Priest]

Why doesn't every single person who die get resurrected?

[Peelee]

Sure, and Batman is willing to lie but doesn't kill. They are, however both fond of improvised gadgets, tactically astute, relentlessly self-disciplined, often work alone, employ surprise and misdirection, were aristocrats orphaned at a young age, are driven by sublimated anger, defend the helpless, value a code, and are known for being blunt and abrasive. There are some valid points of comparison.

My point being that if- if- Miko's parents died under more than usually tragic circumstances, it is quite easy to imagine that redressing this injustice would be important to her. (And given that she apparently had no relatives or retainers to raise her instead, that's far from impossible.)


Earlier in this thread we were arguing that coming of age happens much sooner in medieval societies. Okay, fine, maybe she stayed a monk for 5 years. Doesn't answer why Shojo doesn't know what's she's doing. Is she not 'a child' in the eye of someone pushing 70?

Seems like he treated her just like he treated the Sapphire Guard during that time. You may not like it (I certainly don't), but it's not a mystery we need to dig deep to find the answer on. Dude was a "hands off" kinda guy there.

As to the parents, all you need is a "age couldn't for whatever reason," which certainly exists. Saying, "sure but it could have also happened in a way that gave her means, motive, and opportunity," is true but useless; you're effectively saying, it could have happened that way so if it did we need an explanation. But we don't. Just Occam it and figure she had no way to do it, why not.

[hamishspence]

Okay, fine, maybe she stayed a monk for 5 years. Doesn't answer why Shojo doesn't know what's she's doing. Is she not 'a child' in the eye of someone pushing 70?

He gave permission for her to join the Sapphire Guard, at least, so even if he doesn't know the details of what the Guard were doing - one would expect him to know at least, that they are "on mission".

[hroþila]

In addition to that, it's quite common for an older person to look at someone in their late teens/early 20s and think they're still a child for some things but an adult for others.

[Lacuna Caster]

Fine. "Shojo is oblivious and dire crabs ate her parents" it is.

[martianmister]

They could be executed, which explains Miko's need for greatness and fanaticism against crime.

[dps]

I'm not 100% clear that a True Resurrection had to be used in that case, since the body was still around, the issue was locating the soul. I don't recall offhand how much time had passed after death, but I don't think it was beyond the reach of high-level clerics. I'm open to being wrong.



If I understand the timeline of the story correctly, the length of time since her death still wouldn't be an issue to raising her.

There are, of course, other obstacles.

[GrayGriffin]

You might notice that while Eugene and Sara tried to have Eric resurrected immediately after he died, it never occurred to Roy to tell him, "So when I get back to the world of the living, I'll get Durkon to resurrect you, so make sure you accept the resurrection this time." It would be well within Durkon's power.

I'm not sure Roy could really explain that to Eric. He talked about it, but Eric just wanted to play blocks. Not to mention both his parents are still dead and his sister is in school, so there's no one who could really take care of him. Hilgya method notwithstanding.

[Anymage]

I get that there are drawbacks to being in heaven, but how much do they really apply to your average commoner? It's not like they were going to gain many levels anyways, and while they might well be sad about having lost friends they'll be able to make new ones with all the ideologically people they're surrounded by. Good and even neutrally aligned commoners probably aren't going to be horribly driven to get raised even if it wouldn't take much effort on their part.

So if they were commoners, they're content in the afterlife and bringing them back wouldn't change their long term situation much. If they were adventurers, the chance of dying by some irrecoverable means has just gone up appreciably. Either would fit the observations without requiring too much plot to shift around, so take your pick.

[hamishspence]

So if they were commoners, they're content in the afterlife and bringing them back wouldn't change their long term situation much.

According to Miko, they were nobles. While it's possible to stat out people in the noble caste with the commoner statblock, it would be rather unusual.

[Lacuna Caster]

They could be executed, which explains Miko's need for greatness and fanaticism against crime.

According to Miko, they were nobles. While it's possible to stat out people in the noble caste with the commoner statblock, it would be rather unusual.
That's not really Anymage's point. If they've been dead for 20+ years one would imagine they wouldn't be returning to conditions of material luxury, even if Miko could support them financially.

But as I see it, how comfortable the afterlife is is not the issue here. The question is whether someone's parents would want to be with their child. Because I'm pretty sure that for 90% of parents that knew their child for any length of time, the answer is, "yes, in a heartbeat."

But as far as I can tell, the only evidence here is as follows, and it's pretty tentative-
* Miko was not raised by relatives or retainers, which suggests either her parents were very minor nobles or their clan was wiped out.
* Miko's parents are never raised, which suggests either the bodies are unavailable, or Miko/Shojo/other rich relatives don't want to raise them, or they don't want to return.
* Miko identifies herself as 'daughter of Eyko', so ancestry must mean something to her.
* When dying, Miko asks whether she'll see windstriker again, rather than her parents, which suggests she either doesn't have much attachment to them or she doesn't expect they'd want to see her.

It's... sort of frustratingly suggestive without allowing any well-defined conclusions to be drawn, but I feel like there's something there.

[Peelee]

She was orphaned at a young age (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0209.html). Probably didn't remember her parents very well, depending on how young that age was.

[Darth Paul]

If I understand the timeline of the story correctly, the length of time since her death still wouldn't be an issue to raising her.

There are, of course, other obstacles.

Well then, maybe I'm correct about the spell. You're absolutely right about there being other issues, of course.

Namely, and in order: Dorukan would have to kill Xykon, recover the gem with Lirian's soul inside along with the zombie Lirian, either kill or escape the rest of the army, free her soul from the gem, kill the zombie body (somewhere tactfully out of sight) and then have Resurrection cast. He obviously had cleric allies ready to do this. The spell restores her body, as we saw it do with Roy's, at the same time reuniting her soul and body. Then it's just a matter of having the body already in a cozy bower for privacy when she comes back to life, and some wine and cheese on standby. :smallwink:

[CJG]

They were nobles living in a city that was full of backstabbing nobles. Pretty sure that’s what happened. And if you’re gonna Assassinate some nobles you better make sure they can’t just be rezzed in a day or two.
I agree that her youth at the time and monk training helped too.

[Lacuna Caster]

They were nobles living in a city that was full of backstabbing nobles. Pretty sure that’s what happened. And if you’re gonna Assassinate some nobles you better make sure they can’t just be rezzed in a day or two.
Yeah, it kinda raises the question of what the point to sending mere assassins after a member of the upper nobility would be, given that higher nobles are rich enough to afford raise dead/resurrection spells fairly trivially.

[Keltest]

Yeah, it kinda raises the question of what the point to sending mere assassins after a member of the upper nobility would be, given that higher nobles are rich enough to afford raise dead/resurrection spells fairly trivially.

All the assassins need to do is toss the bodies into the ocean, and those means of resurrection are all but impossible. Yeah, its not completely inconceivable that they would turn up again, be identified and be resurrected, but even if that happens it will be long enough away that their power base will have been broken.

[Lacuna Caster]

All the assassins need to do is toss the bodies into the ocean, and those means of resurrection are all but impossible. Yeah, its not completely inconceivable that they would turn up again, be identified and be resurrected, but even if that happens it will be long enough away that their power base will have been broken.
Yeah, but with powerful enough divinations it's not hard to find and retrieve the body.

(I mean, if the assassins in question can drag away the body without being noticed, they could dissolve it in a vat of acid or feed it to their dogs or have it cremated, or something, but the simplest thing is to just send a teleporting wizard who can cast disintegrate. Which isn't what Kubota & Co. generally seem to be doing.)

Of course, in a way, this might actually explain why the azurite nobility get away with as much of these stabby shenanigans as they apparently do- because most of it doesn't really kill anyone.

[RatElemental]

Even resurrection brings the subject back with one fewer level, or a lower con score if they were level 1. I imagine many of the nobles in Azure city are using the aristocrat class, which doesn't really lend itself to leveling up very much.

That said, there are some cheap means of making a raise even harder, such as dismembering the corpse to make raise dead not work, disposing of the body somehow to prevent resurrection, or even animated dead. Animate dead only costs 25 gp per hit die of the subject, and the giant seems to ignore that material cost anyway. You can then order your new unrecognizable skeleton to go march off to the nearest volcano or ravine and jump in.

[Peelee]

Yeah, it kinda raises the question of what the point to sending mere assassins after a member of the upper nobility would be, given that higher nobles are rich enough to afford raise dead/resurrection spells fairly trivially.


Yeah, but with powerful enough divinations it's not hard to find and retrieve the body.

(I mean, if the assassins in question can drag away the body without being noticed, they could dissolve it in a vat of acid or feed it to their dogs or have it cremated, or something, but the simplest thing is to just send a teleporting wizard who can cast disintegrate. Which isn't what Kubota & Co. generally seem to be doing.)

Of course, in a way, this might actually explain why the azurite nobility get away with as much of these stabby shenanigans as they apparently do- because most of it doesn't really kill anyone.

Given that we know this is how Azure City has worked for some time, we can safely assume that the assassins know what they're doing.

[Resileaf]

Raising the dead is expensive anyway. If children resurrected their parents, the nobility would run out of money quickly. Besides, raising a parent means that children lose out on earning their parents' holdings. Unless it's someone really important (like Kubota), or someone who set aside money for that express purpose (I bet Kubota did that), a dead noble stays dead.

[Kish]

the simplest thing is to just send a teleporting wizard who can cast disintegrate. Which isn't what Kubota & Co. generally seem to be doing.)
While assuming every noble has the unquestioning obedience of a level 11+ wizard who is a trained and ruthless assassin may in a mechanical sense be simpler, it should still go back to Tippyverse/Theoretical Optimization threads and not claim to have anything to do with actual stories and/or games.

[Peelee]

While assuming every noble has the unquestioning obedience of a level 11+ wizard who is a trained and ruthless assassin may in a mechanical sense be simpler, it should still go back to Tippyverse/Theoretical Optimization threads and not claim to have anything to do with actual stories and/or games.

Why require magic when mundane means are also possible? Dump the body in acid, feed it to animals, have the unquestioning obedience of a level 11+ wizard, raise the person yourself in a cell only you know about so that nobody else can, etc. etc. There's certainly a variety of methods to deny a corpse to those why may seek to raise the person. Or people just don't raise the dead often, even if they have the means and opportunity. Again, if assassins were a known concern for Azure City politics, I assume they knew what they were doing.

[Lacuna Caster]

While assuming every noble has the unquestioning obedience of a level 11+ wizard who is a trained and ruthless assassin may in a mechanical sense be simpler, it should still go back to Tippyverse/Theoretical Optimization threads and not claim to have anything to do with actual stories and/or games.
Kish, it's not an appeal to the Tippyverse to point at things that exist within the same story as setting a precedent for what one might reasonably expect to happen elsewhere in the story. (As if ubiquitous access to teleport (http://harrypotter.wikia.com/wiki/Apparition) and disintegrate (http://harrypotter.wikia.com/wiki/Bombarda_Maxima) spells was somehow incompatible with interesting stories/games.) I agree that level-11+ wizards may be something of a rarity in OOTSverse, but these other arguments are specious.


Raising the dead is expensive anyway. If children resurrected their parents, the nobility would run out of money quickly. Besides, raising a parent means that children lose out on earning their parents' holdings. Unless it's someone really important (like Kubota), or someone who set aside money for that express purpose (I bet Kubota did that), a dead noble stays dead.
Maybe someone can check my math here (*summon hamishpence*) but I vaguely recall that Azure City and it's hinterlands had something like a million residents? Assuming typical commoner income levels of around 30 GP per year, let's cautiously imagine that 10% of that trickles up the higher nobility, or 3 million GP in tax revenue per year.

If we're talking about absolute top-tier nobles like Shojo, Hinjo, the Daimyos and their immediate family, I imagine we can't be looking at more than 100-200 members of that class- so their typical income, under these assumptions, would be in the range of 15-30,000 GP annually.

Now, how much of that gets sunk into estate maintenance and lifestyle costs is an open question. And wealth might be concentrated differently- the commoners could be relatively prosperous, or Shojo might be hoarding most of the tax revenue, or the middle/lower nobility, merchants etc. could be taking a larger slice of the cheese. But I think one can say that unless the rate of assassination is very high, money per se is not the obstacle here.

[Razade]

Kish, it's not an appeal to the Tippyverse to point at things that exist within the same story as setting a precedent for what one might reasonably expect to happen elsewhere in the story. (As if ubiquitous access to teleport (http://harrypotter.wikia.com/wiki/Apparition) and disintegrate (http://harrypotter.wikia.com/wiki/Bombarda_Maxima) spells was somehow incompatible with interesting stories/games.) I agree that level-11+ wizards may be something of a rarity in OOTSverse, but these other arguments are specious.

No, Kish is right on the money here. We're told pretty expressly by Qarr that level 10+ characters are something of a rarity. To think that people could just have them on call would be to presume something the setting doesn't support and just because you can point to other series that have these things doesn't mean that this story does or that it'd work here. We don't hear about teleporting rocket tag assassins in Harry Potter either do we?



Maybe someone can check my math here (*summon hamishpence*) but I vaguely recall that Azure City and it's hinterlands had something like a million residents? Assuming typical commoner income levels of around 30 GP per year, let's cautiously imagine that 10% of that trickles up the higher nobility, or 3 million GP in tax revenue per year.

How, where, what? Where'd you even come up with that number. Are we ever told that in the story? I doubt it. I don't really care what theory crafting the forums do, word of God or bust.


If we're talking about absolute top-tier nobles like Shojo, Hinjo, the Daimyos and their immediate family, I imagine we can't be looking at more than 100-200 members of that class- so their typical income, under these assumptions, would be in the range of 15-30,000 GP annually.

With no basis for your math, we can't assume anything.

[Lacuna Caster]

No, Kish is right on the money here. We're told pretty expressly by Qarr that level 10+ characters are something of a rarity...
Which is the part I agree with. Everything else, not so much.

And we do, in fact, hear about teleporting rocket tag assassins (http://harrypotter.wikia.com/wiki/Death_Eaters) in Harry Potter. Continuously, really.


How, where, what? Where'd you even come up with that number. Are we ever told that in the story?
I think the population estimate is given in some of the supplemental book material, but I can't swear to it. 1 silver piece per day is a standard income for commoners under default D&D rules. Either way, one can reasonably expect higher nobility to be pretty damn rich by smallfolk standards.


EDIT: If you want a slightly more direct line of evidence, there's an exchange in O-Chul's story where Bao(?) tells Hinjo that she joined the army for 25 gold pieces.

Hinjo: "You joined the army for 25 gold pieces?"
Bao: "I know! Can you believe it was that much?"

