Tsukiko's Crimes

[Hallavast]

So, after the last comic, I've witnessed a little animosity towards Tsukiko. Namely that she "deserves worse than death", because she committed murder and treason. Other justifications include her alleged necrophilia, her evil alignment, and her general annoyingness.

I'd like to point out that there's no proof of necrophilia. She was put into prison for "unnatural acts of wizardry". This might just mean she created some undead.

I'd also like to express my opinion that she isn't liable for treason or murder. Treason implies that she at some point held allegience to AC. I see no evidence of this.

If we take hold it to be true that she didn't commit treason, then we must also recognize that she didn't commit murder. She simply killed a bunch of enemy soldiers during a battle.

That just leaves her evil alignment (which hasn't been proven as far as I recall) and her annoying personality (subject to opinion). I wouldn't want her dead based on either of these things alone.

So I must ask; why does she deserve worse than death?

[FoE]

Fortunately, the House of Horrors thread has already settled the 'necrophiliac' debate with incontrovertible proof.


http://img401.imageshack.us/img401/2091/tsukikoroych1.jpg

I would call that 'checkmate,' sir. :smalltongue:

[Shas aia Toriia]

Just so long as Tsukiko was born an Azurite, she technically was treasonous by joining Team Evil. Also, she agreed to help out Azure City in the battle, and then switched sides. Sounds like treason to me.

[Nerd-o-rama]

Pretty much all my arguments come from here. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0446.html)

If you are a citizen of a nation, and we have nothing to make us think that Tsukiko is not a citizen of Azure City, and you aid that nation's enemies in wartime, you are a traitor. She defects as soon as she is able. When she kills soldiers after this, it's normal warfare, but she's still committing treason.

Tsukiko also goes as close to stating that she is a necrophiliac without using the word as is possible, although it was possible she was lying to get on Xykon's good side.

Personally, I think she's Evil, but not particularly so, and an entertaining character. I don't think she deserves a fate worse than death, but death would be a good one, since execution is the traditional punishment for treason. Plus, as a lieutenant to the BBEG, she's probably going to be offed by a hero in the course of stopping him anyway.

[Hallavast]

Just so long as Tsukiko was born an Azurite, she technically was treasonous by joining Team Evil. Also, she agreed to help out Azure City in the battle, and then switched sides. Sounds like treason to me.

Two questions:

1. Why does birth in a particular location guarauntee your allegience to that location even after society has ostricized you (justly or not)?

2.When did she "agree" to Hinjo's terms? I don't see a panel with her giving her consent to Hinjo's contract. Hinjo just said: You will fight for me, and I'll reduce your sentence.

2a. Even if there is some sort of agreement between them, does breaking such an unfair agreement warrant her death (or worse)?

[FujinAkari]

1. Why does birth in a particular location guarauntee your allegience to that location even after society has ostricized you (justly or not)?

It doesn't, but agreeing to fight for a side and then betraying them midbattle DOES count as treason.


2.When did she "agree" to Hinjo's terms? I don't see a panel with her giving her consent to Hinjo's contract. Hinjo just said: You will fight for me, and I'll reduce your sentence.

Did you see her in prison during the battle? I sure didn't. Therefore, she obviously accepted the terms.


2a. Even if there is some sort of agreement between them, does breaking such an unfair agreement warrant her death (or worse)?

The lowest level of hell is reserved for traitors.

[sihnfahl]

1. Why does birth in a particular location guarauntee your allegience to that location even after society has ostricized you (justly or not)? 2.When did she "agree" to Hinjo's terms? I don't see a panel with her giving her consent to Hinjo's contract. Hinjo just said: You will fight for me, and I'll reduce your sentence.
Here. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0420.html) When Hinjo makes his offer, Tsukiko says, "I suppose." That's taken as consent to the contract as Hinjo allows her out of the prison to fight; the kidnapper, who declined, was sent back to the prison (where he got squashed by falling masonry).
That returns to #1 - by agreeing to defend AC, and turning in the middle of battle, that's treason.


2a. Even if there is some sort of agreement between them, does breaking such an unfair agreement warrant her death (or worse)?
How is it unfair? Help defend AC and have your sentence reduced if AC is successfully defended, or be sent back to prison and hope the Hobgoblins don't kill you.

[Hallavast]

It doesn't, but agreeing to fight for a side and then betraying them midbattle DOES count as treason.

Did you see her in prison during the battle? I sure didn't. Therefore, she obviously accepted the terms.

The lowest level of hell is reserved for traitors.

I didn't see her agree to Hinjo's terms. Hinjo is also busy/naive/inexperienced enough to have not required her to actually voice her agreement and may have just taken it as given that she'd help him.

Sorry nevermind that argument. I missed the part where she agreed.

But this is semantics, anyway. I wouldn't hold myself or my peers to honoring a bogus contract from who I see as an illegitimate tyrant, especially if my only other options are death or unjust imprisonment.

The government stripped Tsukiko's rights as a citizen when they imprisoned her. She owes AC nothing. Thus, there is no betrayal.

[sihnfahl]

I wouldn't hold myself or my peers to honoring a bogus contract from who I see as an illegitimate tyrant, especially if my only other options are death or unjust imprisonment.
Illegitimate? Shojo was the legal ruler of AC. When he was killed, the laws specify that the next in line, Hinjo, was the legal ruler of AC. How is he illegitimate?
And Hinjo is a PALADIN. He CANNOT make a bogus contract - that would violate the law.


The government stripped Tsukiko's rights as a citizen when they imprisoned her. She owes AC nothing. Thus, there is no betrayal.
By living in AC, she consents to live by AC's laws; if she did not want to abide by AC's laws, she could have left.
When she violated those laws, the government had all rights to punish her for it. Unless you're arguing that someone who lives in a country and enjoys the benefits of citizenship of that country has no duty to follow its justly enacted laws?

[Nerd-o-rama]

The government stripped Tsukiko's rights as a citizen when they imprisoned her. She owes AC nothing. Thus, there is no betrayal.
That's not how citizenship works...

What you're talking about is Tsukiko's motivation for defection. Just because she had an emotional reason to betray her country doesn't make her morally or ethically justified, just well-written.

[Zencao]

There's no hope! The OP has been turned into an undead (fanboy)! He is now a slave to Tsukiko! Kill it with fire!

[Hallavast]

Illegitimate? Shojo was the legal ruler of AC. When he was killed, the laws specify that the next in line, Hinjo, was the legal ruler of AC. How is he illegitimate?
And Hinjo is a PALADIN. He CANNOT make a bogus contract - that would violate the law.


By living in AC, she consents to live by AC's laws; if she did not want to abide by AC's laws, she could have left.
When she violated those laws, the government had all rights to punish her for it. Unless you're arguing that someone who lives in a country and enjoys the benefits of citizenship of that country has no duty to follow its justly enacted laws?

Your concept of legitimacy is not the same as Tsukiko's. Why is your claim that a man has a right to rule any different from those of countless others supporting tyrrany? I agree that the contract is perfectly legal within the confines of AC law. Tsukiko obviously doesn't see herself as a citizen of that city, though. Any social contract that binds her to the city is therefore Void. Thus, she is not responsible for upholding her end of a bargain made at the point of a sword. She was obviously not enjoying the benefits of citizenship. She was a prisoner of the city.

Also, I'd like to point out the fact that I do not share Tsukiko's affinity for the undead. The views expressed here are made from Tsukiko's point of view-not my own. So there is no basis for any tactless claim that I am some sort of "fanboy". I am simply vocal about morality and civil rights.

