Miko and Redcloak's debate, 'white is black and black is white.'

[Alex Warlorn]

Re-read this comic,

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0372.html

And I feel that Redcloak's logic is skewered. Then again, Redcloak is -naturally- bias again Paladins AND humans alike.

Redcloak doesn't admit to his own hypocracy, hating the oppression his race suffers yet having no problem when it's his race doing the oppression.

And I think that the 'immune to fear' clause in this instance refers to being immune to fear created from outside sources rather than common sense.

Redcloak: You filthy paladins killed my mom and my fellow goblins!

Hinjo: I don't care!

Redcloak: You see?! That's the problem! You don't-agh! *Hinjo kicks him in the throat*

Hinjo: Did I give you permission to speak? You say that people who are part of the same group as me killed those dear to you? Fine! But don't go dragging in ANOTHER group of innocent people into things and call it justice!!!

[TheOOB]

Keep in mind that Recloak is evil and darn proud of it, he doesn't justify his position because of his vendetta, he just uses that to fuel his generic goblin hatred of humans and paladins.

Under normal circumstances, a paladins immunity to fear doesn't so much mean they don't feel fear, but rather that they have mastered fear, no allowing it to dictate their actions. Courage is being afraid of something, but doing it anyways, stupidity is not being afraid of something you should be. However, since Miko takes every paladin stereotype to the extream, she doesn't feel any fear, she is always right and the gods will personally make sure she succeeds. She really is a horrible monster.

[Tempest Fennac]

I know what you mean about Miko (ironically, the "scared of being wrong" statement is something that Redcloak has a lot of experience in: his tendency to follow things through to the bitter end in order to "justify" the deaths of his followers hasn't always gone as well as it did duing the Azure City battle).

[Vella_Malachite]

Well, the other difference is that we assume Redcloak has a conscience, given he repented sending all the poor, moderately defenceless hobgoblins to their deaths :smallfrown:. Miko has no conscience. Yes, she is Lawful Good and does everything for the Greater Good, but she has taken the belief in the Greater Good to such an extreme, she will kill for the slightest infringement without a conscience to kick in because it is for the Greater Good, and "the Twelve Gods ordered me to". Does this mean she is evil, thereby proving Redcloak's theory of her being everything she tried not to be?

And as for the "no fear" thing, she has no fear because she believes she is an emissary of the Twelve Gods, and therefore protected from whatever spiritual harm she may come to? Has she no fear because of her faith? Either way, it's still unnatural.

[EvilJames]

Actually Miko doesn't kill for the slightest infringment just major ones like (ironicly enough) murder. Nowhere in the comic did she attack any one for slight infringments (she seemed very fond of scolding and berating) and no the Shojo thing doesn't count as slight. He manipulated and subverted the law and had been doing so for quite some time; in addition she thought he was actually working with the enemies of creation. (She fell because she was wrong about that)

Also Miko has a consience as well, she just never did anything that went against her code up until the fall (she was a little lacking in the empathy and compassion areas though) afterward her delusions were essentially masking it for the time being.

Redcloak didn't have much of a consience until his revelation and even then it only improvrd slightly.

[Kish]

The trick with Redcloak and Miko is that each sees the other's failings perfectly, and neither will ever grant the others' viewpoint any validity.

[EvilJames]

The trick with Redcloak and Miko is that each sees the other's failings perfectly, and neither will ever grant the others' viewpoint any validity.

QFT.... yep very truthful....is that enough words now....





.....I like puppies

[Querzis]

Redcloak is evil and proud of it. The point he was making in that strip and from his personnal experience his that paladins arent better and the only reasons they can get away with killing everyone that register as evil is because the gods created goblins and most evil aligned creatures for the sole purpose of giving experience to adventurers. Redcloak see paladins and their gods just as evil as him, Xykon or the Dark one but at least he freaking admit it while they go around destroying goblin villages and killing childrens while still keeping their LG alignement for no better reasons then the gods are on their sides. Redclaok hate humans before anything else because of their hypocrisy, he isnt thinking «we goblins are better then them» but «how the hell can those bastards can call themselves the good guys? They are just as bad as us!»

[bluish_wolf]

Sometimes fair is foul and foul is fair, but, in this situation, foul is foul as well. So, basically, they are all jerks.

[Sigbru]

I also realized that the person that is evil and is pround to be evil (Redcloak) tends to be "better" than the person that is good but act as evil (Miko)
At least I saw much less "I hate Redcloak" then "I hate Miko"

[The Hop Goblin]

To Redcloak, evil defines a side - Specifically goblins. He has seen what "Good" paladins do (or at least, paladins that proclaim themselves as good). It skewers the whole understanding of what is "Good" and what is "Evil". So when he is proud to be "Evil", its pride of being the opposition to humans, elves, and those calling themselves "Good".