Hinjo: "Money isn't everything."
Bao: "Said no peasant ever."

...I think this gives some indication of their relative expectations when it comes to living standards.

[martianmister]

Whole resurrection thing puts Lord Shojo's reasons for feigning madness into doubt. Maybe he was mad after all, as I suspect.

[woweedd]

Whole resurrection thing puts Lord Shojo's reasons for feigning madness into doubt. Maybe he was mad after all, as I suspect.
Dying still ****ing hurts. Plus, it lets him do what he wants without having to hear the nobles' endless bellyaching, and it keeps him beneath suspicion.

[martianmister]

Still, it's a stupid plan to assassinate the lord of your city when resurrection is a thing.

[Peelee]

Still, it's a stupid plan to assassinate the lord of your city when resurrection is a thing.

And given that the lords and assassins know resurrection is a thing, it would make sense to plan for that accordingly.

[Kish]

If I were to speculate, I would guess that if Hinjo had been assassinated and the hobgoblin siege repelled, Kubota would have moved immediately to get himself established as Lord of Azure City before any of the Azurite clerics, who were loyal to the office of Lord (not to Hinjo personally), could be brought to resurrect him.

If Hinjo had been assassinated and Azure City had still fallen as it did, there wouldn't have been any trouble ensuring Hinjo stayed dead; his body, like Roy's, would have been stuck behind enemy lines. The rationality of Kubota's fixation on becoming ruler of the Azure City refugees aside, he unambiguously was willing to go to great lengths for it.

If Shojo had been assassinated not in wartime in a situation where he wouldn't refuse to come back, it would have been much trickier to keep him dead.

[RatElemental]

Still, it's a stupid plan to assassinate the lord of your city when resurrection is a thing.

You can only come back so many times before the level drain followed by con drain leaves you dying to a stiff breeze, and finally dead for good.

[Jasdoif]

....but I vaguely recall that Azure City and it's hinterlands had something like a million residents?The Stick Planet Travel Guide excerpt listed the nation's population as 530,000; about half of which lived within the city itself.

[Lacuna Caster]

The Stick Planet Travel Guide excerpt listed the nation's population as 530,000; about half of which lived within the city itself.
I stand corrected.


Whole resurrection thing puts Lord Shojo's reasons for feigning madness into doubt. Maybe he was mad after all, as I suspect.
I think feigning madness was not a smart move for a variety of reasons, but not specifically because Shojo had nothing to fear from death. (Though I do think comparing Durkon's attitude to accepting resurrection (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1134.html) with Shojo's apparent disinterest (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0410.html) in that option says something about their respective motivations.)

[Keltest]

I stand corrected.


I think feigning madness was not a smart move for a variety of reasons, but not specifically because Shojo had nothing to fear from death. (Though I do think comparing Durkon's attitude to accepting resurrection (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1134.html) with Shojo's apparent disinterest (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0410.html) in that option says something about their respective motivations.)

I think belkar nails why Shojo wont come back pretty well myself. Theyre trying to drag him back so they can arrest him and put him on trial. On top of that he could well die of old age before they finish anyway. Durkon on the other hand is in his prime, and will be brought back because his friends like him.

[Lacuna Caster]

I think belkar nails why Shojo wont come back pretty well myself. Theyre trying to drag him back so they can arrest him and put him on trial. On top of that he could well die of old age before they finish anyway. Durkon on the other hand is in his prime, and will be brought back because his friends like him.
Durkon is also risking an outside chance of eternal damnation by coming back to the land of the living. Now, sure, we can't all be Durkon, but for someone who claims "Everything I did, I did for my people", it's notable that in his people's (and Hinjo's) greatest hour of need, Shojo either (A) didn't think there was much he could do to help or (B) assigned greater value to his personal comfort and well-being. Apparently, by Shojo's estimation, Miko did him a favour.

[Peelee]

Durkon is also risking an outside chance of eternal damnation by coming back to the land of the living. Now, sure, we can't all be Durkon, but for someone who claims "Everything I did, I did for my people", it's notable that in his people's (and Hinjo's) greatest hour of need, Shojo either (A) didn't think there was much he could do to help or (B) assigned greater value to his personal comfort and well-being. Apparently, by Shojo's estimation, Miko did him a favour.

What could be have done to help? He would have been arrested, not been in power, and everything would likely have gone just like it did anyway.

[Kish]

What could be have done to help? He would have been arrested, not been in power, and everything would likely have gone just like it did anyway.
Setting aside the people on this forum who have argued that Shojo wouldn't actually have faced criminal charges that would have led to his imprisonment--

--because I gather from the question that you find that argument as uncompelling as I do--

--I also find it unlikely that between Hinjo and the Order, there's not a single person who would have taken tactical advice from a prisoner, and also there's nothing Shojo the Prisoner could have done to reduce suspicion that Hinjo's ascending to the throne was actually a coup from the level it was at with him dead.

(Shojo would likely have been maneuvering to put himself back on top to the end, in my estimation, but that, like Shojo remaining dead, would have been Shojo making a [bad] moral choice.)

[Rrmcklin]

I'm not actually sure what advice Shojo would have to offer at that point, or how Hinjo accepting said advice wouldn't make things worse.

[woweedd]

I'm not actually sure what advice Shojo would have to offer at that point, or how Hinjo accepting said advice wouldn't make things worse.
"Reduce suspicion that Hinjo's ascending to the throne was actually a coup from the level it was at with him dead."

[Rrmcklin]

Oh, right, that was a thing.

[martianmister]

I think belkar nails why Shojo wont come back pretty well myself.

I'm not sure how escaping from justice is something in his favour.

[Peelee]

I'm not sure how escaping from justice is something in his favour.

In his favor of what?

[Keltest]

I'm not sure how escaping from justice is something in his favour.

Escaping justice for what? Tricking the paladins? Because as far as im aware he hasn't actually committed any crimes, he simply used deception to protect his health and well being. Heck, its entirely possible that they wouldn't even be able to remove him from power as lord of Azure City.

[hroþila]

I disagree, but I don't think anyone's in the mood to rehash that particular debate. At any rate, whatever the appropriate penalty might be under Azurite law, Shojo already paid with his life, so it's not like he got off scot-free either.

[hamishspence]

Because as far as im aware he hasn't actually committed any crimes, he simply used deception to protect his health and well being.

"Trial-rigging" was the main one.

The Sapphire Guard apparently consider themselves above the laws of other countries - so, "sending Miko to kidnap Roy & company from whatever jurisdiction they happen to be in" may not count as a crime to them.

[Keltest]

"Trial-rigging" was the main one.

The Sapphire Guard apparently consider themselves above the laws of other countries - so, "sending Miko to kidnap Roy & company from whatever jurisdiction they happen to be in" may not count as a crime to them.

The trial was done under the authority of the Sapphire Guard, not as lord of Azure City. Again, he probably wouldn't be allowed to continue leading the paladins, but they would seriously struggle to unseat him as Lord of Azure City.

[hamishspence]

While he's not actually guilty - Miko's accusations of treason against the city (through conspiring with Xykon) would at least need to be dealt with, if he came back.

[Lacuna Caster]

The trial was done under the authority of the Sapphire Guard, not as lord of Azure City. Again, he probably wouldn't be allowed to continue leading the paladins, but they would seriously struggle to unseat him as Lord of Azure City.
He also arranged for Belkar to be let out 'on parole', only you know, illegally, and I'm fairly sure Belkar was imprisoned for crimes that Azure City's legal system does recognise. (Also, the Linear Guild were being held without trial for crimes in a different jurisdiction, which is probably somewhat irregular.) Roy, incidentally, was an accomplice/conspirator in both cases.

[Keltest]

While he's not actually guilty - Miko's accusations of treason against the city (through conspiring with Xykon) would at least need to be dealt with, if he came back.

That's... questionable, given that she then went insane and tried to murder a half dozen people. More likely, Hinjo would raise a fuss about potential other potential deceptions hiding actual crimes. At that point several different things could happen which would delay Shojo getting his throne back, possibly until the end of his life depending on how long he has left, but as far as we have been shown he hasn't actually gone and subverted Azure City's laws in such a way that he could be criminally charged, so if he lived through the investigation theres nothing to indicate that he wouldn't still remain the legitimate lord.


He also arranged for Belkar to be let out 'on parole', only you know, illegally, and I'm fairly sure Belkar was imprisoned for crimes that Azure City's legal system does recognise. (Also, the Linear Guild were being held without trial for crimes in a different jurisdiction, which is probably somewhat irregular.) Roy, incidentally, was an accomplice/conspirator in both cases.

Hinjo did so as well, before the battle for Azure City, so clearly it is within the authority of the lord to do so.

[hamishspence]

He also arranged for Belkar to be let out 'on parole', only you know, illegally, and I'm fairly sure Belkar was imprisoned for crimes that Azure City's legal system does recognise.

Belkar may not be the only one:

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0602.html

possibly "give Mark of Justice, and release" is an extralegal solution he uses a lot.

[Lacuna Caster]

Hinjo did so as well, before the battle for Azure City, so clearly it is within the authority of the lord to do so.
If you do it through legal channels and had the right rationale, maybe. But Shojo didn't, which is precisely why Belkar had to hide from all the paladins while walking around the city/castle.

Frankly, I'd be astonished if these were the only irregularities turned up by a scrupulous investigation of Shojo's past decision-making (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?545494-Questions-about-the-early-strip-and-Sapphire-Guard).

[Keltest]

If you do it through legal channels and had the right rationale, maybe. But Shojo didn't, which is precisely why Belkar had to hide from all the paladins while walking around the city/castle.

Frankly, I'd be astonished if these were the only irregularities turned up by a scrupulous investigation of Shojo's past decision-making (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?545494-Questions-about-the-early-strip-and-Sapphire-Guard).

Belkar hid from the paladins because it would raise questions as to why he was let out and what Shojo wanted him to do. There is no specific indication that Shojo would not have been within his authority to do so, only questions as to his motives that he did not want.

[Lacuna Caster]

Belkar hid from the paladins because it would raise questions as to why he was let out and what Shojo wanted him to do...
Yes, subverting the course of justice does tend to raise eyebrows that way.

In any case, Hinjo explicitly remarks (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0420.html) that the Mark of Justice is not a part of Azure City's legal system and that his uncle was operating outside the system to get Belkar out. For heaven's sake- does installing an illusory prisoner in the cells look like the actions of someone who's confident of the legality of his actions?

[Keltest]

Yes, subverting the course of justice does tend to raise eyebrows that way.

In any case, Hinjo explicitly remarks (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0420.html) that the Mark of Justice is not a part of Azure City's legal system and that his uncle was operating outside the system to get Belkar out. For heaven's sake- does installing an illusory prisoner in the cells look like the actions of someone who's confident of the legality of his actions?

Historically speaking, lords had fairly broad reach in administering justice. While they don't call it out much, Shojo and Hinjo are dictators. He quite probably had the legal ability to do everything he did, and nobody could say anything to the contrary except maybe if the nobles inexplicably all banded together.

He's specifically hiding from the paladins, who are not part of the Azure City hierarchy (or rather, their primary duties lie outside it. Many of them likely hold formal titles and rank within the city as well), and who could probably remove him from power within their own organization.

And as far as the Mark of Justice goes, Hinjo literally uses it against Belkar as Shojo does, just for different goals.

[Lacuna Caster]

Historically speaking, lords had fairly broad reach in administering justice. While they don't call it out much, Shojo and Hinjo are dictators. He quite probably had the legal ability to do everything he did, and nobody could say anything to the contrary except maybe if the nobles inexplicably all banded together...

...And as far as the Mark of Justice goes, Hinjo literally uses it against Belkar as Shojo does, just for different goals.
Hinjo uses the fact he's not legally obliged to remove the Mark as leverage. That's rather different from applying it in the first place. If the argument on Shojo you're making is that an autocrat is effectively above the law, then there is literally nothing Shojo could do that would be considered illegal.

In any case, going back to the earlier point that started this exchange, how does this make Shojo's refusal to accept Resurrection look better? If it's genuinely the case that Shojo did nothing prosecutable and he wasn't going to face imprisonment while alive, then why exactly did he refuse to return and help organise the defences? Either Shojo himself reckoned he did something sufficiently criminal to threaten his own liberty, or he didn't care what happened to the city.

[Keltest]

Hinjo uses the fact he's not legally obliged to remove the Mark as leverage. That's rather different from applying it in the first place. If the argument on Shojo you're making is that an autocrat is effectively above the law, then there is literally nothing Shojo could do that would be considered illegal.

In any case, going back to the earlier point that started this exchange, how does this make Shojo's refusal to accept Resurrection look better? If it's genuinely the case that Shojo did nothing prosecutable and he wasn't going to face imprisonment while alive, then why exactly did he refuse to return and help organise the defences? Either Shojo himself reckoned he did something sufficiently criminal to threaten his own liberty, or he didn't care what happened to the city.

Trials and investigations take time, during which he would be, if not imprisoned, then at least confined and under suspicion. He would absolutely not be allowed to help with the defenses given the suspect nature of his rule, and the time it would take to clear things up would be too late for Azure City. On top of that, he was nearing the end of his natural lifespan anyway, so what exactly does he have to come back to?

[Morty]

Arguing for the moral and legal obligation to return from the dead when someone tries to resurrect you after getting murdered by a vigilante... I'm not sure if it's a new one or if it feels like 2007 all over again.

[Lacuna Caster]

Trials and investigations take time, during which he would be, if not imprisoned, then at least confined and under suspicion. He would absolutely not be allowed to help with the defenses...
So... Hinjo is willing to recruit murderers and necrophiles to his cause during the siege, but he wouldn't take advice from his own uncle?

The question of "what does he have to come back to" seems to be tackling the problem from the wrong angle. Shojo is ostensibly Chaotic Good. His primary concern should be ensuring the welfare of his nephew, adoptive daughter, city, and planet. I would say that even a modest chance of safeguarding those would be worth the temporary privation of a prison cell, let alone the temporary inconvenience of a legal investigation.

[Keltest]

So... Hinjo is willing to recruit murderers and necrophiles to his cause during the siege, but he wouldn't take advice from his own uncle?

The question of "what does he have to come back to" seems to be tackling the problem from the wrong angle. Shojo is ostensibly Chaotic Good. His primary concern should be ensuring the welfare of his nephew, adoptive daughter, city, and planet. I would say that even a modest chance of safeguarding those would be worth the temporary privation of a prison cell, let alone the temporary inconvenience of a legal investigation.

I am, at the very least, somewhat pleased that you have never been accused of treason, but I think you need to re-read the sequence of events that lead to Shojo's death, and pay special attention to how Hinjo is acting. His is not an attitude of "this is a betrayal on a personal level with no legal repercussions." so much as "this man may well be destroying the rule of law in Azure City and is not to be taken at his word alone."