[Stormwolf]

Tsusiko probably wasn't thrown in jail directly on her entry into the city - she must have broken some law whilst under the jurisdiction of the SG to wind up in that jail.

Even if you live in a foreign country / city state you are still bound by the laws of that country. Witness the recent troubles caused by Mohammed the Teddy Bear (i.e. even ignorance / stupidity isn't an excuse under the law).

If you commit a crime against local law then you face the local system of justice / law - however 'tyranical' and unfair those laws appear to be (unless the government of your home country gets you off the hook).

Whether or not it is the duty of a just man (or woman) to usurp an unjust law is another debate... although I would suggest that there aren't many civilisations that have ever considered laws against necrophilia, graverobbing and necromancy as 'unjust'.

[Hallavast]

Whether or not it is the duty of a just man (or woman) to usurp an unjust law is another debate...

Not really. That was part of the argument I was trying to make. In her eyes, she has done nothing wrong. So isn't she capable of redemption? If she can be redeemed, then isn't death a little too harsh a punishment?

[multilis]

Ok, so if Belkar felt he was a citizen of Lord Banjo the puppet's kingdom and they were at war with AC, then killing the guard would be no crime because there was a war?

I don't really see how war makes something ok.

[Hallavast]

I don't really see how war makes something ok.

Me neither, but that's beside the point. The point is that Tsukiko is not guilty by reason of insanity.

[sihnfahl]

Your concept of legitimacy is not the same as Tsukiko's.
Er, how did Tsukiko's concept of legitimacy come into this? Up to this point, all statements as to why Tsukiko should not suffer a fate worse than death has been from your POV, not Tsukiko's. You only recently made the statement

The views expressed here are made from Tsukiko's point of view-not my own.. And that's negated by you saying
So there is no basis for any tactless claim that I am some sort of "fanboy". I am simply vocal about morality and civil rights. Not 'Tsukiko's concepts of morality and civil rights' but 'I'.


I agree that the contract is perfectly legal within the confines of AC law.
And when made by a Paladin, is better than a legal contract under AC law. Were Tsukiko to have upheld the agreement and AC successful in its defense, Hinjo could do nothing BUT reduce her sentence. He's bound not only by AC law, but the Paladin Code. And ANYONE who knows Paladins know that he would uphold that contract. (Heck, why would she take it if she believed he wouldn't follow through on his end?)


She was obviously not enjoying the benefits of citizenship. She was a prisoner of the city.
She enjoyed the benefits of citizenship up until her incarceration. Protection from crime, from invasion, public works, etc. Unless you're arguing that she became a high-level mystic theurge, committed unnatural acts of wizardry, was tried and sentenced all before she left the womb, culminating in her being put into jail at the moment of birth, which also aged her to adulthood?

[The_Evil_One]

Me neither, but that's beside the point. The point is that Tsukiko is not guilty by reason of insanity.

In D&D, insanity is justification for death.

[kpenguin]

Fortunately, the House of Horrors thread has already settled the 'necrophiliac' debate with incontrovertible proof.



I would call that 'checkmate,' sir. :smalltongue:

All that proves is an attraction to the undead.

The definition of "necrophilia" from Merriam Webster Online (http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/necrophilia):

obsession with and usually erotic interest in or stimulation by corpses

So, do undead count as corpses? I say not.

According to the definition of "corpse" from Merriam Webster Online (http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/corpse):

1archaic : a human or animal body whether living or dead2 a: a dead body especially of a human being b: the remains of something discarded or defunct <the corpses of rusting cars>

Assuming that definition 2a is the most prevelant to discussion of necrophilia, we can observe that attraction to the undead does not qualify necrophilia since the undead are not dead.

Unless someone can find evidence that Tsukiko is attracted to corpses that are not animated, I can safely say that Tsukiko is not a necrophiliac.

[Rutee]

Your concept of legitimacy is not the same as Tsukiko's. Why is your claim that a man has a right to rule any different from those of countless others supporting tyrrany?
It isn't, but you haven't supported a claim of illegitimacy besides "Tsukiko doesn't like him/thinks he's a tyrant". Keep in mind, that tyrannical or not (And they weren't), Britain held completely legitimate claims of sovereignty over America when America held its revolution. Mind, if she feels it was tyrannical, she certainly has her human right to rebel! But this doesn't the government less legitimate.


I agree that the contract is perfectly legal within the confines of AC law. Tsukiko obviously doesn't see herself as a citizen of that city, though. Any social contract that binds her to the city is therefore Void. Thus, she is not responsible for upholding her end of a bargain made at the point of a sword. She was obviously not enjoying the benefits of citizenship. She was a prisoner of the city.
No, that is in fact, not how it works. Firstly, the bargain was HARDLY at sword point. Secondly, even if you are not a citizen of a government, you can in fact make contracts with them. Not being a citizen doesn't suddenly mean you can renege.


Also, I'd like to point out the fact that I do not share Tsukiko's affinity for the undead. The views expressed here are made from Tsukiko's point of view-not my own. So there is no basis for any tactless claim that I am some sort of "fanboy". I am simply vocal about morality and civil rights.

You appear to be arguing that Tsukiko's emotions are the logical viewpoint, however.

[Stormwolf]

Not really. That was part of the argument I was trying to make. In her eyes, she has done nothing wrong. So isn't she capable of redemption? If she can be redeemed, then isn't death a little too harsh a punishment?

Okay... make it part of the debate. It doesn't matter that in her eyes she has done nothing wrong, she broke the laws of the country and it's their eyes that matter here. Going back to the example of Mohammed the Teddy Bear, in the eyes of most of the world Gillian Gibbons was guilty of nothing more than ignorance of local laws yet there were Sharia lawyers who wanted her executed... whether or not that was for political purposes or not is a moot issue here.

As for redemption, you're trying to apply liberal 21st century law to an (ostensibly) medieval society. Remember people were being hanged less than 150 years ago for relatively minor crimes. Treason / betrayal alone would generally bring out the more ...imaginative means of execution.

[Hallavast]

It isn't, but you haven't supported a claim of illegitimacy besides "Tsukiko doesn't like him/thinks he's a tyrant". Keep in mind, that tyrannical or not (And they weren't), Britain held completely legitimate claims of sovereignty over America when America held its revolution. Mind, if she feels it was tyrannical, she certainly has her human right to rebel! But this doesn't the government less legitimate.


I don't believe the government was any less legitimate, either, but I think it's obvious that Tsukiko does. From her reactions and statements, it appears that she honestly believes that she is being oppressed by a government (that she may or may not have chosen to support) for no good reason.



No, that is in fact, not how it works. Firstly, the bargain was HARDLY at sword point. Secondly, even if you are not a citizen of a government, you can in fact make contracts with them. Not being a citizen doesn't suddenly mean you can renege.
"Serve in my army or suffer death/enslavement". The argument was at sword point. Her decision was obviously made under duress.




You appear to be arguing that Tsukiko's emotions are the logical viewpoint, however.

To the insane zombie lover, the viewpoints are rational and justified. She cannnot be held responsible. She is insane.

In case I was misunderstood the first time, I hold no attraction or affinity for corpses animated or otherwise. Calling me an "undead fanboy" is a personal attack that is both baseless and uncalled for. Views expressed about social contracts and civil rights ARE my own. These subjects are entirely separate.