Miko? Miko took LG and perverted it into LE - taking essentially good and just laws and saying "Screw habius corpus" and took on the role of the only true Justicar of the world. Her continued arrogance and tyrannical view of what the world is did a disservice to herself, the Sapphire Guard, and Paladins themselves.

In all seriousness, Redcloak/Miko is a fantastic comparison - the varitable Yin and Yang.

[Wolfman42666]

In all seriousness, Redcloak/Miko is a fantastic comparison - the varitable Yin and Yang.

That's a good comparison shame the balance got screwed up. I think it was here (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0370.html) or maybe here (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0462.html) :smallbiggrin:

[David Argall]

I also realized that the person that is evil and is pround to be evil (Redcloak) tends to be "better" than the person that is good but act as evil (Miko)


Redcloak can be a more sympathetic character, but to deem him morally better than Miko is simple nonsense. The list of Redcloak crimes is long and largely unregretted.

Redcloak is evil. The lich may scorn him as only little evil, but he is quite definitely evil. He kills people, frequently and with no hesitation.

It is simply self defense to kill him. We may argue the paladins, Miko in particular, are distinctly too eager to engage in such self defense, but if there were no goblin attacks, there would be no paladin attacks. If there were no paladin attacks, there would be no paladins, or other good people, except as goblin slaves.

[Demented]

Redcloak can be a more sympathetic character, but to deem him morally better than Miko is simple nonsense. The list of Redcloak crimes is long and largely unregretted.

Ah, but there's the rub.
Redcloak's actions are quite clearly Evil, and it's unlikely anyone could ever debate that. That fits perfectly with his actions and even the purpose of his race, as a monster that serves as a guilt-free source of combat xp. He's Evil, he likes it that way, and everyone else does too. (Except for the peasants whose pigs he steals, but, eh, you can't please everyone.)

Guess who obstructs that? Instead of people killing goblins, they're debating Miko's alignment and arguing over whether she should fall. By rights, that's going to destroy the very purpose of the goblins' existence... If you can't trust paladins to be spotless paragons of Good, how can you trust goblins to be their usual selves? Where's your guilt-free xp then? Hell forbid, we'd even start having Lawful Good goblin teenagers running around!

What's that you say? Oh. Nevermind then.

[Alex Warlorn]

Ah, but there's the rub.
Redcloak's actions are quite clearly Evil, and it's unlikely anyone could ever debate that. That fits perfectly with his actions and even the purpose of his race, as a monster that serves as a guilt-free source of combat xp. He's Evil, he likes it that way, and everyone else does too. (Except for the peasants whose pigs he steals, but, eh, you can't please everyone.)

Guess who obstructs that? Instead of people killing goblins, they're debating Miko's alignment and arguing over whether she should fall. By rights, that's going to destroy the very purpose of the goblins' existence... If you can't trust paladins to be spotless paragons of Good, how can you trust goblins to be their usual selves? Where's your guilt-free xp then? Hell forbid, we'd even start having Lawful Good goblin teenagers running around!

What's that you say? Oh. Nevermind then.

Killing opponents is no longer the only way to get XP.

[pjackson]

Killing opponents is no longer the only way to get XP.

It never was.

[Techonce]

It's interesting to see who has read Start of Darkness and who hasn't. I like Redcload a whole lot more after reading that.

As for his motivations, they are in some ways more "good" than Miko's.

If you have 2 people and one fo them wants to live on their own in peace and the other hunts people down and kills them based on what race they are, it muddies the water when the "good" guys are doing the killing.

But that is an alignment debate and well, there have been enough of those already.

[chibibar]

Heh... Miko could have NOT kill the Bandit leader or Samantha... sure Samantha wanting Miko to be her "minion" but Miko was powerful enough to subdue them and take them to jail, but nah... it is easier to kill since she is not in anyone's jurisdiction.

[Alex Warlorn]

One could argue that in that case that was just self defense, the bandits started that fight, and they were outside of any nation's legal reach.

[Flubadubdub]

When she murdered Shogo, and Hinjo asked her to put down her weapon and be reasonable, she attempted to then kill him. Umm, last time I checked, Hinjo wasn't be accused of any sort of misdoing.

No infringement, just attempting to kill a paladin.

I don't understand why people try to still paint her as a saint. I personally think that despite being wrong in both attacking Shogo and Hinjo, both being unlawful attempts at bringing justice, she was still lawful good. Was she the pure definition of lawful good anymore though?