So yes, I think he would absolutely not be willing to trust his uncle, on account of the massive breach of trust he just discovered.

[Lacuna Caster]

I am, at the very least, somewhat pleased that you have never been accused of treason, but I think you need to re-read the sequence of events that lead to Shojo's death...
I have. And I note, for example, that after Shojo refused to return, Hinjo expressed (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0410.html) with disappointment "it looks like I'm on my own, then." This sounds like someone who was looking for all the help he could get, and from a fairly specific quarter.

[hamishspence]

His primary concern should be ensuring the welfare of his nephew, adoptive daughter, city, and planet.

After getting killed once through trying to do this,

it makes sense that he'd think "I've already given everything I reasonably can - including my own life."

[Peelee]

Huh. It just occurred to me to wonder why they tried Resurrection instead of Raise Dead.

[Lacuna Caster]

After getting killed once through trying to do this... ...it makes sense that he'd think "I've already given everything I reasonably can - including my own life."
Durkon doesn't think so, and Roy didn't think so, and it's not like their future prospects are nothing but sunshine and daisies.

I'm not saying that taking the easy way out isn't understandable... but it's also a basically selfish decision. Which, given the stakes of the situation, does not reflect especially well on the late Lord Shojo. He basically took an opportunity to run away.

.

[Peelee]

Durkon doesn't think so, and Roy didn't think so, and it's not like their future prospects are nothing but sunshine and daisies.

Different people think differently. News at 11.

[Lacuna Caster]

Different people think differently. News at 11.
Yes. People who place primary value on the well-being of others make different decisions from people looking out their own interests. That's rather my point.

[hamishspence]

He basically took an opportunity to run away.


After being forcibly exiled from the Material Plane, unjustly, he chose not to respond to requests to return. Not quite the same thing as "running away".

Shojo is Chaotic Good - but "Good" doesn't mean "Perfectly unselfish" - it just means "Mostly unselfish".

[hroþila]

Huh. It just occurred to me to wonder why they tried Resurrection instead of Raise Dead.
I imagine that the cleric was en route to resurrect the teleporting wizard, who was well beyond the help of a Raise Dead spell, and thus the cleric may not have prepared it.

[Peelee]

I imagine that the cleric was en route to resurrect the teleporting wizard, who was well beyond the help of a Raise Dead spell, and thus the cleric may not have prepared it.

Unless I hear anything better or from the author directly, I'm headcanoning this. Fits really well. Thanks!

[hamishspence]

for someone who claims "Everything I did, I did for my people", it's notable that in his people's (and Hinjo's) greatest hour of need, Shojo either (A) didn't think there was much he could do to help or (B) assigned greater value to his personal comfort and well-being. Apparently, by Shojo's estimation, Miko did him a favour.

More likely, for a short period (a day or two?) after being killed, he was angry and resentful:

"So this is how I get treated after a lifetime of trying to do what's in their best interests".

and acted accordingly.


Possibly, if the CG afterlife has the same ability to "scry the Material Plane" he might have seen how badly the Siege of Azure City turned out, and regretted his refusal to return. We'll probably never know.

[Lacuna Caster]

More likely, for a short period (a day or two?) after being killed, he was angry and resentful...
Toward whom? Hinjo? The city? The entire material plane? I can totally understand him being distinctly annoyed with Miko, but plenty of innocent people besides her were in jeopardy at the time.

[Keltest]

Toward whom? Hinjo? The city? The entire material plane? I can totally understand him being distinctly annoyed with Miko, but plenty of innocent people besides her were in jeopardy at the time.

And again, what is he actually going to do? Besides get imprisoned pending his trial, I mean?

[Lacuna Caster]

And again, what is he actually going to do? Besides get imprisoned pending his trial, I mean?
I suppose we will never know, Keltest. I can only say it looked like Hinjo had some expectation that his advice and experience would be useful, but maybe he was off the mark. I don't know for sure.

The usual argument I've heard- and what is implied by the strip- is that Miko was in some sense to blame for the soldiers' poor morale and noble defections among the azurites, possibly leading to the hobgoblins' victory, because Shojo died under unclear circumstances. I would counter that to whatever extent the city suffered from Shojo's death, that was entirely his own decision. And to the extent that Shojo couldn't have helped from prison, Miko is not responsible for his actual crimes.

.

[Keltest]

I suppose we will never know, Keltest. I can only say it looked like Hinjo had some expectation that his advice and experience would be useful, but maybe he was the mark. I don't know for sure.

The usual argument I've heard- and what is implied by the strip- is that Miko was in some sense to blame for the soldiers' poor morale and noble defections among the azurites, possibly leading to the hobgoblins' victory, because Shojo died under unclear circumstances. I would counter that to whatever extent the city suffered from Shojo's death, that was entirely his own decision. And to the extent that Shojo couldn't have helped from prison, Miko is not responsible for his actual crimes.

So let me get this straight. You believe Shojo is morally compelled to come back from the dead and be thrown in prison so that he can participate in the defense of Azure City in some unknown manner you yourself can neither identify nor explain how he will be in a position to actually do this. Additionally, you do not believe his stated reasons for subterfuge (namely, keeping the paladins in the dark) and instead believe him guilty of legitimate crimes which you also cannot identify as being distinct from legitimate actions taken by the other Lord seen in the comic.

Im going to be honest here, you seem as confused as Miko.

[Resileaf]

I suppose we will never know, Keltest. I can only say it looked like Hinjo had some expectation that his advice and experience would be useful, but maybe he was off the mark. I don't know for sure.

The usual argument I've heard- and what is implied by the strip- is that Miko was in some sense to blame for the soldiers' poor morale and noble defections among the azurites, possibly leading to the hobgoblins' victory, because Shojo died under unclear circumstances. I would counter that to whatever extent the city suffered from Shojo's death, that was entirely his own decision. And to the extent that Shojo couldn't have helped from prison, Miko is not responsible for his actual crimes.

.

As if the nobles would have participated to the battle even if Shojo was still alive. They would have weaseled out somehow, no matter what happened.

[Lacuna Caster]

Im going to be honest here, you seem as confused as Miko.
Keltest, not so long ago you were arguing that Shojo did nothing legally wrong and the paladins would have a hard time removing him from office. Now you're arguing his imprisonment was so certain that he had nothing to live for and no wiggle room to influence events.

Maybe he'd have had some information about the nobles that could be used as leverage to coerce them. Maybe having him under 'house arrest' or 'pending investigation' would be easier to explain/lie-about than dropping suddenly dead. Maybe he'd have some general experience in military tactics and could improve their overall battle plan. I don't know. But again, Hinjo found a use for Belkar, of all people. I don't see him failing to find a use for a 14th-level aristocrat with Improved Paranoia.

.

[Keltest]

Keltest, not so long ago you were arguing that Shojo did nothing legally wrong and the paladins would have a hard time removing him from office. Now you're arguing his imprisonment was so certain he had nothing to live for and no wiggle room to influence events.

Maybe he'd have had some information about the nobles that could be used as leverage to coerce them. Maybe having him under 'house arrest' or 'pending investigation' would be easier to explain/lie-about than dropping suddenly dead. I don't know. But again, Hinjo found a use for Belkar, of all people. I don't see him failing to find a use for a 14th-level aristocrat with Improved Paranoia.

His arrest is absolutely certain. His conviction is unlikely, but theres still a period of time between the two where Shojo is out of commission.

And given that your entire claim rests on him being able to make a meaningful contribution to the defense, you may want to do better than "I don't know."

[Peelee]

Yes. People who place primary value on the well-being of others make different decisions from people looking out their own interests. That's rather my point.

More to my point, Roy and Durkon were killed by Evil undead abominations who were actively opposing their attempts to save the world. Shojo was killed by a Lawful Good Paladin who was his ally and subordinate. So having a different feeling on "I have everything including my life" is pretty understandable there, even ignoring all other aspects (PCs vs NPC, prime-of-their-lives vs coming up in the dice roll of old-age-death, etc. etc.).

[Jasdoif]

Maybe he'd have had some information about the nobles that could be used as leverage to coerce them. Maybe having him under 'house arrest' or 'pending investigation' would be easier to explain/lie-about than dropping suddenly dead. Maybe he'd have some general experience in military tactics and could improve their overall battle plan. I don't know. But again, Hinjo found a use for Belkar, of all people. I don't see him failing to find a use for a 14th-level aristocrat with Improved Paranoia.I have pondered this before.



But it's an interesting question. What would happen after Shojo was resurrected?


http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i294/trytoguess/Shojo.png: Well, time to talk defensive strategy, I suppose.
http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a311/estelindis/hinjo.gif: Uncle, did you miss the part about being placed under arrest?
http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i294/trytoguess/Shojo.png: Do you "officially have time for this" all of a sudden, Hinjo?
http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a311/estelindis/hinjo.gif: To have the magistrates put you in jail? Yes, I think there's officially time for that.
http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i294/trytoguess/Shojo.png: How about to learn how to organize the entire city's defenses, including dealing with all the nobles, before Xykon arrives tomorrow? Half a million lives depend on your answer.
http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a311/estelindis/hinjo.gif: Uncle, you're not seriously trying to guilt me into letting you get away with this, are you?
http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i294/trytoguess/Shojo.png: "Guilt"? You're next in line, nephew. If I'm removed from this fancy chair, the responsibility for the nation goes directly to you. That is how the legitimate authority you and your fellow paladins are supposed to respect works, is it not?
http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a311/estelindis/hinjo.gif: ....
http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i294/trytoguess/Shojo.png: And everyone outside this room is innocent. Will Xykon think twice about killing them anyway?
:roy:: I'd be surprised if he thought once about it....
http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i294/trytoguess/Shojo.png: So. How many lives are you willing to bet on your experience versus mine?
http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a311/estelindis/hinjo.gif: ....
http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i294/trytoguess/Shojo.png: Besides. Where's your proof for whatever you intend to charge me with?
http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a311/estelindis/hinjo.gif: Are you kidding, Uncle? Miko and I both heard you.
http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i294/trytoguess/Shojo.png: Right. Miko, who has so much respect for the law she jumped straight to an execution. And you, who in no way stands to gain the crown by deposing me. How well do you think that's going to stand up in court?
http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a311/estelindis/hinjo.gif: Pretty well, after the diviners and Celestial representatives verify the statements.
http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i294/trytoguess/Shojo.png: Ah yes, because there's not something more pressing like, oh, a giant army of hobgoblins led by a lich that our more powerful clerics should prepare spells for instead.
http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a311/estelindis/hinjo.gif: I'm still obligated to arrest you.
http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i294/trytoguess/Shojo.png: Of course, of course. But is there any sense in doing it before you can reasonably act on the arrest?
http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a311/estelindis/hinjo.gif: You think you can just walk around like nothing has happened? You were killed, Uncle! People are going to talk.
http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i294/trytoguess/Shojo.png: I'm pleased to see you're more perceptive than some other paladins I could name. But that's not a problem. Miko came here to warn us about the army, but it seems her mind was affected after her encounter with the lich.
:belkar:: Oh she's affected alright....
http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i294/trytoguess/Shojo.png: And since Mr. Scruffy doesn't hold a grudge, we're keeping her restrained until we can figure out what's wrong with her.
http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a311/estelindis/hinjo.gif: But...that's dishonest.
http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i294/trytoguess/Shojo.png: So? Deception isn't against the paladin code. Why, I've heard it only matters what you take--
http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a311/estelindis/hinjo.gif: Uncle! You know full well we can't reference quotes that won't happen for five hundred more strips, not even in an alternate timeline!
http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i294/trytoguess/Shojo.png: Oh. Right. Well Hinjo, it's up to you: Are you going to let a little thing like a decades-long policy of orchestrating actions behind my paladins' backs get in the way of saving our nation from a lich and his legion of lackeys?
http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a311/estelindis/hinjo.gif: ...you are trying to guilt me into letting you go, aren't you?
http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i294/trytoguess/Shojo.png: Well, obviously, but I wasn't going to say it before it looked like it was working.
http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a311/estelindis/hinjo.gif: Twelve Gods help us....Fine. But I'm bringing charges once the city is safe.
http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i294/trytoguess/Shojo.png: Fair enough.
:roy:: Why's he agreeing? He could get off easily.
:belkar:: If he's smart, he'll insist both of them be allowed to present their testimony.
:roy:: ...Do I want to know why?
:belkar:: They'll have to figure out what's wrong with Miko, before she can testify. Do you know how long that'll take? He'll be dead of old age before the trial ever starts.
http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i294/trytoguess/Shojo.png: Shh!

[woweedd]

I have pondered this before.



That's brilliant Jas.

[Kish]

I know this isn't news to anyone, but the tenor of the exact same events seems totally different depending on how one phrases it.

i.e., there's, "Roy and Durkon were killed by Evil undead abominations who were actively opposing their attempts to save the world. Shojo was killed by a Lawful Good Paladin who was his ally and subordinate" which evidently comes from a position of being sympathetic to Shojo's not being willing to come back. There's also the equally accurate, "Roy and Durkon were killed trying to save others, Shojo was killed immediately after trying to lie his way out of trouble with two of the many people he'd spent decades manipulating like chesspieces, by one of them, and unless he was completely stupid had to recognize the attempted resurrection as an indication that the other one didn't want him dead and Miko had spoken only for herself in indicating she wanted him dead...though if it took him longer than two seconds to independently realize the latter of those he was pretty close to completely stupid already," which comes from a position of not being sympathetic to Shojo.

I wonder what Roy would think of Shojo's decision not to come back, if it was presented to him through a veil of ignorance (i.e., he knew all the events but not that it specifically involved the woman he'd called an "overbearing self-righteous bitch").

In any event, it appears to me that Shojo was fundamentally unwilling to recognize that it was wrong to manipulate other people like chesspieces, when he was doing it throughout his life, when he was telling Hinjo to "grow up" for objecting to it, and when he was deciding whether to come back to what would (in my and Peelee's opinion, if no one else's) have been a subordinate position as an imprisoned advisor rather than a ruler. That'd be the kind of severe moral failing that, in the absence of any repentance, would bar someone from an Upper Plane were I the writer...

...but of course, I'm not, so that doesn't really matter. Just felt like sharing.

[hamishspence]

In any event, it appears to me that Shojo was fundamentally unwilling to recognize that it was wrong to manipulate other people like chesspieces, when he was doing it throughout his life, when he was telling Hinjo to "grow up" for objecting to it, and when he was deciding whether to come back to what would (in my and Peelee's opinion, if no one else's) have been a subordinate position as an imprisoned advisor rather than a ruler.