[Hallavast]

As for redemption, you're trying to apply liberal 21st century law to an (ostensibly) medieval society. Remember people were being hanged less than 150 years ago for relatively minor crimes. Treason / betrayal alone would generally bring out the more ...imaginative means of execution.

I apply liberal 21st century ideas to the subject because people who live in the 21st century have absolutely agreed that the character deserves death in the worst way. If people were legally hanged for minor crimes 150 years ago does that mean it's ok to agree with it today?

[The Extinguisher]

The problem is, it doesn't matter what her viewpoints are. The revoultionists of the 13 colonies may have thought the British were tyranical and did not consider themselves British subjects, but if they failed they would still have been arrested for treason.

If we must get technical, no she didn't commit treason, because her side won. But she is still clearly an Azurite, and betrayed her country, so it's treasonous.

[Hallavast]

The problem is, it doesn't matter what her viewpoints are. The revoultionists of the 13 colonies may have thought the British were tyranical and did not consider themselves British subjects, but if they failed they would still have been arrested for treason.

If we must get technical, no she didn't commit treason, because her side won. But she is still clearly an Azurite, and betrayed her country, so it's treasonous.

So, looking back on the American Revolutionary War, do you believe the Americans that rebelled deserve death for their "treason"?

[kpenguin]

So, looking back on the American Revolutionary War, do you believe the Americans that rebelled deserve death for their "treason"?


As the Ovid once wrote, "Treason doth never prosper: what's the reason? Why if it prosper, none dare call it treason."

Treason is only treason if you fail. Otherwise, its considered patriotic.

[Nerd-o-rama]

To the insane zombie lover, the viewpoints are rational and justified. She cannnot be held responsible. She is insane.
Okay, so she's insane. So she should just be left to run rampant and slaughter whomever she likes to make into an undead minion (regardless of how sweetly she treats that undead minion)?

I guess we should let Xykon off the hook for the hundreds if not thousands of murders he's personally committed, his acts of unprovoked warfare, various psychological tortures, and desire to hold the entire physical universe ransom so he can be crowned king of Everywhere, since he is also clearly insane.

Tsukiko is sick, I won't disagree with that. But she's not incoherent. She is a sociopath who has betrayed her nation, harmed those who had done no wrong to her, and allied herself with powerful forces of supernatural destruction. She needs to be put down for the people of Azure City to retake their homeland, and for the heroes to prevent Xykon from conquering the world. Perhaps, if she's lucky, she can be subdued and interred as an insane criminal. But frankly, this doesn't need to be the top priority of those fighting her.

And I would like to point out, I don't think she deserves a fate worse than death. She's no worse than any other antagonist in this strip. Death is fine, and even then only if necessary.


So, looking back on the American Revolutionary War, do you believe the Americans that rebelled deserve death for their "treason"?
kpenguin has the right of this. But in addition, we must consider that

1) The revolutionary Americans had legitimate, sane complaints with their government, not "they won't let us create hordes of undead minions and have sex with them."
2) Neither Britain nor the Colonists were objectively Good or Evil. Xykon, on the other hand, is about as evil as you get without being entirely a caricature.

[evileeyore]

Assuming that definition 2a is the most prevelant to discussion of necrophilia, we can observe that attraction to the undead does not qualify necrophilia since the undead are not dead.

Unless someone can find evidence that Tsukiko is attracted to corpses that are not animated, I can safely say that Tsukiko is not a necrophiliac.Stop right there.


I know people will argue with me on this, however, we don't have the "undead", the "living dead", and other such problems. If we did we'd certianly have the language to deal with persistent moving corpses. Also just because they are still mobile does not mean they are not corpses.

But if you wish to be "overly logical" I give you three other words you may use:

Thanatophilia - Love of the dead.
Necrolagnia - Sexual desire or attraction to corpses.
Thanatolagnia - Sexual desire or attraction to the dead.


I have no doubt one them applies.

[The Extinguisher]

I remember reading somewhere that unecrophoba was fear of the undead, so logically, the proper term would be unecrophila.

[roadkiller]

"Serve in my army or suffer death/enslavement". The argument was at sword point. Her decision was obviously made under duress.

*snip*
She is insane.

*snip*
In case I was misunderstood the first time, I hold no attraction or affinity for corpses animated or otherwise. Calling me an "undead fanboy" is a personal attack that is both baseless and uncalled for. Views expressed about social contracts and civil rights ARE my own. These subjects are entirely separate.

First. That was not the offer. The offer was "Serve in my army and recieve a reduced sentence or serve a full sentence with the possibility of death if we lose anyways." A much more kindly offer than you present.

Second. From what I've seen, she isn't insane to the point that she didn't see the repercussions of her actions. Hell, I'd even say that she just has an entirely different standpoint from most people. That does not excuse breaking laws.

Third. Hallavast, it was a joke. Calm down. It may not have been nessecary, but it wasn't exceptionally offensive either. It was merely a good natured joke, which was intended to be laughed at by all sides. Or at least understood to be humor.

[Hallavast]

Okay, so she's insane. So she should just be left to run rampant and slaughter whomever she likes to make into an undead minion (regardless of how sweetly she treats that undead minion)? No, but I think placement in a mental institution capable of handling/restraining her while encouraging her redemption is more suitable a sentance than death. :smallwink:



I guess we should let Xykon off the hook for the hundreds if not thousands of murders he's personally committed, his acts of unprovoked warfare, various psychological tortures, and desire to hold the entire physical universe ransom so he can be crowned king of Everywhere, since he is also clearly insane.
The difference is that I don't think Xykon can be redeemed. I also wouldn't "let him off the hook" even if he was capable of redemption.



Tsukiko is sick, I won't disagree with that. But she's not incoherent. She is a sociopath who has betrayed her nation, harmed those who had done no wrong to her, and allied herself with powerful forces of supernatural destruction.

Haley has harmed those who had done no wrong to her and allied herself with powerful forces of destruction. Does she get the rope as well?


She needs to be put down for the people of Azure City to retake their homeland, and for the heroes to prevent Xykon from conquering the world. Perhaps, if she's lucky, she can be subdued and interred as an insane criminal. But frankly, this doesn't need to be the top priority of those fighting her. I quite agree that it would be justifiable to kill her in combat. But not because "she deserves death". Also, this has nothing to do with any imagined "treason" on her part.

[Hallavast]

Third. Hallavast, it was a joke. Calm down. It may not have been nessecary, but it wasn't exceptionally offensive either. It was merely a good natured joke, which was intended to be laughed at by all sides. Or at least understood to be humor.

I'm willing to let it go, but there was some confusion as to what I meant to say in my original response to the joke, so I clarified (or at least tried to).

[Stormwolf]

I apply liberal 21st century ideas to the subject because people who live in the 21st century have absolutely agreed that the character deserves death in the worst way. If people were legally hanged for minor crimes 150 years ago does that mean it's ok to agree with it today?

I think most people who post here would agree that Tsukiko deserves death in the context of the campaign world. And of course it's easy to be blase about the non-life of a 2D (in all respects) cartoon character villain. Whether or not she deserves death for her crimes if they were committed in modern 21st century democratic western society is moot... the crimes for which she was originally imprisoned are not possible with the current limits of physical / medical technology... although if they were, with the bleeding heart liberal vote she'd probably get off with community service and a psych evaluation ;)

Whether or not treason is punishable by death, cowardice and desertion in the face of the enemy is still punishable by death in the military. If you pick a side (which Tsukiko did - she was given the opportunity to be a 'conscientious objector') and then switch sides because things are looking bad that's the worst form of cowardice and you should expect no quarter.