Psh, yeah right. The Hinjo attack was definitely chaotic, and both fit under evil, but her help saving the peasents was a very good act, and in her time getting double digit levels, I imagine the vast majority was spent helping others. It would be like arguing since Belkar did a single good act, he would suddenly be made neutral or good.

[David Argall]

Please cite where anybody labeled Miko a saint, particularly after 406.

We simply point out that, while she did some clearly evil things, the denouncements that she is a blackguard or other major evil are simply way overboard.

[David Argall]

If you have 2 people and one fo them wants to live on their own in peace and the other hunts people down and kills them based on what race they are, it muddies the water when the "good" guys are doing the killing.

So where do we have actual evidence that the run of the mill goblin or other humanoid wants to live in peace? Instead we have the reverse, that they are the ones hunting people down and killing them.

[The Hop Goblin]

So where do we have actual evidence that the run of the mill goblin or other humanoid wants to live in peace? Instead we have the reverse, that they are the ones hunting people down and killing them.

Read Start of Darkness.

[David Argall]

SOD Read several times. We have Redcloak's village, whose intent is not stated. However, we have the presence of the former Redcloak, whose lifegoal is control of the Gate, a goal that requires aggressive action. The village also contails an excess number of higher level goblins, which is consistent with it being a headquarters of the Redcloak, and thus the moral equivilent of a military fort.

We have Right-Eye's village, which is not bothered by paladins or other humans for a period of 17 years, and then was destroyed by the order of the lich. The claim is made that it is far from the humans, but there are a lot of humans in the audience for the MitD along with Right-Eye.

Otherwise, we have goblins engaged in offensive actions.

We are talking here of the typical case. All SOD provides us with is the non-news that there are the exceptions.

[Charles Phipps]

SOD Read several times. We have Redcloak's village, whose intent is not stated. However, we have the presence of the former Redcloak, whose lifegoal is control of the Gate, a goal that requires aggressive action. The village also contails an excess number of higher level goblins, which is consistent with it being a headquarters of the Redcloak, and thus the moral equivilent of a military fort.

We have Right-Eye's village, which is not bothered by paladins or other humans for a period of 17 years, and then was destroyed by the order of the lich. The claim is made that it is far from the humans, but there are a lot of humans in the audience for the MitD along with Right-Eye.

Otherwise, we have goblins engaged in offensive actions.

We are talking here of the typical case. All SOD provides us with is the non-news that there are the exceptions.

My rebuttal

Still, it leaks me feeling a bit squicky. WHY weren't the Paladins punished by their gods for killing children?

[Tempest Fennac]

If the Dark One's plan succeeed, there's a good chance that he would use the Snarl to kill at least a few of the other gods due to how he is classed as evil. Being as the gods wouldn't want to end up being killed for XP, which is ironic considering why they supposedly created the NPC races, they wouldn't really care about anyone who could futher the plan being killed, even though they have no knowledge or interest in the plan.

[The Hop Goblin]

SOD Read several times. We have Redcloak's village, whose intent is not stated. However, we have the presence of the former Redcloak, whose lifegoal is control of the Gate, a goal that requires aggressive action. The village also contails an excess number of higher level goblins, which is consistent with it being a headquarters of the Redcloak, and thus the moral equivilent of a military fort.

We have Right-Eye's village, which is not bothered by paladins or other humans for a period of 17 years, and then was destroyed by the order of the lich. The claim is made that it is far from the humans, but there are a lot of humans in the audience for the MitD along with Right-Eye.

Otherwise, we have goblins engaged in offensive actions.

We are talking here of the typical case. All SOD provides us with is the non-news that there are the exceptions.

SOD
Page 11, Pannel 1.
:redcloak: : Revered Master, I don't understand. These are Azurites, I can recognize their clothing. Their homeland is more than a thousand miles from here. Why are they attacking? What did we do to them?
Goblin Cleric: "We"? We didn't do anything to them, other than set off their "Evil Radar"

Implied innocence. Goblins in this comic have been engaged in aggressive actions only under Xykon. The only other time was in SoD when they killed a million humans when the Dark One was assasinated during a peaceful diplomatic mission.

Due to SoD, I don't really view the Azurites as the pinnacle of good and law. Very few are humble and they enjoy the slaughter way too much for just "doing the lords work".

[Moechi_Vill]

Keep in mind that Recloak is evil and darn proud of it, he doesn't justify his position because of his vendetta, he just uses that to fuel his generic goblin hatred of humans and paladins.