Taking advantage of someone is neither Good nor Evil, inherently. What matters is what you take advantage of them for. Communicating clearly enough for Crystal to be 100% aware that Haley was about to trick her into walking into a pit of lava would have resulted in an immediate resumption of hostilities and, probably, more gnomish deaths. Haley is not under a moral obligation to sacrifice lives so that she can be sure Crystal understands the Terms and Conditions. Therefore, taking advantage of Crystal's tendency to follow and her inability to grasp complex rhetorical points in order to save lives is a Good action. If Haley pulled the same exact stunt in order to kill an innocent person and steal their gold, it would be an Evil action.

Maybe you can argue that it was a Chaotic action rather than a Lawful one, due to the aforementioned advantage-taking.

Using the same principle, "Manipulating people" is the same kind of thing - neither Good nor Evil, inherently.

[woweedd]

Using the same principle, "Manipulating people" is the same kind of thing - neither Good nor Evil, inherently.
Manipulating, no. Treating them as less then human, maybe.

[Morty]

I'm still not entirely certain what difference it makes why the deceased parents of the likewise deceased secondary character didn't come back.

[Lacuna Caster]

On this occasion, Kish and I are in agreement.


I have pondered this before.
Yeah, that seems like a pretty plausible scenario. You should, like write fiction. As a fan. (Is there a word for that?)

[hamishspence]

Manipulating, no. Treating them as less then human, maybe.

We know at least that Shojo's actions tended to improve quality of life in Azure City:


I have no idea what actions Shojo may or may not have taken prior to the beginning of the comic, because I didn't spend any time figuring that out. What I did was have a plot that required that guy on the throne to be pulling schemes behind the backs of the paladins while still serving as a patron to the mostly-Good OOTS, and thought, "Yeah, that sounds Chaotic Good to me. Write it. Done."

...

Stability is not always Good; instability is not inherently Evil. Shojo's instability increased the quality of life for his citizens, at least while he was alive; Tarquin's stability decreases the quality (and duration) of life for his people.

although he basically kneecapped his government in the process:


Did the rule of law have more of a hold in Azure City at the end of Shojo's rule—compared to when he took office—or less? Clearly, less. Before Shojo ascended the throne, it is highly unlikely that his father ignored the rules that he found inconvenient, encouraged the nobles to blame each other for his unpopular edicts via an elaborate ruse, seized citizens of other countries on charges he knew to be false, and snuck around making secret policy behind the backs of even his own most trusted advisors. You can't separate the fact that his government fell apart when Shojo died, because that was a direct result of him kneecapping that government over the years so that it depended on him, personally. Shojo was handed a Lawful system and made it more Chaotic than it was before, so that only his own personal scheming was holding it together.

[Resileaf]

We know at least that Shojo's actions tended to improve quality of life in Azure City:



although he basically kneecapped his government in the process:

That's pretty interesting. I had never known about that, and it really puts into perspective that even benevolent dictatorships can crumble quickly without the dictator around to keep it holding together.

[Lacuna Caster]

That's pretty interesting. I had never known about that, and it really puts into perspective that even benevolent dictatorships can crumble quickly without the dictator around to keep it holding together.
There's been some discussion (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?545494-Questions-about-the-early-strip-and-Sapphire-Guard&p=22838553&viewfull=1#post22838553) about how sustainable Shojo's government would be, particularly if Hinjo, who has no obvious talent for political scheming, was supposed to step into his shoes. But I guess this thread has wandered pretty off-topic already.

[hamishspence]

In War & XPs, the bonus strip where Shojo talks to Eugene, makes it clear that Shojo's goal is to turn Hinjo into someone less idealistic, more cynical, and more capable of scheming, and thus, from Shojo's perspective, better able to run the city.

[Ruck]

Manipulating, no. Treating them as less then human, maybe.
This reads like you're saying "No, manipulating people is not Neutral, but treating them as less than human is," but I'm sure that's not what you meant.

[hamishspence]

This reads like you're saying "No, manipulating people is not Neutral, but treating them as less than human is," but I'm sure that's not what you meant.

The idea appears to be that "Manipulating" has no alignment but "treating people as less than human, is Evil".

[KorvinStarmast]

I am going to respond to the title question.
Why are Miko's parents dead?

The narrative imperative. In order for her to be both related to Shojo and Hinjo, but not be someone born of privilege, and to multiclass Monk/Paladin, the convenient trope of "lost parents at an early age, was orphaned, and then ..." was very useful to fit her into the story in ways that (1) made her personally loyal to Shojo and (2) established a sort of tension between her and Hojo that wasn't manufactured but rather felt natural. This made for a great set up, and sense of wrongness from a loyal servant, when her feelings of betrayal over Shojo's choices drove her to murder.

I don't want to rain on the parade of the previous five pages, but given the state of the strip at the time of her becoming one of the dramatis personae, a more complicated backstory wasn't necessary.

[D.One]

I am going to respond to the title question.
Why are Miko's parents dead?

The narrative imperative. In order for her to be both related to Shojo and Hinjo, but not be someone born of privilege, and to multiclass Monk/Paladin, the convenient trope of "lost parents at an early age, was orphaned, and then ..." was very useful to fit her into the story in ways that (1) made her personally loyal to Shojo and (2) established a sort of tension between her and Hojo that wasn't manufactured but rather felt natural. This made for a great set up, and sense of wrongness from a loyal servant, when her feelings of betrayal over Shojo's choices drove her to murder.

I don't want to rain on the parade of the previous five pages, but given the state of the strip at the time of her becoming one of the dramatis personae, a more complicated backstory wasn't necessary.

Perfect.

I'd also add that maybe they met that rabbit from that movie, and that's why they are dead.

[Lacuna Caster]

The narrative imperative. In order for her to be both related to Shojo and Hinjo, but not be someone born of privilege, and to multiclass Monk/Paladin, the convenient trope of "lost parents at an early age, was orphaned, and then ..." was very useful to fit her into the story in ways that (1) made her personally loyal to Shojo and (2) established a sort of tension between her and Hojo that wasn't manufactured but rather felt natural...
Yeah, but the 'naturalness' of this setup only lasts for as long as death is final. If you make it clear in the same story on multiple occasions that this is a world where death is not final for those of sufficient wealth and privilege, a certain amount of fridge puzzlement sets in.

[Peelee]

Yeah, but the 'naturalness' of this setup only lasts for as long as death is final. If you make it clear in the same story on multiple occasions that this is a world where death is not final for those of sufficient wealth and privilege, a certain amount of fridge puzzlement sets in.

Unless you also make clear in the same story that death can still be final for those of sufficient wealth and privilege. Ain't nobody bringing Kubota back, for instance, despite being a rich and powerful Azurite lord.

[Lacuna Caster]

Unless you also make clear in the same story that death can still be final for those of sufficient wealth and privilege. Ain't nobody bringing Kubota back, for instance, despite being a rich and powerful Azurite lord.
Yes, but that was because a high-level wizard with disintegrate went out of his way to make sure it would never happen. If you're proposing this to explain why Miko's parents are dead, well, I'll like to know what they did to piss off that wizard.

Again, to be clear, I can certainly imagine plausible explanations on this front. But I generally dislike "because the story" arguments. I'm sure Korvin didn't specifically intend it that way, but this often seems to be a coded way of saying "stop thinking about it."

[Peelee]

Yes, but that was because a high-level wizard with disintegrate went out of his way to make sure it would never happen. If you're proposing this to explain why Miko's parents are dead, well, I'll like to know what they did to piss off that wizard.

Again, to be clear, I can certainly imagine plausible explanations on this front. But I generally dislike "because the story" arguments. I'm sure Korvin didn't specifically intend it that way, but this often seems to be a coded way of saying "stop thinking about it."

I'm simply proposing that there are ways for people to not be raised. I've previously mentioned feeding remains to animals or having the assassins retrieve the remains to simply deny access, both of which are very simple, cheap, and mundane ways of blocking anything short of True Resurrection. Died in a shipwreck with their bodies lost at sea is another that doesn't even require assassination or animosity towards them.

I'm not faulting you at all for wanting to know the story behind it, but I am faulting you for calling it out as odd when there's just tons of ways it could happen.

[KorvinStarmast]

I'm sure Korvin didn't specifically intend it that way, but this often seems to be a coded way of saying "stop thinking about it." I did not mean to do that. What I tried to do was reach back to the "when" of this part of the story being written, in terms of the growth of Rich's muse and his skill as an author -- which he readily admits has matured over time.

Given his distaste for how various raise dead, resurrection and true resurrection spells mess up narrative tension, as he's described more than once in some detail, I suspect that anyone being raised is the exception (See Roy, in another narrative imperative) so that unless he wants to make an exception because his narrative momentum needs it, he'd rather not deal with it as a general rule. Miko's parents aren't important enough to the narrative (when Paladin blues was alive and well and in the process of being written) to peel that many layers back for an off screen character.

And given my recent comment regarding Wheel of Time and Robert Jordan going too far for various secondary and tertiary characters ... I like that Rich did not do that.

[LuisDantas]

This just occurred to me a few days ago. Why are Miko's parents dead?

I don't mean 'how did they die?', exactly, I mean 'why are they still dead?' Miko was presumably acquainted with at least one high-level cleric that can cast Resurrection, which allows you to revive someone dead for up to 10 years/level- and if she doesn't have the cash for diamonds herself she could probably beg a favour off Shojo.

Probably for the same reason (whatever it may be) that such ressurrections are not a regular feature of most game worlds. On a meta level, it is because it would make the world difficult to relate to and cheapen death too much. In-game, I assume that often it turns out that the necessary diamonds are simply not available.

Come to think of it, there must be some campaign somewhere which features the dispute for rare diamonds which will decide who gets to ressurrect their loved ones / leaders / whatever as a source of political tension.

The problem is that once you begin to ressurrect NPCs simply because you can, there is no clear reason to ever stop.

That said, Miko made a point of sleeping over hard, rough surfaces out of misguided pride. I just don't think she was very likely to ask for the ressurrection of her parents. That goes against the grain of her cultivated self-image of a selfless warrior.

[Snails]

Again, to be clear, I can certainly imagine plausible explanations on this front. But I generally dislike "because the story" arguments. I'm sure Korvin didn't specifically intend it that way, but this often seems to be a coded way of saying "stop thinking about it."

Korvin is not trying to be mean, but, well, what is the point of pondering a question when it is unlikely you will be satisfied with the truth? It is not Korvin's fault that you dislike what is probably the truth.

And really, it is not The Giant's either. He does not owe you an explanation that would make you happy. He is just trying to tell a fun story in a setting he and his audience will understand well enough to enjoy.

D&D worlds are generally insufficiently bizarre, given how much magic in embedded in them. The more you examine a D&D world, the more you will notice it does not make sense. That is how it is. Whose fault is that?

And I am not trying to be mean, but now is the time for a bit of silliness...

BTW, the "real problem" here is that Eugene was such a coward that he did not follow through. I am not talking about his normal lifespan. He was an idiot for not killing himself and arranging for a druid to reincarnate him into a body that was not going to succumb to old age soon. Then he could have continued to level up and taken out Xykon himself, instead of following this stupid fighter Roy.

Jeeez! The Giant reeeeally got his story wrong. If he only consulted with me first, he would not have wasted so much time on the wrong story, a story that fails to understand the magic that any reasonable double-digit character would surely know to use correctly.

[Kish]

Unless you also make clear in the same story that death can still be final for those of sufficient wealth and privilege.
I think it's more that the story doesn't suggest that death is temporary for those of sufficient wealth and privilege. There was a whole book in part about how wrong Roy's casual assumption that of course he would be resurrected almost immediately was.

But someone who starts with the premise that "those people who are resurrected in the story are resurrected" is an invalid answer will never be happy with the answer. Or with anything else about OotS, really.

[Peelee]

I think it's more that the story doesn't suggest that death is temporary for those of sufficient wealth and privilege. There was a whole book in part about how wrong Roy's casual assumption that of course he would be resurrected almost immediately was.

But someone who starts with the premise that "those people who are resurrected in the story are resurrected" is an invalid answer will never be happy with the answer. Or with anything else about OotS, really.

Based on the last couple weeks, I'm debating holding off on posting for a few hours whenever I want to say something to see if you'll say what I want to, but better.

[RatElemental]

Again, take your pick:

Went missing at sea, on a hike, etc.
Assassinated and had the corpses stolen. A type 1 bag of holding is enough to carry a few corpses, relatively inexpensive compared to a high level wizard's services, and reusable. And not even necessary for this to work. From there, there are a few disposal options:

Had the corpses raised as skeletons. Only costs 150 gold plus 25 per level the target has to hire a cleric to do this, if they're level 10 or under. 210 plus 25 per level if they're above that. Both are easily within the budget of a noble. A skeleton is harder to identify, requires the more expensive and harder to procure resurrection, offers utility as a guard or something, and can just be straight up ordered to dispose of itself.

Just straight up fed to animals, cremated, dumped at sea, buried in an unmarked grave somewhere, sold to Grubwiggler, sold to a pack of ghouls, sacrificed to a demon, planeshifted to somewhere in the astral plane, elemental plane of fire (see cremation), water (see dumped at sea), earth (see buried in an unmarked grave), or air (basically the same as the astral).

They could also simply be raised while their bodies are in custody if raise dead spells are so easy to get. This would block even a true resurrection because they aren't actually dead, but does open you up to the possibility of them being scried to find where they are.

[Lacuna Caster]

But someone who starts with the premise that "those people who are resurrected in the story are resurrected" is an invalid answer will never be happy with the answer. Or with anything else about OotS, really.

Korvin is not trying to be mean, but, well, what is the point of pondering a question when it is unlikely you will be satisfied with the truth? It is not Korvin's fault that you dislike what is probably the truth.
Because it's tautological. Anything that happens in the story is definitionally in service to the the story existing. You can use it to explain virtually anything that happens and deflect all conceivable critique.

Sure, Roy doesn't get casually raised, but again, this happened specifically because of fairly extreme and unusual circumstances. (Circumstances that pertain more frequently to PC adventurers, sure, but again this only pertains to a tiny fraction of the general population. Even the nobles.)


I'm not faulting you at all for wanting to know the story behind it, but I am faulting you for calling it out as odd when there's just tons of ways it could happen.
There are tons of ways it could, but that doesn't make it the probable outcome. I'm not saying this is an eternal blight upon the narrative and Ruins OOTS Forever, but it's not a particular virtue of the story if I have to write substantial chunks of it in my head.

[martianmister]

I still think that they were executed for their crimes and their wealth gone to city coffers.

[Ruck]

Because it's tautological. Anything that happens in the story is definitionally in service to the the story existing. You can use it to explain virtually anything that happens and deflect all conceivable critique.