[doliest]

1) The revolutionary Americans had legitimate, sane complaints with their government, not "they won't let us create hordes of undead minions and have sex with them."

That is a legitamite, sane, complaint to tsukiko. We see it as wrong, but to her it's a perfectly normal right that she was denied for no reason, basically the same complaints that the revolutionarys had-Being denied what they(she) saw as a basic right.

Also-what proof do we have that she was ever a citizen of azure city?
The saphire guild has been seen to judge things that happen hundreds of miles outside their borders. How do we know a traveling group of paladins didn't find her outside azure-city borders, abduct her, & put her on trial? If that was the case she has every right to betray them, because she was abducted from her home unlawfully.

[FujinAkari]

The saphire guild has been seen to judge things that happen hundreds of miles outside their borders. How do we know a traveling group of paladins didn't find her outside azure-city borders, abduct her, & put her on trial? If that was the case she has every right to betray them, because she was abducted from her home unlawfully.

The Sapphire Guard has never been shown to leave their jurisdiction for anything not directly related to the preservation of the Gate.

[Hallavast]

The Sapphire Guard has never been shown to leave their jurisdiction for anything not directly related to the preservation of the Gate.

Yeah, but I wouldn't put it past em...:smallwink:

[kpenguin]

The Sapphire Guard has never been shown to leave their jurisdiction for anything not directly related to the preservation of the Gate.

True, but that doesn't mean that if they see the opportunity to make a "good" act, they won't. Otherwise, those dirt farmers would be a lot happier.

[EvilElitest]

OK three things you forgot

1. Other than treason and betrayal, murder of innocent casters (they were just defending their nation), High Treason (not for betrayal of a contract but for destruction of a nation) property damage, tryanny, resisting arrest, murder, slavery and injustice.
2. If you are going by american laws (I presume you are as your trying to form a insanity defense then you have to be held by the citizenship and their justice system toward prisoners. As a convicted criminal, she losses all of her rights granted by the state, and by betraying the head of state she is giving up her right to a fair trial
3. Also by american law she is not legally insane as she understands the consequences of her actions and does not have voices telling her what to do

Now the punishment for hight treason can vary from life imprisonment to death and as she is also a legal terrorist, convict, and rebel, death is the most likely charge
from
EE

[doliest]

The Sapphire Guard has never been shown to leave their jurisdiction for anything not directly related to the preservation of the Gate.

Dirt farmers-Miko stopped to do what she saw as a good act, without even seeing what the local law said-maybe it was a kingdom that stated the ogres aren't to be stopped?
SOD spoilers-
The only had to kill the wearer of the crimson mantle-they decide to kill everyone.

Besides-Maybe they didn't go out for Tsukiko, but found her & inacted their own law, what we have seen doesn't bode to well for the paladins.

[FujinAkari]

Dirt farmers-Miko stopped to do what she saw as a good act, without even seeing what the local law said-maybe it was a kingdom that stated the ogres aren't to be stopped?

The Ogres were killed, not captured. As Tsukiko was imprisoned in azure city it is unlikely that she was encountered by some questing Paladin. If she was, she would either be killed or captured and taken to the local authority. Being dragged all the way back to AC required a direct order from Shojo.


SOD spoilers-
The only had to kill the wearer of the crimson mantle-they decide to kill everyone.

Well, any goblin could put on the Crimson Mantle and immediately become a bearer of the crimson mantle


Besides-Maybe they didn't go out for Tsukiko, but found her & inacted their own law, what we have seen doesn't bode to well for the paladins.

As shown above, if they did, they wouldn't have taken her back to AC.

[David Argall]

I'd like to point out that there's no proof of necrophilia. She was put into prison for "unnatural acts of wizardry". This might just mean she created some undead.
There is no on camera example of necrophilia. However what we do have is quite enough to make us more surprised if she hasn't than if she had. We are not a court of law that requires 100% proof. Rather a huge amount of relevant events happen out of sight and we have to make our best guess as to what happened. So absent some evidence that she is innocent, we accept the evidence we do have as sufficient to deem her guilty.


Treason implies that she at some point held allegience to AC. I see no evidence of this.
Allegiance to AC is determined by AC. It is not a matter of your declaring allegiance, not even "silence gives consent". In fact, AC, or any other government, may declare you have given allegiance to it despite your most vocal, vigorous, and public rejection of the idea. It is a Catch-22 situation for the individual. You are guilty of treason for disloyalty and the government defines treason, disloyalty, allegiance, and all other terms.
However, here again, the limited evidence we have all fits the conventional definitions of allegiance. Again, we would need some evidence of her having a different allegiance before we need to ask whether AC has a claim on her.


she didn't commit murder. She simply killed a bunch of enemy soldiers during a battle.
It's hard to think of a law system that would allow you to offer to join an attacking army while you are on the territory of the defender.
The immunity of those killing enemy soldiers is partial, and based on the individual soldier really having no option. It's pretty much "You shoot them or I shoot you." As such, it does little good to execute those forced to shoot.
Tsukiko has no such immunity. She is in all respects a volunteer and thus not able to claim she was just following orders. In addition, she had a full ability to flee the combat and didn't.

Even from a chaotic view, Tsukiko is largely out of luck. Fleeing the city as soon as she could is possible if we assume her agreement with the city was null and void. But the lich's attack on the city is not justified by standards other than wanting to. Accordingly Tsukiko is guilty of his sins for helping him.


That just leaves her evil alignment (which hasn't been proven as far as I recall)
She casts evil spells and associates with evil types. Even ignoring the other evidence, the presumption is that she is evil.



Hallavast isn't she capable of redemption? If she can be redeemed, then isn't death a little too harsh a punishment?

Yes, and no.
She almost surely can be redeemed, under some conditions or other. But at what cost? At some point high cost and low chance of success argue that one should stop trying, which means executing her here. And so far we have no evidence that she will be easy or cheap to redeem. So execution is a definite option.

[doliest]

The Ogres were killed, not captured. As Tsukiko was imprisoned in azure city it is unlikely that she was encountered by some questing Paladin. If she was, she would either be killed or captured and taken to the local authority. Being dragged all the way back to AC required a direct order from Shojo.



Well, any goblin could put on the Crimson Mantle and immediately become a bearer of the crimson mantle



As shown above, if they did, they wouldn't have taken her back to AC.

As hinjo pointed out, killing for any crime isn't the paladin code. Maybe it was in an area that said paladin didn't bother to find out the laws of, it has been shown that evil kingdoms exist, so since the paladin didn't know it was chaotic, it didn't count against him/her(The code says the paladin must knowingly commit an evil act.)so said paladin drags said necrophiliac back to the city for trial or maybe she was found in a lawless area like a forest, so the paladin decides to enact his/her own law.

So could any human or paladin or piece of animated dirt that found the cloak-should we destroy earth itself?

[FujinAkari]

Hinjo doesn't get sent on long range assignments though, Miko does (did?) Miko certainly sees execution as a viable option.


So could any human or paladin or piece of animated dirt that found the cloak-should we destroy earth itself?

There is absolutely no evidence that the Crimson Mantle works for anyone but Goblins. It is the most powerful artifact of The Dark One, a Goblin God. It is very unlikely that it would function for a nonfollower.

[doliest]

I didn't mean hinjo specifically, I meant his point out that most paladins don't see death as the only option.