Under normal circumstances, a paladins immunity to fear doesn't so much mean they don't feel fear, but rather that they have mastered fear, no allowing it to dictate their actions. Courage is being afraid of something, but doing it anyways, stupidity is not being afraid of something you should be. However, since Miko takes every paladin stereotype to the extreme, she doesn't feel any fear, she is always right and the gods will personally make sure she succeeds. She really is a horrible monster.

Good is evil?
I submit that due to the fact that Miko fell due to misinformation, lies and poor social handling by Roy and whoever raised her it can be understood why she did what she did.
On one hand we have a woman who has a character flaw and on the other we have a mass-murdering goblin who subscribes to ideas of keeping family and race secure while effectively undermining it through the destruction of other such units and you call her a horrible monster because she made a bad judgment call while under extreme duress?

[Morty]

I submit that due to the fact that Miko fell due to misinformation, lies and poor social handling by Roy and whoever raised her it can be understood why she did what she did.


Really? And here I thought she fell because she was delusional, self-righteous, egomaniacal and unstable.

[Querzis]

Really? And here I thought she fell because she was delusional, self-righteous, egomaniacal and unstable.

Where did you get that idea? You should know that in a conflict between a hot girl and a guy, the guy will always be blamed and sued no matter how crazy and violent the hot girl is! Seriously, we wont really have sex equality until we fix that thing.

[TheOOB]

Really? And here I thought she fell because she was delusional, self-righteous, egomaniacal and unstable.

Hmm, I thought she fell because she slaughtered an old unarmed man in cold blood.

Hinjo knew just as much about the situation as Miko did, but he didn't flip out and kill people, he tried to figure things out and solve matters diplomatically. We don't see him fight until his city is attacked by an invading army. On the other hand Miko attacked the Order of the Stick on sight, despite receiving explicit orders not to, just because one of them registered as evil. She continues to jump off the handle at every opportunity, believing that everything that doesn't agree with her pre-conceived notions about the world is not only wrong, but absolutely evil and to be punished by death. She never considers that she might be wrong about something, or that there may be more to a situation than meets the eye, she is a petty, sociopathic, violent, intolerant, vigilante serial killer.

That doesn't mean Redcloak is any better, he just happened to recognize one of his own when he saw her.

[Demented]

Where did you get that idea? You should know that in a conflict between a hot girl and a guy, the guy will always be blamed and sued no matter how crazy and violent the hot girl is! Seriously, we wont really have sex equality until we fix that thing.

Ah, but in D&D the sexes really ARE equal. Cleavage-induced circumstance bonuses to diplomacy notwithstanding.

[Morty]

Hmm, I thought she fell because she slaughtered an old unarmed man in cold blood.


Which happened because she was delusional, self-righteous, egomaniacal and unstable.
I don't say Redcloak is any better either, but Miko's fall is her own fault alone.

[Shatteredtower]

Hmm, I thought she fell because she slaughtered an old unarmed man in cold blood.Nah. Start of Darkness indicates that it wasn't for that reason. The same action, yes, but not that reason.

We didn't see a paladin fall for killing Redcloak's mother or kid sister, both of whom were unarmed and slaughtered.

Not that it excuses the act, but it wasn't a cold-blooded killing either. It was done in the heat of the moment.


On the other hand Miko attacked the Order of the Stick on sight, despite receiving explicit orders not to, just because one of them registered as evil.No, she didn't. She informed them that they were charged with a crime and ordered them to surrender or face the consequences. True, telling them they were charged with crimes where the only possible sentence was death didn't give them much incentive to surrender, and she jumped the gun by cutting Roy off before he could finish his sentence with a word such as "explanation". (It is likely that she stopped listening at, "We're not surrendering.")


She continues to jump off the handle at every opportunity...If that was true, she'd have attacked Belkar the first time he attempted to hide his evil alignment from her. Or the second. Or the third. Or she'd have gone off at V for loudly rejoicing her death. Or she'd have attacked Roy for trying to escape from prison, rather than asking Durkon what happened and taking him at his word, even though the locks were open.


...believing that everything that doesn't agree with her pre-conceived notions about the world is not only wrong, but absolutely evil and to be punished by death.Yet she didn't attempt to kill the Order for insisting she put them up at an inn for a night, nor did she attempt to kill Roy for expecting her to treat his party with more consideration.


...She never considers that she might be wrong about something...Which is why she accepted correction from Durkon in two out of three cases, even though he was deliberately misleading her in one of the cases she accepted.


...or that there may be more to a situation than meets the eye...Which is why Durkon didn't get a chance to show her that Roy wasn't evil, why she attacked Belkar the moment he blocked her attempt to check his alignment, and why she didn't pause in her attempts to kill everyone in the throne room after her fall to try to figure out what just happened.