Sure, Roy doesn't get casually raised, but again, this happened specifically because of fairly extreme and unusual circumstances. (Circumstances that pertain more frequently to PC adventurers, sure, but again this only pertains to a tiny fraction of the general population. Even the nobles.)


There are tons of ways it could, but that doesn't make it the probable outcome. I'm not saying this is an eternal blight upon the narrative and Ruins OOTS Forever, but it's not a particular virtue of the story if I have to write substantial chunks of it in my head.

I mean, it literally does mean that, given that there are many ways and reasons Miko's parents wouldn't be raised-- the simplest of which is "no one around had the money and/or a strong enough connection to them to do so"-- and that a scenario where they are raised requires a much more specific situation where they or someone close to them has both wealth and access to higher-level spells. (And I mean, if they had e.g. rich family members, Miko wouldn't have been sent to an orphanage in the first place.)

Again, the problem seems to be that you insist things "should" happen a certain way-- in this case, "Resurrection is a very easily available spell, even to these characters we've never seen and know nothing about"-- and people have made cases why it's quite reasonable that they don't happen that way, but none of them seem to satisfy you.

[KorvinStarmast]

Sure, Roy doesn't get casually raised, but again, this happened specifically because of fairly extreme and unusual circumstances. (Circumstances that pertain more frequently to PC adventurers, sure, but again this only pertains to a tiny fraction of the general population. Even the nobles.)

There are tons of ways it could, but that doesn't make it the probable outcome. I'm not saying this is an eternal blight upon the narrative and Ruins OOTS Forever, but it's not a particular virtue of the story if I have to write substantial chunks of it in my head. If you look on the basic chassis of what this story is built upon, it is the D&D game system that has never been a good ecnomonics emulator. PC's have an outsized access to material wealth due to their unique role in the game/story: they are the special ones, the chosen ones. (See WBL as the base issue here, or Haley and Roy discussing how a level appropriate encounter ought to get them enough gold to get Durkon's raising materials .... ) That leaves anyone who is a few circles outside of the narrative arc as not getting the treatment that the stars in the show get. True in a lot of good stories about a variety of secondary, tertiary, and beyond characters.

This problem of having the means suggests that either the (1) "executed" happened (per martianmaster's post), or (2) they were for (fill in the blank) reasons not wealthy enough to afford or have provisions for a raise dead spell available.

And then there is the cultural bit: even with raise dead, in a world with a known afterlife that one is looking forward to existing in, they may have left 'do not resurrect' instructions (rather like a living will's and 'do not resuscitate' instructions that my mom and dad have on file (88 and 90 respectively)) due to their deeply held beliefs. That one in particular is narratively plausible given the cultural preferences of Miko in the story.

[martianmister]

In his favor of what?

In favour of him.


Escaping justice for what?

For the crimes he accused of, whether they were true or not.

[Peelee]

In favour of him.

OK, that doesn't really make any sense. In favor of what argument? "Him" isn't an argument, at least not one I've ever heard presented.

[Fyraltari]

I'm not sure how escaping from justice is something in his favour.In his favor of what?


OK, that doesn't really make any sense. In favor of what argument? "Him" isn't an argument, at least not one I've ever heard presented.

I think that means "i'm not sure how escaping from justice speaks well of Shojo's character/something good on Shojo's part". Is that not a turn of phrase.

[Peelee]

I think that means "i'm not sure how escaping from justice speaks well of Shojo's character/something good on Shojo's part". Is that not a turn of phrase.

Possibly, but since he replied with that to "he won't be rezzed because he's Chaotic and doesn't want to come back to life just to get arrested," it seems like a pretty honking big non-sequitor.

[martianmister]

"he won't be rezzed because he's Chaotic and doesn't want to come back to life just to get arrested,"

And escaping from justice is still not something in his favour, if you want to defend Shojo's action.

[Snails]

Because it's tautological. Anything that happens in the story is definitionally in service to the the story existing. You can use it to explain virtually anything that happens and deflect all conceivable critique.

Not quite correct. The gist of the argument is a potential, not an actual thing that is specified in the story, so there is no logical requirement for a solid counterargument. The argument itself implicitly provides its own counterargument, in this case. Consider...

Because (0) the rules of D&D that run this story's universe, (1) because Miko was highish level surely Miko eventually became very rich and (2) had plenty of money to spend on whatever she might please, and (3) Miko presumably would want to resurrect her parents, and (4) Miko would understand that her parents would desire to be brought back, and (5) a cleric of sufficient power would be inclined to help, and (5) there is not a reason that makes the attempt impossible or likely to fail (e.g death by old age, vampirism, etc.), then potentially Miko could have brought back her parents.

That is a whole lot of guesses, where #1 and #2 are both big ones. We have no idea how much money Miko has to spend freely. Is it really true that every NPC that hits double digit levels must be plenty rich enough to buy a pair of resurrections? I dunno. I see no evidence of such within the OotSverse.

[Keltest]

And escaping from justice is still not something in his favour, if you want to defend Shojo's action.

I don't believe forcing accused criminals to come back to life to stand trial is a particularly reasonable standard for justice.

[Snails]

I don't believe forcing accused criminals to come back to life to stand trial is a particularly reasonable standard for justice.

That idea opens up possibilities: Like Paladins who kill the guilty and then hunt down that soul in the afterlife.

[Kish]

There's a difference between rejecting critique and rejecting a premise.

In this case, Lacuna, your asserted premise is: "the story suggests that death is temporary for those of sufficient wealth and privilege." But, as I pointed out, that is not true, the story suggests nothing of the kind, and waving away Roy's not getting resurrected quickly when he fully expected to be doesn't constitute supporting your premise.

It is entirely true that you cannot derive any entirely consistent pattern of who gets resurrected from the story, and thus you cannot build from that nonexistent pattern to "lookee, a contradiction." You can derive a mostly consistent pattern; it would be "most people who die stay dead." But that pattern would be the opposite of helpful for making a case that it's a plot hole that some particular character didn't get resurrected.

[Ruck]

There's a difference between rejecting critique and rejecting a premise.

In this case, Lacuna, your asserted premise is: "the story suggests that death is temporary for those of sufficient wealth and privilege." But, as I pointed out, that is not true, the story suggests nothing of the kind, and waving away Roy's not getting resurrected quickly when he fully expected to be doesn't constitute supporting your premise.

It is entirely true that you cannot derive any entirely consistent pattern of who gets resurrected from the story, and thus you cannot build from that nonexistent pattern to "lookee, a contradiction." You can derive a mostly consistent pattern; it would be "most people who die stay dead." But that pattern would be the opposite of helpful for making a case that it's a plot hole that some particular character didn't get resurrected.

Yeah, "asserting a premise" is a better way of phrasing what I was trying to say at the end of my post. I'd also add that the premise is asserted that Miko's parents are very likely of sufficient wealth and privilege, but there's no reason to think so; again, I'd argue that the fact that she was sent to an orphanage rather than to any relatives would suggest the exact opposite.

[martianmister]

I don't believe forcing accused criminals to come back to life to stand trial is a particularly reasonable standard for justice.

How come? hhhhh

[Peelee]

How come?

You're seriously questioning why forcing the dead to come back to life to answer for their crimes is unjust in a universe that explicitly has an afterlife system that is based on what the person deserves?

That does not speak in your favor.

[Ruck]

You're seriously questioning why forcing the dead to come back to life to answer for their crimes is unjust in a universe that explicitly has an afterlife system that is based on what the person deserves?

That does not speak in your favor.

Especially considering the accused in this case was already assassinated for it. I'm not sure how it's particularly Good to bring an old man back to life just to imprison him, or even to kill him, but, like, according to proper procedure.

[martianmister]

You're seriously questioning why forcing the dead to come back to life to answer for their crimes is unjust in a universe that explicitly has an afterlife system that is based on what the person deserves?

That doesn't make any sense. Shojo is guilty of staging a fake trial, being in CG plane doesn't change that. He's still an escapee from justice.

[Keltest]

That doesn't make any sense. Shojo is guilty of staging a fake trial, being in CG plane doesn't change that. He's still an escapee from justice.

He's dead. He isn't just "in another plane", he's dead and unable to come back under his own power, incapable of learning or growing, and will slowly be converted into a celestial power source for the plane. Furthermore, he has been judged by the various beings of the upper planes already.

[Morty]

There are tons of ways it could, but that doesn't make it the probable outcome. I'm not saying this is an eternal blight upon the narrative and Ruins OOTS Forever, but it's not a particular virtue of the story if I have to write substantial chunks of it in my head.

This isn't a "substantial chunk" of the story. It barely qualifies as part of the story at all, since it's just a bit of background for a single character.

[martianmister]

He's dead. He isn't just "in another plane", he's dead and unable to come back under his own power, incapable of learning or growing, and will slowly be converted into a celestial power source for the plane. Furthermore, he has been judged by the various beings of the upper planes already.

None of these things you listed change anything. He escaped from justice by refusing to come back, because he prefers partying in CG plane to face the charges.

[Peelee]

None of these things you listed change anything. He escaped from justice by refusing to come back, because he prefers partying in CG plane to face the charges.

A.) I have never, until now, heard of dying as "escaping justice." So kudos for that.
2.) Shojo was executed for his crimes.
iii.) You keep assuming Shojo is in a CG plane.do you have any proof of this?

[hamishspence]

iii.) You keep assuming Shojo is in a CG plane.do you have any proof of this?
We've got Word of Giant that his alignment is CG, at least:


Shojo is not Chaotic Good because he took certain actions within the narrative. He was born Chaotic Good, and as a result of that worldview, took certain actions. Not all of those actions are required to be Chaotic, not all are required to be Good, but we can assume that they more often were than not. That's why I said temperament and self-image matter: that's how he viewed himself, that's how he tried to act, so barring some drastic disqualifying situation like murdering a bunch of people, that's what he is.

of course he wasn't literally popped out of his mother's womb Chaotic Good. I meant that the character was created that way, and that I then had him take the actions that I had him take because I had already determined his alignment. Or, that he came into adulthood already CG due to events in his childhood, and lived his life that way.

Given the whole "characters go to the plane that suits their alignment" thing - we've got good reason to presume that Shojo's gone to one of the CG-appropriate afterlives unless proven otherwise.


2.) Shojo was executed for his crimes.

Murdered actually - but yes. It may be disproportionate, but once Miko had killed him, we can't say "he escaped justice". Rather, we can say - "he suffered excessive, vigilante justice".

[martianmister]

A.) I have never, until now, heard of dying as "escaping justice." So kudos for that.

Not the dying part; refusing resurrection to avoid trial is escaping from justice.

[hamishspence]

Punishment beyond being "stabbed/hacked to death" would be unjust in the extreme.

[Peelee]

We've got Word of Giant that his alignment is CG, at least:




Given the whole "characters go to the plane that suits their alignment" thing - we've got good reason to presume that Shojo's gone to one of the CG-appropriate afterlives unless proven otherwise.

All true, but Roy, for example, was LG and still nearly got his file kicked over to the True Neutral afterlife. Which is why I asked for proof, not evidence. The devas seem like Chaz from Disenchantment - they'll bring you what you deserve.

[hamishspence]

All true, but Roy, for example, was LG and still nearly got his file kicked over to the True Neutral afterlife.

That's because Roy, according to the Deva, committed an act which would have been "drastic" and "disqualifying" for LG alignment, if he hadn't repented and attempted to undo the consequences of it.

But, as far as we know, none of Shojo's acts have been called out by the Giant as alignment-disqualifying, the same way.

[Peelee]

That's because Roy, according to the Deva, committed an act which would have been "drastic" and "disqualifying" for LG alignment, if he hadn't repented and attempted to undo the consequences of it.

But, as far as we know, none of Shojo's acts have been called out by the Giant as alignment-disqualifying, the same way.

Roy's act wasn't called out by the Giant until the deva in-comic, to be fair.

[hamishspence]

Roy's act wasn't called out by the Giant until the deva in-comic, to be fair.

Yup (though Roy himself eventually said regarding it "I'm a disgrace to my alignment".)

But the review is only to see what Roy's "true" (as opposed to "declared") alignment is:



There are only 17 Outer Planes; Roy's alignment would have to match one of them, because you can't not have an alignment. The deva only got "first look" because Lawful Good was the alignment Roy declared himself to be. It was his goal, and the review was to see if he had really met that goal. If he didn't, that would mean he actually had some other alignment, in which case the powers-that-be on that plane would have been happy to have him.

[Peelee]

Yup (though Roy himself eventually said regarding it "I'm a disgrace to my alignment".)

But the review is only to see what Roy's "true" (as opposed to "declared") alignment is:

Yes, but look back at the Giant saying Shojo was CG: that's how he viewed himself, that's how he tried to act, so barring some drastic disqualifying situation like murdering a bunch of people, that's what he is. That could be said of Roy when he died as well.

[martianmister]

Punishment beyond being "stabbed/hacked to death" would be unjust in the extreme.

Not according to Hinjo.


Belkar: "Why the hell would he want to come back here, knowing that you're waiting to throw him in prison?..."

Hinjo: "He's probably right..."

[hamishspence]

Not according to Hinjo.

Which is kind of the point - Belkar, evil as he is - gets that throwing Shojo in prison after he's already been murdered is unjust - and that Shojo has incentive not to submit himself to that kind of injustice.

[hroþila]

I don't think it would be unjust to prosecute someone who came back to life. Otherwise that'd open up some very unsavoury loopholes.

I do think it's not reasonable to expect/demand someone to come back to life just to face justice, however.

[KorvinStarmast]

Which is kind of the point - Belkar, evil as he is - gets that throwing Shojo in prison after he's already been murdered is unjust - and that Shojo has incentive not to submit himself to that kind of injustice. That Belkar is the one who has to make that point is, IMO, a nice choice by Rich in putting that scene together. For the unrepentant Chaotic Evil psychopath to be the voice that points out the injustice in the LG justice perspective, so that the LG gets it, was grin inducing.

Belkar has had a variety of situations where he is cast as the "cut through the BS, truth teller" role for a given scene.

[hamishspence]

I don't think it would be unjust to prosecute someone who came back to life. Otherwise that'd open up some very unsavoury loopholes.

Probably depends on why they were dead in the first place.

If someone is executed, and then turns out to be innocent of that crime but guilty of a different crime, ressurrecting them purely in order to punish them "for the other crime" seems unfair.


I do think it's not reasonable to expect/demand someone to come back to life just to face justice, however.


A case could be made that, once someone is dead, it's "the afterlife's job" to punish them, not mortals' job.