[Hallavast]

Even from a chaotic view, Tsukiko is largely out of luck. Fleeing the city as soon as she could is possible if we assume her agreement with the city was null and void. But the lich's attack on the city is not justified by standards other than wanting to. Accordingly Tsukiko is guilty of his sins for helping him.


I think members of the invading army of hobgoblins would call Xykon's attack more than justified. They see it as taking land back from the evil, oppressive humans.



She casts evil spells and associates with evil types. Even ignoring the other evidence, the presumption is that she is evil.

Ok, but good people don't kill folks for pinging evil on the detect evil radar(or at least they shouldn't).

Let me ask you this: What gives AC (specifically the Saphire Guard) the right to impose their sovereignty over those who fundamentally oppose their ideals?
Apparently, a popular consensus is force of arms. If I can beat you militarily, I have the right to command your allegience and kill you if you disobey regardless of what you think. According to this view, Haley and her rebels could be branded as traitors to the authority of the rulers of the city. Haley doesn't have the power to beat Team evil militarily, so must she submit to their rule?

[Zencao]

They can't be traitors since they were never citizens under the rule of the goblins. They are at worst, terrorists.

EDIT: Actually, since their objective isn't to cause fear or spread dissent amongst the goblins, they can't be considered terrorists.

Rebels it is, my bad.

[EvilElitest]

If we go by 21th century american standards she is still guilty of quite a few crimes with a death sentence
from
EE

[FoE]

Unless someone can find evidence that Tsukiko is attracted to corpses that are not animated, I can safely say that Tsukiko is not a necrophiliac.

Oh, for God's sake ... kpenguin, did you really go to that much effort just to prove that I used the wrong term to describe someone who is sexually stimulated by dead bodies? Did you really? (Shake head)

[Hallavast]

They can't be traitors since they were never citizens under the rule of the goblins. They are at worst, terrorists.

EDIT: Actually, since their objective isn't to cause fear or spread dissent amongst the goblins, they can't be considered terrorists.

Rebels it is, my bad.

If RC makes a law stating that any being that comes within 5 miles of AC is a citizen of the city, then it really doesn't matter. It's not about legality it's about morality.


If we go by 21th century american standards she is still guilty of quite a few crimes with a death sentence
from
EE

Why are you so insistent on pidgeonholing this into the microchasm of American law? And not everyone agrees that she's guilty of half of the crimes you listed based upon lack of authority.

[The Extinguisher]

Haley and the rebels are insurgants. Different sport entirely.

The thing is, no matter what Tsukiko thinks, she commited a treasonous act against Azure City. If and when Xykon is removed from power, and she is caputured, she will be put on trial for treason. End of.

To be fair, all the deserted soldiers would be as well.

[EvilElitest]

Why are you so insistent on pidgeonholing this into the microchasm of American law? And not everyone agrees that she's guilty of half of the crimes you listed based upon lack of authority.

If AC authority acts in the same manner as American Authority then she is quite guilty of all those crimes, and and your argument only makes sense if you use 21th american standards (A monarchy system is a lot easier to run and a lot more brutal)
Also, if you want to pled insanity, she isn't legally insane and in D&D that doesn't protect you
from
EE

[FoE]

Hallavast, ignoring all debate about her moral justification, here's the simplest reason why Tsukiko must be destroyed: she opposes the protagonists of this story, who we know to be (mostly) good, and supports the antagonists, who we know to be definitely evil.

Regardless of whether her reasons may have been justified for turning traitor during the battle of Azure City, by aiding Xykon and Redcloak, she is a willing accomplice to all the murders those two will commit and she threatens the safety of the very world itself. (If Xykon and Redcloak release the Snarl, then the world will be undone and all of its inhabitants will be wiped from existence.)

[Rutee]

So, looking back on the American Revolutionary War, do you believe the Americans that rebelled deserve death for their "treason"?

I'm not sure if I'd say they deserve death (I think Treason is overrated as a crime) but considerring that the vast majority of the revolutionary's points were based on /whininess/ (Oh no! You have to pay less then your share of the previous war! Oh, you refuse? Fine, fine, don't pay. But don't go west of the Appalachians! Since you won't pay, we can't afford to garrison the area, and you'll bitch at us when the Indians attack you!), yeah, I'm pretty darn sure I'd have called the revolution unjust at the time.

[Hallavast]

If AC authority acts in the same manner as American Authority then she is quite guilty of all those crimes, and and your argument only makes sense if you use 21th american standards (A monarchy system is a lot easier to run and a lot more brutal)
Also, if you want to pled insanity, she isn't legally insane and in D&D that doesn't protect you
from
EE

The question isn't "Is Tsukiko guilty by America's standards?". It's do you believe she deserves the death penalty?

Also, how can I defend someone with American standards if you say the defense isn't protected by D&D standards?

Also, the last quoted line from your post reads "Also, if you want to pled insanity, she isn't legally insane and in D&D that doesn't protect you from EE."

Hilarious.

Edit: to further my previous point, what gives the american government Azure city legitimacy... soley in the context of the Oots world politics?

[FoE]

Edit: to further my previous point, what gives the american government (or its fantasy representation) legitimacy?

Oooh, you just wrecked the thread.

@V: As yet, the Mitd has largely just been comic relief. But had he actually threatened any of the protagonists, I wouldn't have any problem with seeing him go down.

[Hallavast]

Hallavast, ignoring all debate about her moral justification, here's the simplest reason why Tsukiko must be destroyed: she opposes the protagonists of this story, who we know to be (mostly) good, and supports the antagonists, who we know to be definitely evil.

Regardless of whether her reasons may have been justified for turning traitor during the battle of Azure City, by aiding Xykon and Redcloak, she is a willing accomplice to all the murders those two will commit and she threatens the safety of the very world itself. (If Xykon and Redcloak release the Snarl, then the world will be undone and all of its inhabitants will be wiped from existence.)

So why no animocity and enraged hatred against the MitD?

[Rutee]

Edit: to further my previous point, what gives the american government (or its fantasy representation) legitimacy?
What, /now/? Consent of the governed. I consider it to have been an unjust revolution, but it'd be pretty tough to argue against the legitimacy of the US' sovereignty over the continental US.

Edit: Well, no, actually, Texas, and Southwestern US (And California) are.. hm... well, the acquisitions thereof are /definitely/ illegitimate.

In Hawaii and Puerto Rico? It's illegitimate (Most of the inhabitants of both states/territories wish to be seperated from the US). Potentially in other US holdings. To date, we haven't seen a massive wave of people protesting the rule of AC's rulership.



So why no animocity and enraged hatred against the MitD?
Is that the Monster in the Darkness? Who's been arguing for him being a nice, good person who's actions are just?

[Hallavast]

What, /now/? Consent of the governed. *snip*
Emphasis mine.

Thank you.

Edit: Notice that nobody is screaming for the MitD's death?

[Rutee]

Thank you.

Uh, this doesn't prove your point. Nobody's contesting that she considers it illegitimate. What's contested is whether the government /is/ illegitimate. Which we have no proof of, aside from /one citizen/ (Potentially a cracked citizen) voicing displeasure and despising the government.

[Hallavast]

Uh, this doesn't prove your point. Nobody's contesting that she considers it illegitimate. What's contested is whether the government /is/ illegitimate. Which we have no proof of, aside from /one citizen/ (Potentially a cracked citizen) voicing displeasure and despising the government.

"Cracked" meaning insane?