...she is a petty, sociopathic, violent, intolerant, vigilante serial killer.Violent and intolerant, I will grant you. She is not a vigilante or serial killer, however. She's a soldier, discharged for the wrongful execution of her lord. Belkar is the sociopath. Roy's the petty one, unless you compare him to Eugene.

[Shatteredtower]

Where did you get that idea? You should know that in a conflict between a hot girl and a guy, the guy will always be blamed and sued no matter how crazy and violent the hot girl is! Seriously, we wont really have sex equality until we fix that thing.That is as true as the observation that people are only condemning the paladin for having gone up against a hot guy. I mean, look at those rippling muscles! Mmm, baby! And those hands -- so strong, so skilled... sigh...

What's that? He's a stick figure? Like Miko, you mean?

I don't get to suggest that people support Roy because they like seeing women get smacked around, because that would be a baseless assumption on my part. I don't believe that's the case, because there's as little grounds for me to make that accusation as there is to accuse people of condemning Roy's behaviour because he perceives her to be attractive.

[The Hop Goblin]

Good is evil?
I submit that due to the fact that Miko fell due to misinformation, lies and poor social handling by Roy and whoever raised her it can be understood why she did what she did.
On one hand we have a woman who has a character flaw and on the other we have a mass-murdering goblin who subscribes to ideas of keeping family and race secure while effectively undermining it through the destruction of other such units and you call her a horrible monster because she made a bad judgment call while under extreme duress?

So characters, (or real people for that matter) should have no responsibility and can blame it on someone who gave them a rough time - or - their parents? A Paladin falls because of their choices, not because mamma didn't hold her enough. No judge in the world would say it was understandable you shot the old man in the head because some burly dude slapped you around a bit.

A Paladin is humble, and takes their task that was appointed by their gods with humility and great honor - They do not think themselves special, or above another just because of this. A Paladin doesn't denounce reality or another point of view just because being a Paladin means you are special in the gods' eyes. She fell because she was unworthy.

If you want to see what an example of a real Paladin should be, find the book "The Deed of Paxinarrion". You'll find Miko comming up short in every concievable way.

[Shatteredtower]

She fell because she was unworthy.She fell for committing an unworthy act. Not the same thing, or else she'd never have been in a position to fall in the first place.

[The Hop Goblin]

She fell for committing an unworthy act. Not the same thing, or else she'd never have been in a position to fall in the first place.

The gods were kind. Her behavior was not as a true Paladin from the get go. This kinda goes along with the old question: Are Paladin's a calling or a class.

But I would like to ask a System-related question on this. Are thoughts/attitudes held in the same regard as actions? I mean clearly not in this case. But having a Paladin strut around saying "I'm the chosen one and if I don't like you and/or you don't agree with me, you are clearly evil." but does Not commit an act of aggression... are there any Official penalties?

[Shatteredtower]

The gods were kind. Her behavior was not as a true Paladin from the get go.Song of Roland says otherwise. So does the Giant, it would seem.

So much for that argument.

[Corsair]

Well, the gods are rather pragmatic, and this isn't The Forgotten Realms where the only threat to a God's immortality is lack of belief and Ao flinging them all from their perches. The Gods are forced in OOTS to recognize a sense of Lesser Evils.

Furthermore, when the Paladins attacked, killing the children pretty much qualifies as a mercy killing. Is it better to leave them to starve or be torn apart by animals, or just kill them quickly? They couldn't exactly haul them back to Azure City, the first time he stepped into the streets he'd get shot, stabbed, stoned, burned, and disintegrated before he could say "A pint all 'round."

[PhallicWarrior]

It's interesting, really. Redcloak is an evil creature who does horrible things in the name of equality, while Miko was a (arguably) good creature who did bad (In some cases, very bad.) things "for the Greater Good." Miko killed an unarmed man in cold blood and accidentally kills herself because she jumped to conclusions, which was what she does. That's it, her Tragic Flaw. Redcloak on the other hand, is unquestionably evil, but raises an army to crush humans for reacting exactly how RL humans have acted throughout history- persecuting those who are different from them. Whether it's the crusades, the salem witch trials, or slavery, it all comes back to that, and Redcloak (understandably) doesn't like it. Does that make his actions just? Of course not, but it does explain them. He's gotten to the point where he's decided that no matter what comes next, he's gone too far to stop.

[Demented]

What's that? He's a stick figure? Like Miko, you mean?

Miko DOES have boobies! Well, fine, only one boobie. But the mind fills in the rest...