By contrast, if someone is resurrected for reasons unrelated to punishment, and then their past crimes are discovered, then prosecuting them is reasonable.

[Kish]

I do think it's not reasonable to expect/demand someone to come back to life just to face justice, however.
How about to help save the world?

Particularly if that person wants to claim "Everything I did, I did for my people"--and expect a reaction other than, "Ah, same last words as Pol Pot, an obvious hypocritical villain!"

[D.One]

I think I've got the answer:

They are dead (and can't be brought back) because they died from the most terrible cause: Mysterious circunstances (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0727.html).

[hroþila]

How about to help save the world?

Particularly if that person wants to claim "Everything I did, I did for my people"--and expect a reaction other than, "Ah, same last words as Pol Pot, an obvious hypocritical villain!"
Well, that wouldn't be "just to face justice" anymore, would it.

By and large, I agree with hamishspence's last post.

[hamishspence]

How about to help save the world?

Particularly if that person wants to claim "Everything I did, I did for my people"--and expect a reaction other than, "Ah, same last words as Pol Pot, an obvious hypocritical villain!"

There's a strong implication here:


this idea that Shojo "should have known" that his actions would lead to open rebellion is silly. They didn't. They led to 50+ years of prosperity, peppered with a few instances of violence against him. Which I'm sure he would argue was his risk to take. This is the whole point behind his final lines: He has no regrets over his actions, because he did it all for his people at the possible expense of his own safety or liberty should his transgressions be discovered.

I can't really wrap my head against this idea that his reign wasn't Good because the things he did could have lead to other people performing Evil acts at some vague future point, even though it didn't. The only way his rule would be non-Good is if there was no other outcome except for there to be an increase in Evil, AND he knew it. And we know that isn't the case because that's not what happened.

that Shojo's words were sincere, at that point.

[Kish]

I am not questioning that Shojo is officially Chaotic Good.

Whether the story, absent Word of God, actually earns that, now, that I'll question.

[hamishspence]

Whether the story, absent Word of God, actually earns that, now, that I'll question.

It's not like The Giant can show the whole of Shojo's life:


This isn't, "The Amazing Adventures of Shojo," he's a minor character with a limited role in the narrative. I describe the broad strokes, anything else is beyond the scope of my work.

all we get is a few snippets.

[D.One]

Since we've apparently changed the dead character being discussed, what if Shojo was in fact Miko's real father. I'd bet old CG insanity faker had his share of affairs.

[hamishspence]

I got the impression from War & XPs bonus strip:

(in which he tells Hinjo he needs to get a girlfriend, and not be as occupied with politics as Shojo himself was)

that Shojo was too busy to have much time for affairs.

[martianmister]

Which is kind of the point - Belkar, evil as he is - gets that throwing Shojo in prison after he's already been murdered is unjust - and that Shojo has incentive not to submit himself to that kind of injustice.

I strongly disagree.

[Ruck]

I am not questioning that Shojo is officially Chaotic Good.

Whether the story, absent Word of God, actually earns that, now, that I'll question.


It's not like The Giant can show the whole of Shojo's life:



all we get is a few snippets.

Given that Shojo's primary concern seems to have been defending the world against a god-killing abomination, and that, as we saw after his assassination, keeping the nobles in the dark about his mental state (and avoiding assassination attempts) may have been at least as much to prevent Azure City from descending into civil war as it was maintaining his personal power... I think the best answer is "He was doing what he thought was best, to the limit of his abilities-- including his abilities to judge what was best." (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0491.html) And like Roy when it comes to verbally lambasting friends and foes, he may have enjoyed getting one over on the nobles and the paladins a little much for the tastes of being of pure Good, I don't think when considered against his greater goals it's the sort of thing that would knock him from Good to Neutral.

I mean, Girard Draketooth is Chaotic Neutral, and "seducing strangers then kidnapping the resultant child" is far worse behavior than "pretending to be senile to fool the nobles."

[hamishspence]

I mean, Girard Draketooth is Chaotic Neutral, and "seducing strangers then kidnapping the resultant child" is far worse behavior than "pretending to be senile to fool the nobles."

There's a theory that, since Girard has been dead for decades:

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0846.html


the kidnapping system may post-date his death, having been put into place by someone else- maybe the next most senior in the family.

[Kish]

Indeed. I'm a pretty firm advocate of that theory...

...largely because if Girard actually came up with the kidnapping scheme, then it is completely unimaginable to me that he could be nonevil. I'd have to stop discussing the alignments of OotS character at all in that case, because that'd be some serious Gygax-level incomprehensibility.

[Rrmcklin]

I am not questioning that Shojo is officially Chaotic Good.

Whether the story, absent Word of God, actually earns that, now, that I'll question.

I mean, the character was sincerely trying to do good, and apparently succeeded in doing good for the vast majority of his life.

That's not to say he was some paragon or virtue, or there weren't some unsavory aspects to his actions (as I believe were pointed out in comic by other characters) but I'm really not sure what the hang up is supposed to be.


Indeed. I'm a pretty firm advocate of that theory...

...largely because if Girard actually came up with the kidnapping scheme, then it is completely unimaginable to me that he could be nonevil. I'd have to stop discussing the alignments of OotS character at all in that case, because that'd be some serious Gygax-level incomprehensibility.

I think that depends on how you define "nonevil". Personally, I think it's totally possible for someone to be an awful person without being "evil", and I figure that D&D lends itself for that to be true more often than it would be in real life.

I feel like such things sort of have to be possible, otherwise there is no actual "neutral" just "good-lite" or "evil-lite".

Which for my part I have no issue saying that Girard and his family were terrible people, but I don't know if they were all evil.

[Peelee]

I think that depends on how you define "nonevil". Personally, I think it's totally possible for someone to be an awful person without being "evil", and I figure that D&D lends itself for that to be true more often than it would be in real life.

Agreed, but my definition of non-evil doesn't include "seducing people in order to steal the baby as a method of self-propagation for multiple generations." I'm with the moonlit sea.

[Rrmcklin]

Agreed, but my definition of non-evil doesn't include "seducing people in order to steal the baby as a method of self-propagation for multiple generations." I'm with the moonlit sea.

Normally, I'd agree, but I think the circumstances (trying to defend something that could literally mean the end of the world, and legitimately was better off being kept highly secret and guarded) could be argued to be extenuating.

I wouldn't necessarily agree, but I could understand the argument being made. Not enough to say it was good by any stretch of the word, but, you know.

[Kish]

Roy said it pretty well--:roy: "So, what, placing a classified ad didn't have the right undertone of personal violation for you?[...]The last thing I want is to be like Shojo, twisting legal authority into coercion."

Rich has said four things that strike me as equally relevant here:
1) Shojo's manipulations improved the lives of people in Azure City. (I'm not sure how, but I'll take his word for it for the sake of argument.)
2) Shojo kneecapped the government so that it fell apart without him.
3) If Hinjo had taken over when the city wasn't being invaded, the result would have been a lot of grumbling and jockeying for position by the nobles before all their hidden schemes that Shojo tolerated by pitting them against one another were systematically exposed and shut down (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=15385351&postcount=241). In other words, it wasn't necessary to let them continue their schemes. There was no need for the second most powerful nobleman in Azure City to be a Lawful Evil egomaniac who got away with sending ninjas to kill people. Shojo just went to manipulation as his go-to tool, to the extent of using it when it alienated potential allies, when other tools would have served far better--and, bluntly, when using it set up his own death. O-Chul, Hinjo, Lien, literally anyone else Miko ever interacted with would have understood that treating her like a summoned monster that would obey commands to the letter without caring about them was a really bad approach. The Order came within inches of death repeatedly because Shojo was too busy thinking of all the paladins as "toys" (quote from Good Deeds Gone Unpunished) to be ordered around and dismissed with threats of humiliation if they questioned any orders (the way he treated O-Chul in the online comic) to realize her level of violence and trigger-happiness was dangerous or even noteworthy.
4) Rich didn't think about Shojo's background, beyond a casual "the character role I need sounds Chaotic Good to me. Write it! Done."

Hinjo, the new Lawful Good ruler, shocked the existing nobles by raising two soldiers to the nobility; apparently the nobility remained closed for Shojo's entire tenure. As described in the comic, he started faking senility in response to an attempt on his life, and accepted letting the nobles think they actually ran everything while he worked around them rather than taking steps to avoid assassins while staying in charge. This looks like the opposite of what Rich said: his ruse was to protect himself, not his people. His rule improved quality of life in some undefined way, and caused the government to collapse in an extremely defined way which we all saw on-panel. Hinjo, assuming the Azure City Refugees remain a monarchy, will one day pass down to his heir a rulership that will not come with immediate assassination attempts.

So, we're left with a fine old 1ed tradition: Chaotic Good as Good Lite. Shojo was less good than every Lawful Good character in the comic*, and that is what his Chaoticness meant. It sure didn't mean any interest in freedom for anyone else. He absolutely did not hate it when [person named Shojo] tr[ied] to intimidate others and tell them what to do. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/description.htm) He was a "scheming benevolent dictator" officially of the one alignment I would consider least compatible with the word "dictator." As for "sincerely trying to do good," well, I guess we disagree on how much Tarquin believes his own "everyone needs my kind of stability" hype, but in my view, "sincerely trying to do good" is just as likely to lead to a monster as to a saint, particularly when the person "sincerely trying to do good" believes as heartily in the ends justifying the means as Shojo did.

I'm one of the very few members of the Shojo Doesn't Act Anything Like Good club on the forum. I'm not expecting this to convince anybody. But hopefully, it will at least make my perspective clear.

*This does hinge on the assumption that the deal with Eugene will ultimately be something more than just, "Rich and Kish disagree on what constitutes Lawful Good once again." If I'm wrong there, there is one Lawful Good character even worse than Shojo. But I don't think I am, and while that would improve the situation in that it would no longer be such a clear-cut example of Chaotic Good being presented as lesser good, it wouldn't make me think either Shojo or Eugene deserves their Good tags.

[Rrmcklin]

Roy said it pretty well--:roy: "So, what, placing a classified ad didn't have the right undertone of personal violation for you?[...]The last thing I want is to be like Shojo, twisting legal authority into coercion."

Rich has said four things that strike me as equally relevant here:
1) Shojo's manipulations improved the lives of people in Azure City. (I'm not sure how, but I'll take his word for it for the sake of argument.)
2) Shojo kneecapped the government so that it fell apart without him.
3) If Hinjo had taken over when the city wasn't being invaded, the result would have been a lot of grumbling and jockeying for position by the nobles before all their hidden schemes that Shojo tolerated by pitting them against one another were systematically exposed and shut down (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=15385351&postcount=241). In other words, it wasn't necessary to let them continue their schemes. There was no need for the second most powerful nobleman in Azure City to be a Lawful Evil egomaniac who got away with sending ninjas to kill people. Shojo just went to manipulation as his go-to tool, to the extent of using it when it alienated potential allies, when other tools would have served far better--and, bluntly, when using it set up his own death. O-Chul, Hinjo, Lien, literally anyone else Miko ever interacted with would have understood that treating her like a summoned monster that would obey commands to the letter without caring about them was a really bad approach. The Order came within inches of death repeatedly because Shojo was too busy thinking of all the paladins as "toys" (quote from Good Deeds Gone Unpunished) to be ordered around and dismissed with threats of humiliation if they questioned any orders (the way he treated O-Chul in the online comic) to realize her level of violence and trigger-happiness was dangerous or even noteworthy.
4) Rich didn't think about Shojo's background, beyond a casual "the character role I need sounds Chaotic Good to me. Write it! Done."

Hinjo, the new Lawful Good ruler, shocked the existing nobles by raising two soldiers to the nobility; apparently the nobility remained closed for Shojo's entire tenure. As described in the comic, he started faking senility in response to an attempt on his life, and accepted letting the nobles think they actually ran everything while he worked around them rather than taking steps to avoid assassins while staying in charge. This looks like the opposite of what Rich said: his ruse was to protect himself, not his people. His rule improved quality of life in some undefined way, and caused the government to collapse in an extremely defined way which we all saw on-panel. Hinjo, assuming the Azure City Refugees remain a monarchy, will one day pass down to his heir a rulership that will not come with immediate assassination attempts.

So, we're left with a fine old 1ed tradition: Chaotic Good as Good Lite. Shojo was less good than every Lawful Good character in the comic*, and that is what his Chaoticness meant. It sure didn't mean any interest in freedom for anyone else. He absolutely did not hate it when [person named Shojo] tr[ied] to intimidate others and tell them what to do. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/description.htm) He was a "scheming benevolent dictator" officially of the one alignment I would consider least compatible with the word "dictator." As for "sincerely trying to do good," well, I guess we disagree on how much Tarquin believes his own "everyone needs my kind of stability" hype, but in my view, "sincerely trying to do good" is just as likely to lead to a monster as to a saint, particularly when the person "sincerely trying to do good" believes as heartily in the ends justifying the means as Shojo did.

I'm one of the very few members of the Shojo Doesn't Act Anything Like Good club on the forum. I'm not expecting this to convince anybody. But hopefully, it will at least make my perspective clear.

*This does hinge on the assumption that the deal with Eugene will ultimately be something more than just, "Rich and Kish disagree on what constitutes Lawful Good once again." If I'm wrong there, there is one Lawful Good character even worse than Shojo. But I don't think I am, and while that would improve the situation in that it would no longer be such a clear-cut example of Chaotic Good being presented as lesser good, it wouldn't make me think either Shojo or Eugene deserves their Good tags.

Huh, well, that at least clarifies your position, thank you. I will say that:

1) You draw a line between Shojo protecting himself and the people that I don't think you actually need to and 2) Shojo wasn't Lawful Good and clearly we aren't supposed to see him as such so your point about Eugene possibly failing at worse than Shojo seems misplaced.

Besides that though, I don't have anything else to add.

[Peelee]

So, we're left with a fine old 1ed tradition: Chaotic Good as Good Lite. Shojo was less good than every Lawful Good character in the comic*

[snip]

*This does hinge on the assumption that the deal with Eugene will ultimately be something more than just, "Rich and Kish disagree on what constitutes Lawful Good once again." If I'm wrong there, there is one Lawful Good character even worse than Shojo. But I don't think I am, and while that would improve the situation in that it would no longer be such a clear-cut example of Chaotic Good being presented as lesser good, it wouldn't make me think either Shojo or Eugene deserves their Good tags.

Well, I'd toss in Gun-Jin and Roy & Durkon's paladin "teammate" as well.

[KorvinStarmast]

I'm one of the very few members of the Shojo Doesn't Act Anything Like Good club on the forum. Then maybe, just maybe, the problem is with the ideological blinders that you wear. Ever consider that?