[Rutee]

"Cracked" meaning insane?

It's funny; You persist in claiming that we shouldn't be applying modern ethics or law to Tsukiko, but you seem to be eager to use it when it helps her. Regardless, it means crazy, in the same sense as any other villain; Not insane, strictly speaking, but language failing to provide a word for me that means "Very Illogical" without meaning "Possessing a brain disorder"

[The Extinguisher]

There are plenty people who find real governemnt to be illegitimate. Anarchists, anyone?

Does that make them less so?

[EvilElitest]

The question isn't "Is Tsukiko guilty by America's standards?". It's do you believe she deserves the death penalty?

To me it is the same thing almost, by american standards she is guilty of quite a few death penalty offenses
By simple D&D standards, she is also guilty of death sentence offensives


Also, how can I defend someone with American standards if you say the defense isn't protected by D&D standards?

alright, in D&D standards she is evil and is activity oppressing the people of AC, committed murders during the war (not good), betrayed a lawful good contract (i'm going to presume she was guilty of her crimes as she hasn't denied it) and she has attempted murder of good adventures and innocents, serves an evil overlord, and uses evil magics (i don't care if you think necromancy is evil, the fact of the matter is that according to RAW, it is so)
And as this is D&D, the sentence is death with at best one offer for a surrender (if the killer is a paladin)
So yes, she is guilty of death


Also, the last quoted line from your post reads "Also, if you want to pled insanity, she isn't legally insane and in D&D that doesn't protect you from EE."

Hilarious.
That you attempted an insanity pled with no basis, yes it is quite hilarious that you actually thought that would work



Edit: to further my previous point, what gives the american government Azure city legitimacy... soley in the context of the Oots world politics?

American Goverment or AC (Also Rutee, Hawaii and Puerto Rico's options about being part of the state vary, i know a lot of people from Puerto Rico want statehood so they can be treated somewhat equally to other states, but that is debatable)
AC is a LG government, as Tsukiko was not in jail for treason, i imagine she would have had the benefits of citizenship until her rightful imprisonment for breaking the laws of the nation. When she committed evil acts and treasonous acts, against the powers of good and the state to serve an evil overlord who hopes to take over the world, kill thousands of innocents and is currently enslaving many thousand more the she is not only a traitor, but an evil doer who's crimes are punishable by death. I am not against her being redeemed but only a paladin would offer he the choice
from
EE


Edit

It's funny; You persist in claiming that we shouldn't be applying modern ethics or law to Tsukiko, but you seem to be eager to use it when it helps her. Regardless, it means crazy, in the same sense as any other villain; Not insane, strictly speaking, but language failing to provide a word for me that means "Very Illogical" without meaning "Possessing a brain disorder"
This basically sums up my argument about her insanity, Rutee has put it quite nicely. To add, if you want to protect her with the modern definition of "Insanity means you aren't held responsible for your actions" and yet your not even using the modern definition of insane,

[FoE]

Hallavast, is the whole thrust of your argument that Tsukiko should be placed in a mental institution rather than killed? The problem with that is: how? Haley doesn't exactly have access to such facilities, even if they were capable of holding a powerful magic-user such as Tsukiko. On the other hand, if she doesn't kill Tsukiko, then she is likely consigning that other paladin to death and is risking the lives of others.

Additionally, I don't see why you view Tsukiko as 'moral' when you view Xykon as thoroughly 'immoral.' She enjoys killing others, she engages in necromancy ... aren't these qualities that Xykon himself has?

[EvilElitest]

Also, how is AC not a legitimates government body?

Edit: Notice that nobody is screaming for the MitD's death?
It hasn't come up yet but here are three reasons
1. He hasn't done many things that are evil on screen
2. As of now, i see no reason why he wouldn't be punished for evil, though not necessarily death
3. He is of a far lesser scale of evil than Tsukiko
from
EE

[Zencao]

I see my joke I made before has actually turned out to be true.

The OP has been turned into an undead, and is now a fanboy of Tsukiko!

And he took my boots!

[roadkiller]

Hallavast, it is called acknowledgement of the possibility that your arguement is correct.

What gives Azure City, and thereby the Sapphire Guard legitimacy? Well, as previously mentioned, consent of the ruled, though some might argue that force of arms or divine right provide that legitimacy as well. There was not an obvious, if any, major unrest of the populace with the rule. This is true, whether Tsukiko is insane or not.

Is Tsukiko innocent due to insanity? I believe that she isn't. She appears to morally disagree with the laws of AC, even giving a logical, if odd, arguement as to why she believes she is correct. Even assuming that she is, indeed, insane, she should not be found innocent, as she did understand what she was doing and the repercussions thereof. The innocence by insanity laws were intended to pardon individuals who could not comprehend the consequences of their actions, not as they have been used in recent times.

EDIT:: As for MitD, I haven't read any of the books, but I haven't seen it do anything particularly evil. Aside from his association, that is. MitD also appears to have a childlike mentality, which may not actually comprehend the full extent of what it is doing. Do you send a ten-year-old to jail for smothering his bother because big Uncle Al told him to? No, you send Uncle Al to jail, though.

[Zencao]

Oh, and Tsukiko is the new Miko.

Consider yourselves informed :P

[Rutee]

Is Tsukiko innocent due to insanity? I believe that she isn't. She appears to morally disagree with the laws of AC, even giving a logical, if odd, arguement as to why she believes she is correct. Even assuming that she is, indeed, insane, she should not be found innocent, as she did understand what she was doing and the repercussions thereof. The innocence by insanity laws were intended to pardon individuals who could not comprehend the consequences of their actions, not as they have been used in recent times.

Point of Quibbling: The Insanity Defense is still used in this exact way, except on TV. >.>

[EvilElitest]

Oh, and Tsukiko is the new Miko.

Consider yourselves informed :P

Oh gods, why!!!!!!!!!!!
from
EE

[Hallavast]

It's funny; You persist in claiming that we shouldn't be applying modern ethics or law to Tsukiko, but you seem to be eager to use it when it helps her. Regardless, it means crazy, in the same sense as any other villain; Not insane, strictly speaking, but language failing to provide a word for me that means "Very Illogical" without meaning "Possessing a brain disorder"

I do nothing of the sort.


To me it is the same thing almost, by american standards she is guilty of quite a few death penalty offenses
By simple D&D standards, she is also guilty of death sentence offensives

So EE, is there absolutely no american or D&D law that you dissagree with, personally?


Hallavast, is the whole thrust of your argument that Tsukiko should be placed in a mental institution rather than killed? The problem with that is: how? Haley doesn't exactly have access to such facilities, even if they were capable of holding a powerful magic-user such as Tsukiko. On the other hand, if she doesn't kill Tsukiko, then she is likely consigning that other paladin to death and is risking the lives of others.
I agree that she poses a threat and should be eliminated. But she still doesn't "deserve worse than death".


Additionally, I don't see why you view Tsukiko as 'moral' when you view Xykon as thoroughly 'immoral.' She enjoys killing others, she engages in necromancy ... aren't these qualities that Xykon himself has

-I don't see Tsukiko as moral. I'm trying to get people to sympathize with her.
-Belkar enjoys killing goblins. Vaarsuvius engages in necromancy. Your point?

[roadkiller]

Point of Quibbling: The Insanity Defense is still used in this exact way, except on TV. >.>

Well, yes. I actually was referring to the other idiocies that people attempt to get away with using it. While it rarely works with those sort of things, people still try it, and a few do get away with it.

[EvilElitest]

I do nothing of the sort.


You claimed insanity which can only be a protection under modern standards.


So EE, is there absolutely no american or D&D law that you dissagree with, personally?

For the purpose of this discussion and excluding ones that contradict eachother, no. In general yes, but none that will protect Tsukiko


I agree that she poses a threat and should be eliminated. But she still doesn't "deserve worse than death".

Personally, i don't really know what counts as fate worst than death, i imagine torture but that is against both American and D&D morals (not that it stops them from doing it, but that is another story). I think Tsukiko should be killed, method doesn't bother me, imprisoned for life, or redeemed in a over the top manner



-I don't see Tsukiko as moral. I'm trying to get people to sympathize with her.
-Belkar enjoys killing goblins. Vaarsuvius engages in necromancy. Your point?

1. Most people can sympathize with her without admiring her, but i wish to point out that defending her from justice is over the top
2. Belkar is evil, and most likely deserves a death penalty if you didn't count OOTS into the bargain
3. V does evil necromancy? When
from
EE

[FoE]

Belkar enjoys killing goblins. Vaarsuvius engages in necromancy. Your point?

Vaarsuvius doesn't actually engage in necromancy. Different school of magic. So that point's moot.

Belkar is evil, but he's on the same side as the protagonists. If he switched sides, however, then he would need to be defeated. Simple as that.

I don't understand why you want us to sympathize with Tsukiko. Aren't villains supposed to be despised, so it's all the sweeter when they fall?

[EvilElitest]

Vaarsuvius doesn't actually engage in necromancy. Different school of magic. So that point's moot.

Belkar is evil, but he's on the same side as the protagonists. If he switched sides, however, then he would need to be defeated. Simple as that.

I don't understand why you want us to sympathize with Tsukiko. Aren't villains supposed to be despised, so it's all the sweeter when they fall?

It is good to sympathize with villains but more to pity them for the error of their ways. Some villains you can actually truly sympathize with but even then that doesn't justify them
from
EE

[Hallavast]

You claimed insanity which can only be a protection under modern standards.
Why can't it be used in a fictional setting? :smallconfused:



For the purpose of this discussion and excluding ones that contradict eachother, no. In general yes, but none that will protect Tsukiko

Personally, i don't really know what counts as fate worst than death, i imagine torture but that is against both American and D&D morals (not that it stops them from doing it, but that is another story). I think Tsukiko should be killed, method doesn't bother me, imprisoned for life, or redeemed in a over the top manner Then we aren't that far different in our opinions. The only qualm I'd have that you don't is the method of her death (if necessary at all).



1. Most people can sympathize with her without admiring her, but i wish to point out that defending her from justice is over the top

Why attack me? I really don't have any admiration for Tsukiko. Honest. She's a pretty flat, cliche'd character, actually. I'm not "defending her from justice". I'm defending "justice" from the zealous and the bloodthirsty. Her state of mind is a mitigating factor that should take the death sentence out of the equation.



2. Belkar is evil, and most likely deserves a death penalty if you didn't count OOTS into the bargain
Belkar is generally well liked, and people don't scream for his death when he does something heinous.


3. V does evil necromancy? When
from
EE

Didn't say "evil necromancy" did I? Further, there is much debate on the evilness of certain "evil" necromancy spellls.

[FoE]

While there are great 'tragic' villains (Darth Vader, Mr. Freeze, Frankenstein's Monster), there is also a lot of value in the heartless, bloodthirsty villain. I tend to prefer them, actually.

[Hallavast]

Vaarsuvius doesn't actually engage in necromancy. Different school of magic. So that point's moot. I was under the impression that he had cast a vampiric touch or something of the sort at one point... Doesn't matter. Necromancy isn't inherently evil. Condemming a character for performing necromancy doesn't make sense to me.



Belkar is evil, but he's on the same side as the protagonists. If he switched sides, however, then he would need to be defeated. Simple as that.

I don't understand why you want us to sympathize with Tsukiko. Aren't villains supposed to be despised, so it's all the sweeter when they fall?

If you only see villains as bad guys with asses that need righteous kicking, then that's all they will ever be. But if you look at them as people, you get a greater understanding of why they are doing what they do, and it helps with versimilitude and the atmosphere of the story. Look at Darth Vader. I think he's a much better villain than the Emporer, because we've had a look at his past and his personality. We know a bit more about why he did the things that he did. It gives the character depth.

[EvilElitest]

Why can't it be used in a fictional setting? :smallconfused:

Two possible answers
WOTC answer-Because insanity doesn't excuse you in D&D
Modern Answer- Then you must be insane by a legal standpoint, which Tsukiko is not


Then we aren't that far different in our opinions. The only qualm I'd have that you don't is the method of her death (if necessary at all).

Her death is most certianly necessary, unless their a peaceful low risk way she can be imprisoned or redeemed (unlikely but possible). As for manner of death, if I was to choose her death via execution (I'd prefer life but lets just say that was impossible) is say beheaded French Style of Lethal injection (if we go by modern standards), but she will most likely be killed in combat.




Why attack me? I really don't have any admiration for Tsukiko. Honest. She's a pretty flat, cliche'd character, actually. I'm not "defending her from justice". I'm defending "justice" from the zealous and the bloodthirsty. Her state of mind is a mitigating factor that should take the death sentence out of the equation.
1. I'm really not attacking you, i just am confused about this argument, most the insanity defense and the lack of legitiment authority. Note i haven't called you a fan boy
2. I haven't seen any of this "worst than death" argument actually
3. Defending the guilty (American or D&D, she is guilty of both) from a just punishment seem a tad odd
4. But it isn't insanity by modern standards and that doesn't help you by D&D standards

Belkar is generally well liked, and people don't scream for his death when he does something heinous.

Correction, some people
He also isn't a threat and thus isn't a worthy of a death sentence at current (could change)


Didn't say "evil necromancy" did I? Further, there is much debate on the evilness of certain "evil" necromancy spellls.
1. Then their is not crime if it is evil necromancy
2. By RAW however, the debate has a point but not for Tsukiko (who uses undead for evil purposes)

And while Darth Vader is a sympathetic character, he is worthy of a death sentence
from
EE

[Sir_Chivalry]

1st: Necromancy is one of V's two prohibited schools.

2nd: I agree with Rutee (OMG) on this. Trying to push the square peg (Tsukiko's mind) into a round hole (insanity, which in the middle ages, even through the enlightened period, got you a fate worse than death, slow torture in an asylum) is absurd. But if you insist, see my above brackets.

3rd: If Tsukiko truly felt, as you imply Hallavast, that AC was a tyrannical dictatorship (meh, it's possible, especially with their Byzantine politics), and she wanted to dictate her own rights, she could have gone off into the wilderness, drawn a line in the dirt, built a hut and claimed the land as a sovereign country. And then... The Sapphire guard would have marched on this country, beaten her and her little army of undead (M.A.D.), and taken her as a political prisoner. And I doubt this would get her much better.

[kpenguin]

He also isn't a threat and thus isn't a worthy of a death sentence at current (could change)


Debatable. I believe Belkar is worthy of a death sentence because of his past crimes. However, I would also say that enacting that death sentence now would be impractical.

[Rutee]

I do nothing of the sort.
Frankly, that's how it appears.




I agree that she poses a threat and should be eliminated. But she still doesn't "deserve worse than death".
I don't even think she deserves death, but eh.