The application of "CG" as "good light" is good enough to make the story work. It takes a particularly doctrinaire and closed minded attitude to not accept that politicians are what they are: they use half truths day in and day out simply to do their jobs. Simply being a politician, which Shojo certainly is, does not disqualify one as ineligible for a good alignment.

I agree with your point on Shojo kneecapping the succession process. (A point well presented) Making imperfect decision doesn't disqualify anyone from a good alignment either.

[Keltest]

I strongly disagree.

Yes, you've made that exceptionally clear. What im unclear about is why youre putting so much importance on him being tried by Azure City law. While a Good city like Azure City would try their best to make their laws and justice go together well, theres nothing that says that their laws automatically align with justice, or indeed are a necessary component of it.

He faced justice in that his deceit left him without anybody close to him being willing to extend their trust to him, to the point where he was killed by somebody who was all but his adopted daughter, and when offered the chance to come back, had nothing to look forward to but being put on trial and, regardless of the outcome, having his every move watched carefully by his friends, family and coworkers for the rest of his life.

[Forealms]

I'm clipping parts of this because it's a really long comment and most if it I don't really have an issue with.



2) Shojo kneecapped the government so that it fell apart without him.
3) If Hinjo had taken over when the city wasn't being invaded, the result would have been a lot of grumbling and jockeying for position by the nobles before all their hidden schemes that Shojo tolerated by pitting them against one another were systematically exposed and shut down (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=15385351&postcount=241). In other words, it wasn't necessary to let them continue their schemes.

As described in the comic, [Shojo] started faking senility in response to an attempt on his life, and accepted letting the nobles think they actually ran everything while he worked around them rather than taking steps to avoid assassins while staying in charge. This looks like the opposite of what Rich said: his ruse was to protect himself, not his people. His rule improved quality of life in some undefined way, and caused the government to collapse in an extremely defined way which we all saw on-panel.

I would argue differently. Shojo faking senility IS taking steps to avoid assassins while staying in charge. He was protecting himself, but it's not like it came at the cost of anyone else (except the scheming). Also, Shojo's methods of running the city seemed just fine - did the city collapse because he died, or did the city collapse because 30000 hobgoblins attacked it? In other words, had Shojo been alive, do you have any reason the outcome would have been different? In fact, what you quoted seems to suggest that before Shojo came into power, nobles seemed to be essentially running things, and by the end, they were effectively sidelined to the point that Hinjo could have shut them down entirely.

[Kish]

Instead of thinking about the end state and whether it was a stable government, think about the delta-v: Did the rule of law have more of a hold in Azure City at the end of Shojo's rule—compared to when he took office—or less? Clearly, less. Before Shojo ascended the throne, it is highly unlikely that his father ignored the rules that he found inconvenient, encouraged the nobles to blame each other for his unpopular edicts via an elaborate ruse, seized citizens of other countries on charges he knew to be false, and snuck around making secret policy behind the backs of even his own most trusted advisors. You can't separate the fact that his government fell apart when Shojo died, because that was a direct result of him kneecapping that government over the years so that it depended on him, personally. Shojo was handed a Lawful system and made it more Chaotic than it was before, so that only his own personal scheming was holding it together.

Yes, I think the government would probably have continued, insofar as it was functioning, to function as long as Shojo lived. That only indicates that his governing style was only functional as long as he could reasonably plan to be immortal. His attitude toward Hinjo suggested, to me anyway, that he thought the only possible way to prepare Hinjo to rule was to strip away his sense of honor and turn him into a scheming manipulator like Shojo himself--so it could be said he planned to live forever, in a way even less realistic than using actual magic to do it.

As for whether Kubota and other corrupt nobles were less powerful at the end of Shojo's reign than at the beginning of it, well, I guess that's pure speculation; it appears we speculate in opposite directions. Given that Kubota was able to get away with siccing monsters on the entire refugee fleet for months and only died because Vaarsuvius didn't care about the rules any more than Shojo did, if he or his predecessor were even more politically powerful when Shojo began his reign, I have to wonder why he hadn't already seized total control of Azure City, though.

[martianmister]

Yes, you've made that exceptionally clear. What im unclear about is why youre putting so much importance on him being tried by Azure City law.

Because we're talking about whether his refusing to come back is an act performed to escape from justice or not? And he supposed to be the leader of them, it's his responsibility to face charges regarding his rule.

[hamishspence]

he supposed to be the leader of them, it's his responsibility to face charges regarding his rule.

He's Chaotic:

"Chaos" implies freedom, adaptability, and flexibility. On the downside, chaos can include recklessness, resentment toward legitimate authority, arbitrary actions, and irresponsibility.

Maybe, in a similar way to Eugene

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0039.html

his view on "responsibility for Azure City" or "his criminal actions" is "till death do us part" - with the City, once he's died, being left to take care of itself.

[Potatopeelerkin]

Because we're talking about whether his refusing to come back is an act performed to escape from justice or not? And he supposed to be the leader of them, it's his responsibility to face charges regarding his rule.

His coming back just to be thrown in jail, tried and probably found guilty doesn't benefit Azure City or the side of Good at all. His "responsibility" to be tried only makes sense from a Lawful perspective- a Chaotic Good person would believe that because it wouldn't actually achieve anything positive, it isn't worth doing, responsibility be damned. At least if he stays dead, Hinjo wouldn't be distracted from the upcoming battle.

[martianmister]

He's Chaotic:

"Chaos" implies freedom, adaptability, and flexibility. On the downside, chaos can include recklessness, resentment toward legitimate authority, arbitrary actions, and irresponsibility.

Maybe, in a similar way to Eugene

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0039.html

his view on "responsibility for Azure City" or "his criminal actions" is "till death do us part" - with the City, once he's died, being left to take care of itself.

So what?


His coming back just to be thrown in jail, tried and probably found guilty doesn't benefit Azure City or the side of Good at all.

The comic highlighted that Shojo's "disappearance" lowered military's morale in the war and caused factionism of Azure city resistance.


His "responsibility" to be tried only makes sense from a Lawful perspective- a Chaotic Good person would believe that because it wouldn't actually achieve anything positive, it isn't worth doing, responsibility be damned. At least if he stays dead, Hinjo wouldn't be distracted from the upcoming battle.

Chaotic people can be responsible. And if that someone is the ruler of a city and claiming to be doing something for common good, I expect him to be responsible.

[Potatopeelerkin]

The comic highlighted that Shojo's "disappearance" lowered military's morale in the war and caused factionism of Azure city resistance.

Chaotic people can be responsible. And if that someone is the ruler of a city and claiming to be doing something for common good, I expect him to be responsible.

Would Shojo's arrest be better for morale? What better way to inspire confidence in your soldiers than to tell them your leader betrayed you? I don't think Shojo's actions were a betrayal, but that's certainly the impression the soldiers would get, especially as the nobles would likely encourage it to get soldiers on their side.

Shojo being out of commission in any way would cause the factionism. I don't think for a second he could have prevented it by coming back and getting thrown in jail. And even if Miko and Hinjo never walked in on him in the first place and his facade remained intact, I doubt the nobles would follow him into the war. They only went as far as they did because they had something to gain from what they saw as an easily-swayed ruler. It was an inevitable part of stressful times.

The conditions for Good say nothing about responsibility or adherence to the law- rather, these are very explicitly LAWFUL traits as opposed to ones that are good or evil. A Good person takes actions which they believe will benefit the world. Now, yes, Chaotic people CAN be responsible- if they believe that'll contribute to their overall goal. In this case, it wouldn't, so Shojo doesn't see the point.

I don't believe for a second that Robin Hood would willingly take responsibility for his actions and be punished for it, and he's the most obvious CG archetype. Shojo's actions seem in line with Shojo's alignment to me.

[hamishspence]

yes, Chaotic people CAN be responsible- if they believe that'll contribute to their overall goal. In this case, it wouldn't, so Shojo doesn't see the point.

I don't believe for a second that Robin Hood would willingly take responsibility for his actions and be punished for it, and he's the most obvious CG archetype. Shojo's actions seem in line with Shojo's alignment to me.

Or, as The Giant put it:




In my personal interpretation of Lawfulness in D&D, I believe that yes, it is possible to be Lawful using a personal code rather than the societal definitions of law and order. However, I believe that the burden of upholding that code has to be much stricter than that of the average person in order to actually qualify as Lawful. You must be willing to suffer personal detriment through adhesion to your code, without wavering, if you want to wear the Lawful hat.

Because almost everyone has a personal code of some sort; Robin Hood had a personal code, and he's the poster child for Chaotic Good. The reason his code doesn't rise to the level of Lawful is that he would be willing to bend it in a pinch. And since he's already bucking all the societal traditions of his civilization, there are no additional penalties or punishments for him breaking his own code. He's unlikely to beat himself up if he needs to violate his own principles for the Greater Good; he'll justify it to himself as doing what needed to be done, maybe sigh wistfully once, and then get on with his next adventure.

Conversely, a Lawful character who obeys society's traditions has a ready-made source of punishment should he break those standards. If such a character does stray, she can maintain her Lawfulness by submitting to the proper authorities for judgment. Turning yourself in effectively atones for the breaking of the code, undoing (or at least mitigating) the non-Lawful act.

A Lawful character who operates strictly by a personal code, on the other hand, is responsible for punishing herself in the event of a breach of that code. If she waves it off as doing what needed to be done, then she is not Lawful, she's Neutral at the least. If she does it enough, she may even become Chaotic. A truly Lawful character operating on a personal code will suffer through deeply unpleasant situations in order to uphold it, and will take steps to punish themselves if they don't (possibly going as far as to commit honorable suicide).

[KorvinStarmast]

Yes, I think the government would probably have continued, insofar as it was functioning, to function as long as Shojo lived. That only indicates that his governing style was only functional as long as he could reasonably plan to be immortal. His attitude toward Hinjo suggested, to me anyway, that he thought the only possible way to prepare Hinjo to rule was to strip away his sense of honor and turn him into a scheming manipulator like Shojo himself--so it could be said he planned to live forever, in a way even less realistic than using actual magic to do it. The problem Shojo faced regarding succession is the problem faced by most feudal systems/rulers; how do you prepare your successor to be as good as, or better than you (which is needed to keep your duchy/country/empire from backsliding) without adding to the risk of being displaced by your successor before you want to step down? Tied to that, how do you ensure that the one you prefer to follow you will be able to handle the cat herding necessary to keep the various nobility in line rather than leading a revolt, coup, usurpation, or whatever that will disrupt rule and governance?

I like how Rich explored that particular puzzle within the context of a magical, versus real, world setting. As you pointed out earlier, Shojo hampered the process due to some of the choices he made to keep the whole thing together.

The comic highlighted that Shojo's "disappearance" lowered military's morale in the war and caused factionism of Azure city resistance. The fact that the rest of the nobility were reluctant to contribute to the leadership requirements of that battle (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0452.html) shows that the system was rotten within, and had been for a long time.

[Keltest]

The fact that the rest of the nobility were reluctant to contribute to the leadership requirements of that battle (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0452.html) shows that the system was rotten within, and had been for a long time.

Indeed. The assassination attempts would indicate that Shojo should really have been going after the nobles a lot harder than he had been, but that's an error of judgment, not a moral failing.

[KorvinStarmast]

Indeed. The assassination attempts would indicate that Shojo should really have been going after the nobles a lot harder than he had been, but that's an error of judgment, not a moral failing. His risk, I think, in going after a given noble would be that in so doing, he empowers that noble's allies to make a power play and opens the door to civil war. (I think that's what Rich was pointing to in one of the quoted observations up thread) . A few decades ago, I read a two book story by Stephen R Donaldson (Mirror of Her Dreams/Man Rides Through) that had a major character, the king, doing something similar to what Shojo does: he puts on the front of being mad while his kingdom is under threat (from within and from without) as part of his strategy of defeating his kingdom's and his family's foes . In the 90's, and 00's, I read the Farseer (Assassins) trilogy (Robin Hobb) where a similar ploy by King Shrewd (in the first book) is taken for reasons that don't become clearer until a later book. Not sure if Rich is familiar with either of those works, but the trope, or genre convention, of a king being more clever than forceful has been around for a long time.

[Rrmcklin]

Re: Shojo, I agree that he's not the type of person to see it as his "responsibility" to come back to life just to face trial and then die in prison, and I don't think it really dampens whatever claim he has to be called good.

I imagine that Haley would react much the same if she were in a similar position to him. If she thought she could still help by coming back she would but, honoring the justice system and the like just for the sake of it, is never going to be one of her priorities.

[Kish]

I think there are two different issues here.
1) Whether Shojo should have felt obligated to come back to assist Hinjo from a subordinate/imprisoned position, since "Everything I did, I did for my people" was apparently not supposed to be calling Pol Pot to mind as I thought was obviously the case when I first read it.
2) Whether Shojo should have felt obligated to come back to answer for his crimes under the law.

As to 2, whether he should have or not according to the moral code of anyone here, it's pretty unambiguous that he didn't feel any obligation to make amends for anything. The closest he could muster to "I apologize for making you think I was crazy" was "Oh, grow up, Hinjo!" He regretted nothing he'd done. If he was looking at it in the same terms martianmister is, then choosing to stay dead was a huge duh.

[Joerg]

As for whether Kubota and other corrupt nobles were less powerful at the end of Shojo's reign than at the beginning of it, well, I guess that's pure speculation; it appears we speculate in opposite directions. Given that Kubota was able to get away with siccing monsters on the entire refugee fleet for months and only died because Vaarsuvius didn't care about the rules any more than Shojo did, if he or his predecessor were even more politically powerful when Shojo began his reign, I have to wonder why he hadn't already seized total control of Azure City, though.

We don't know that much about politics under Shojo. Maybe Kubota was checked by the other nobles during Shojo's reign because Shojo cleverly played them against each other. Then Hinjo antagonized all of them and they preferred Kubota to Hinjo. Indeed, that Kubota could freely act like he did under Hinjo may indicate that Shojo's style of government was better at holding evil nobles down than Hinjo's, and thus was better for the people.

But circumstances were much different, too, so that's all rather vague. Anyway, I certainly find Shojo's methods questionable, but I don't know that they qualify as evil in an "the ends justify the means" kind of way. A comparison with Tarquin is invalid because his means were extremely evil and his ends were not good either.

[Resileaf]

We don't know that much about politics under Shojo. Maybe Kubota was checked by the other nobles during Shojo's reign because Shojo cleverly played them against each other. Then Hinjo antagonized all of them and they preferred Kubota to Hinjo. Indeed, that Kubota could freely act like he did under Hinjo may indicate that Shojo's style of government was better at holding evil nobles down than Hinjo's, and thus was better for the people.

But circumstances were much different, too, so that's all rather vague. Anyway, I certainly find Shojo's methods questionable, but I don't know that they qualify as evil in an "the ends justify the means" kind of way. A comparison with Tarquin is invalid because his means were extremely evil and his ends were not good either.

It's very much that Shojo was manipulating the nobles into fighting one another instead of him. As he explained, by acting crazy, whatever decision he made would be thought to be the result of an opposing house's meddling rather than being Shojo's own.
Hinjo, on the other hand, is obviously not crazy. And he showed very early on that he did not intend to let himself be pushed around by the nobles. Therefore, he immediately became a target for all of them, rather than all of them keeping an eye on each others.

In this comparison, Tarquin is a mix of Shojo and the noble houses. He didn't lead the countries, but he manipulated the leaders into fighting each other to get his way.

[Jasdoif]

Shojo's manipulations improved the lives of people in Azure City. (I'm not sure how, but I'll take his word for it for the sake of argument.)I thought that much was straight-forward: Shojo made decisions beneficial to the people of Azure City in general, while not looking like he was ruling at all so the nobles wouldn't get in the way of his continuing to make decisions beneficial to the people of Azure City in general.

[Lacuna Caster]

Because (0) the rules of D&D that run this story's universe, (1) because Miko was highish level surely Miko eventually became very rich...

Yeah, "asserting a premise" is a better way of phrasing what I was trying to say at the end of my post. I'd also add that the premise is asserted that Miko's parents are very likely of sufficient wealth and privilege, but there's no reason to think so; again, I'd argue that the fact that she was sent to an orphanage rather than to any relatives would suggest the exact opposite.

If you look on the basic chassis of what this story is built upon, it is the D&D game system that has never been a good ecnomonics emulator. PC's have an outsized access to material wealth due to their unique role in the game/story: they are the special ones, the chosen ones...

In this case, Lacuna, your asserted premise is: "the story suggests that death is temporary for those of sufficient wealth and privilege." But, as I pointed out, that is not true, the story suggests nothing of the kind...
Kish, you've gone out of your way to assert that high-level-wizards are not commonly available even to azurite nobles, which has been the major impediment to raising half the dead characters in this strip. Shojo and Therkla are only dead because they preferred it that way for either daft or selfish reasons. Roy comes back, Durkon presumably comes back, Jirix came back, and five random dwarves apparently came back because a certain someone had precisely 25,000 gold pieces to spare.

What we do know is that Shojo was of sufficient wealth and privilege that he could raise Miko's parents fairly easily as long as the bodies weren't destroyed, given Resurrection has a very long expiration date. If they were destroyed beyond recovery, then at minimum this suggests someone went out of their way to perma-kill them, which... you know, seems like an interesting detail.

Or they were lost at sea and dire crabs ate them. Whatever. I agree that there are certainly plausible ways to resolve this particular conundrum, and I'm sure most readers will never be especially troubled by this kind of background detail. I just don't care for the general attitude (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?545494-Questions-about-the-early-strip-and-Sapphire-Guard) of "nothing to see here, move along".

[Keltest]

Kish, you've gone out of your way to assert that high-level-wizards are not commonly available even to azurite nobles, which has been the major impediment to raising half the dead characters in this strip. Shojo and Therkla are only dead because they preferred it that way for either daft or selfish reasons. Roy comes back, Durkon presumably comes back, Jirix came back, and five random dwarves apparently came back because a certain someone had precisely 25,000 gold pieces to spare.

What we do know is that Shojo was of sufficient wealth and privilege that he could raise Miko's parents fairly easily as long as the bodies weren't destroyed, given Resurrection has a very long expiration date. If they were destroyed beyond recovery, then at minimum this suggests someone went out of their way to perma-kill them, which... you know, seems like an interesting detail.

Or they were lost at sea and dire crabs ate them. Whatever. I agree that there are certainly plausible ways to resolve this particular conundrum, and I'm sure most readers will never be especially troubled by this kind of background detail. I just don't care for the general attitude (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?545494-Questions-about-the-early-strip-and-Sapphire-Guard) of "nothing to see here, move along".

There IS nothing to see here though. Its literally not part of this story. Its like asking about what the magical community of France was up to during Harry Potter. Yeah, the answer probably isn't literally "nothing", but its entirely beyond the scope of whats actually important.

[Lacuna Caster]

There IS nothing to see here though. Its literally not part of this story. Its like asking about what the magical community of France was up to during Harry Potter...
...No. It's more like asking how Neville's parents ticked off the death eaters. Only that's actually much better explained, and Neville is a little less important to the plot, and he didn't grow up in a monastery.

[Keltest]

...No. It's more like asking how Neville's parents ticked off the death eaters. Only that's actually much better explained, and Neville is a little less important to the plot, and he didn't grow up in a monastery.

No, it really isn't. Neville's parentage is actually somewhat important to the story, and their specific fate affected his character. Miko doesn't have that.

[Resileaf]

No, it really isn't. Neville's parentage is actually somewhat important to the story, and their specific fate affected his character. Miko doesn't have that.

Indeed.
Storywise, Miko's relationship with Shojo was much more important.
So in truth, Miko's parents are dead so that Miko would have a semi-familial link with Shojo.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

...No. It's more like asking how Neville's parents ticked off the death eaters. Only that's actually much better explained, and Neville is a little less important to the plot, and he didn't grow up in a monastery.

Ah, Lacuna Caster once again talking about a different comic in which the main character was this "Miko" person completely unrelated to the one in OotS. What else is new.

Neville was a secondary protagonist deeply connected to the plot. Miko was a minor antagonist whose purpose was over the moment the OotS made it to Shojo. Minor antagonists don't need to have their circumstances or backgrounds explained. You have already acknowledged that there is headcanon to explain why they weren't raised. Pick one.

Grey Wolf

[hamishspence]

Miko was a minor antagonist whose purpose was over the moment the OotS made it to Shojo.

Going by War & XPs commentary, killing Shojo was her main narrative purpose (in order to ensure that Hinjo would be leader, and therefore that the OOTS would play a major part in the Battle of Azure City rather than a minor part.)

That, and blowing up the Gate.

As the Giant put it:


Everything from the point where Miko drags the Order to Azure City in chains in #251 is more-or-less exactly what was always going to happen, with only some tone changed. Miko, and only Miko, was intended to kill Shojo, fall from grace, and ultimately destroy the Azurite gate. No one else was ever considered for this role, and this role was assigned to her from before her first appearance in #200. It was the entire narrative purpose of her character.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

Going by War & XPs commentary, killing Shojo was her main narrative purpose (in order to ensure that Hinjo would be leader, and therefore that the OOTS would play a major part in the Battle of Azure City rather than a minor part.)

Fair enough, although that's a role that I think could have been given to Therkla, honestly. Kinda wish it had been, now that I think about it. She (and Moustache boss) always felt very much tacked in. Had they been involved in Shojo's death, I think they'd have been more menacing.

On the other hand, no Type-O joke, so it wouldn't have been all gains.

ETA: on response to your edit: I do not mean to suggest that those actions should have been given to anyone else. Just that the narrative could have worked with only slight changes (Therkla killing Shojo, O-Chul choosing to break the gate in face of Xykon, etc). Miko is, at best, the OotS equivalent of Cedric Diggory.

Grey Wolf

[Keltest]

Fair enough, although that's a role that I think could have been given to Therkla, honestly. Kinda wish it had been, now that I think about it. She (and Moustache boss) always felt very much tacked in. Had they been involved in Shojo's death, I think they'd have been more menacing.

On the other hand, no Type-O joke, so it wouldn't have been all gains.

Grey Wolf

I think their tacked-on-ness (please give me a better word for this!) was somewhat deliberate. As Belkar points out, the Order was a mess, unable to resolve plots and personal issues without Roy.

[Resileaf]

Also Therkla would have definitely not survived the gate exploding.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

I think their tacked-on-ness (please give me a better word for this!) was somewhat deliberate. As Belkar points out, the Order was a mess, unable to resolve plots and personal issues without Roy.

Huh. Could be. Doesn't make them for any more interesting characters to have to spend pages on, though. IMnpHO, of course. To misquote Xykon, they can't all be winners, and you have to save your A-game characters for the main plot.

Sorry, don't have a better word. If I had, I would've used it.


Also Therkla would have definitely not survived the gate exploding.
Err... neither did Miko, and I'm not suggesting Therkla would be involved in that bit of the plot?

Grey Wolf

[Lacuna Caster]

So in truth, Miko's parents are dead so that Miko would have a semi-familial link with Shojo.

No, it really isn't. Neville's parentage is actually somewhat important to the story, and their specific fate affected his character...
Which you only know because Ms. Rowling told you so. Aren't you glad she did?

Are you otherwise contending that the manner in which Miko's parents expired would have no particular impact on her character? After, let me see, getting four different protagonists that are implied to have been heavily shaped by early upbringing and/or family tragedy? I mean, sure, I'd like to be able to point at some evidence of nurturing behaviour on Shojo's part, but all available evidence indicates that he treated Miko as a disposable weapon to be kept in the dark and fed manure.


Neville was a secondary protagonist deeply connected to the plot. Miko was a minor antagonist whose purpose was over the moment the OotS made it to Shojo...
I... have no words.

[Rrmcklin]

Kish, you've gone out of your way to assert that high-level-wizards are not commonly available even to azurite nobles, which has been the major impediment to raising half the dead characters in this strip. Shojo and Therkla are only dead because they preferred it that way for either daft or selfish reasons. Roy comes back, Durkon presumably comes back, Jirix came back, and five random dwarves apparently came back because a certain someone had precisely 25,000 gold pieces to spare.

What we do know is that Shojo was of sufficient wealth and privilege that he could raise Miko's parents fairly easily as long as the bodies weren't destroyed, given Resurrection has a very long expiration date. If they were destroyed beyond recovery, then at minimum this suggests someone went out of their way to perma-kill them, which... you know, seems like an interesting detail.

Or they were lost at sea and dire crabs ate them. Whatever. I agree that there are certainly plausible ways to resolve this particular conundrum, and I'm sure most readers will never be especially troubled by this kind of background detail. I just don't care for the general attitude (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?545494-Questions-about-the-early-strip-and-Sapphire-Guard) of "nothing to see here, move along".

1) Did you somehow miss all the trouble they had getting Roy resurrected?
2) For Durkon, we can assume Hilgya will be the one to resurrect him, but failing that, there have been other high-level clerics established to be a part of this. Perhaps the High Priest of Thor or whoever.
3) Jirix was also with Redcloak, you know, that really high level cleric who is one of the main antagonist of the series.
4) There also happen near a High Priest nearby and as you yourself said, those five wouldn't have been resurrected otherwise if not for the convenient money.

The common thread for all of these resurrections is that there was at least some plot-related reason for them to happen; none of them imply that resurrection is inherently easily accessible just because someone happens to be wealthy. Which is the point everyone else is making: the story never treated Miko's parents as important, so they aren't. You being curious about them doesn't make it some huge writing flaw that they were left with "they died and stayed dead".

[hamishspence]

I'd like to be able to point at some evidence of nurturing behaviour on Shojo's part, but all available evidence indicates that he treated Miko as a disposable weapon to be kept in the dark and fed manure.


Well, there's this:


If anything, I attribute most of her positive traits to the way she was raised by Shojo and her subsequent membership in the Sapphire Guard. Which is not to say that he did a perfect job, but he recognized that she needed discipline in order to function, and gave her life meaning and purpose that it wouldn't have otherwise had. I've always felt that someone who had come to him with less underlying issues (whether due to her inherent personality or the trauma of losing her parents and getting sent to a monastery) could have been raised the same way and not turned out to be like Miko. Likewise, if Miko had never met Shojo, she probably would have left the monastery as an angry unstable loner with no purpose. Shojo's guidance was the tape that was held her together for so long, which is why she went to pieces when it was ripped off.

There's a strong implication that Shojo turned Miko into a better person than she otherwise would have been.

And, in HtPGhS:

a strong implication that Gin-Jun influenced her for the worse.

[Jasdoif]

I think their tacked-on-ness (please give me a better word for this!) was somewhat deliberate. As Belkar points out, the Order was a mess, unable to resolve plots and personal issues without Roy.Kubota was the face of all the issues with the nobility Shojo had been putting off. That's why he didn't come up until after Shojo wasn't around to put him off.

The initial purpose that Therkla would fill was to highlight Elan's physical estrangement from Haley, why is why she was introduced after the party was split. She did, of course, also end up internally conflicted between Elan and Kubota; and Vaarsuvius' disregard of her death at Kubota's hands catalyzed Elan's rejection of Vaarsuvius, which helped along Vaarsuvius abandoning the fleet....
Basically, they were introduced for the sake of an intermission between main points of the Order's actual goals; of course they're not going to come across as integral as aids/obstacles to those goals.


Also, try "hamfistedness".

[Lacuna Caster]

1) Did you somehow miss all the trouble they had getting Roy resurrected?
I did not. I also know how to spot a little thing called 'narrative contrivance'.


Well, there's this:
Unfortunately, I think the events of Scar effectively contradict this. We know what early Miko looked like based on her behaviour in O-Chul's story, and it isn't worse than her behaviour in the main strip- several readers commented on how relatively reasonable and mild-mannered she seemed. By that standard, the actual influence of her time spent in the Guard was clearly in the opposite direction. And blaming Gin-Jun doesn't help, because Shojo put her under Gin-Jun's command in the first place.

[hamishspence]

blaming Gin-Jun doesn't help, because Shojo put her under Gin-Jun's command in the first place.

But he didn't know just how out of control Gin-Jun was becoming.

Gin-Jun's lesson:

"never hesitate to punish evil, or support of evil, or tolerance of evil"


which he uses to justify attacking nonevil beings (any non-evil hobgoblins, in this case)


clearly stuck.

Not to mention that it's less "He put her under Gin-Jun's command" and more "he let her join the Guard."

[Resileaf]

Unfortunately, I think the events of Scar effectively contradict this. We know what early Miko looked like based on her behaviour in O-Chul's story, and it isn't worse than her behaviour in the main strip- several readers commented on how relatively reasonable and mild-mannered she seemed. By that standard, the actual influence of her time spent in the Guard was clearly in the opposite direction. And blaming Gin-Jun doesn't help, because Shojo put her under Gin-Jun's command in the first place.

I don't think that really contradicts what Hamish stated. Miko in the Sapphire Guard is mellow for a time after she meets Shojo. She said after all that she had been told by Shojo himself that she had a great destiny put on her by the Gods, so that probably helped in making her more bearable.
And then she became the antagonist she was because of the Order due to them pretty much breaking her down piece by piece, culminating in her father figure's perceived betrayal.