-I don't see Tsukiko as moral. I'm trying to get people to sympathize with her.

What's to sympathize with? She's cracked and out to kill more people. She's hardly the incarnation of evil, but I don't really get the sense of "What a senseless waste of human life".

[FoE]

If you only see villains as bad guys with asses that need righteous kicking, then that's all they will ever be. But if you look at them as people, you get a greater understanding of why they are doing what they do, and it helps with versimilitude and the atmosphere of the story. Look at Darth Vader. I think he's a much better villain than the Emperor, because we've had a look at his past and his personality. We know a bit more about why he did the things that he did. It gives the character depth.

See, I'm afraid that's where you and I will just have to agree to disagree. I have always favoured the Emperor as one of my favourite villains because he's so deliciously evil. Sure, there's value in a 'tragic' villain — Miko and Redcloak, for example — but I tend to prefer the absolutely reprehensible villain, the black-hearted tyrant who is willing to do anything for the pursuit of his goals (power, the supremacy of evil, etc.) and doesn't really have any 'justification' for his motives. He/she/it is simply greedy/bloodthirsty/power-hungry.

But to each his own, you know. You don't like those kind of villains, and that's fine. Everyone has their own preferences.

OK, I'm done with this debate. Isn't it New Year's Eve? God, I wish it wasn't so cold out, I would go watch fireworks. Oh well.

[Hallavast]

Frankly, that's how it appears.

Then you misunderstand. I am trying to use insanity as a moral defense. Legality (whether modern or Oots) has very little to do with what I'm trying to say.




What's to sympathize with? She's cracked and out to kill more people. She's hardly the incarnation of evil, but I don't really get the sense of "What a senseless waste of human life".

I do get the sense that she doesn't understand why people think what she does is wrong. So, out of rage and frustration, you get some pretty heinous acts. This sense doesn't mesh well with reading about people wanting her death and worse.


Two possible answers
WOTC answer-Because insanity doesn't excuse you in D&D
I don't let WOTC's manufactured fluff responses dictate nuances in the worlds that I create. Why should Rich?


Modern Answer- Then you must be insane by a legal standpoint, which Tsukiko is not


I see no more point in arguing over her insanity from a legal standpoint. It wasn't the point I was getting at in the first place.

[David Argall]

You claimed insanity which can only be a protection under modern standards.
Nearly all societies have recognized some form of not guilty by reason of insanity. Of course most have used the catch-22 If you are sane enough to plea insanity, you are not insane enough to be let off on that grounds.




WOTC answer-Because insanity doesn't excuse you in D&D

It does actually, tho a paladin, or a good many other good types might well feel the need for Atonement once they recover, and the spell versions of insanity are harsh enough to justify killing the insane in self defense. Less drastic forms of insanity would likely be judged by more or less modern standards, and how easy it would be to magically cure.


He also isn't a threat and thus isn't a worthy of a death sentence at current (could change)
Belker is definitely a threat [See Roy's sleeping problems] and is definitely worthy of a death sentence. See Origens if you want to argue that nothing in the strip quite merits a death sentence. But even in the strip, it's been more a matter of having the right friends than justice.



There are plenty people who find real governemnt to be illegitimate. Anarchists, anyone?

Does that make them less so?

Definitely, tho we anarchists are generally heavily outnumbered and/or recognize that telling a man with a lot of guns he is not the legitimate government is not healthy.

Still, government do fall when people, for good or bad reasons, simply decide they are not legitimate. [Of course, that is not decided by a vote. More often than not, it consists in the government losing its belief it has the right to shoot people and/or running out of soldiers willing to obey such orders.]

[FujinAkari]

Then you misunderstand. I am trying to use insanity as a moral defense.

What makes you think she's insane? She seems very calculating and cunning, having set up a colored alarm system, and using the threat of a slow and torturous death to draw Haley out into the open. Nothing about her seems to indicated "Cracked, raving MAD!" to me. While she doubtless has some values which we as a society reject, and seems utterly committed to continuing her path of necromantic sacrilege, I certainly wouldn't call her out of touch with reality.


I do get the sense that she doesn't understand why people think what she does is wrong. So, out of rage and frustration, you get some pretty heinous acts. This sense doesn't mesh well with reading about people wanting her death and worse.

Out of rage and frustration? Ummm... no. Tsukiko says quite clearly that she wants to be evil (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0446.html). I certainly don't get the sense that this is her acting out.

While I agree that she doesn't share the Paladin's values (could it be more obvious?), there is a difference in not agreeing with a societies' value system, and being insane to the point of not comprehending that society doesn't share your perspective. Tsukiko -clearly- is aware that what she is doing is considered wrong by AC standards, and this prevents her from being insane.


I don't let WOTC's manufactured fluff responses dictate nuances in the worlds that I create. Why should Rich?

He doesn't have too, he can houserule whatever he wants. However, this game is a 3.5 D&D Parody, and so until evidence emerges that Rich HAS parted with the SRD on some point, then it is automatically assumed to be in compliance with D&D standards.

[Gitman00]

Then you misunderstand. I am trying to use insanity as a moral defense. Legality (whether modern or Oots) has very little to do with what I'm trying to say.

It doesn't work as a moral defense. For that to work, she has to be incapable of understanding that her actions are morally wrong due to her mental condition. This just isn't the case. See #446: "I want to be evil!" She knows Xykon is evil. She allies herself with him willingly, switching sides in the battle and becoming a traitor. She commits atrocities in his service with full knowledge of their moral implications. She's not insane; or at least not in a way that would get her off the hook for her crimes.


The lowest level of hell is reserved for traitors.

Indeed. In Dante's Divine Comedy (upon which DnD's Nine Hells are loosely based), Brutus, Cassius, and Judas Iscariot were getting eternally munched on by Satan himself.

EDIT: Ninja'd!

[Fafnir13]

Wow, this thread just keeps going. I really can't add anything to the debate of whether of not she's insane or if treason was committed. To me, it's rather moot. The only government that really has any known desire or potential right to convict her is in disarray and no longer in control of anything but a traveling populace. They lost the city and, until they retake it, can't really enact any trial style justice on those dwelling in it. We could explore various hypotheticals, but I'd prefer to keep it focused on the here and now.

Here and now, the only way there will be any choice in whether Tsukiko deserves life or death will be if Haley subdues her and gets to make that choice. From that perspective, I think there is a fair stack in favor of execution. Tsukiko is part of a powerful evil that threatens the world. Tsukiko is also one of the more competent members of that evil group and will continue to aid said group until she is rendered unable. To render her unable would require either her death or her imprisonment.

Imprisonment just isn't much of a viable option at this point. Rebels need to be mobile, probably don't have much in the way of supplies to spare, and any prisoners would have a good chance of getting rescued should things go sour.
Given this, would it be right for Haley to endanger the lives of her fellow rebels and the slaves they've rescued just on the off chance that Tsukiko can be redeemed? How many lives is a possibility worth? From my own point of veiw, based on what I've seen of Tsukiko's actions thus far, I consider the possibility to slim to warrant her life spared.

Stepping back from arguments that treat OOTS as reallity, I do like the character. She's been amusing and is currently providing a great foe to go up against. I mean, Mystic Thurge? Never heard of them, great to see the vast and scary world of source books come into play. Still, however much I may like her as presented, she's the bad guy here. Her actions are evil. Not just "kick a puppy" evil but "bend the world to your tyrannical vision" evil. That usually means the character, whoever they are, deserves and are probably going to get death. Just liking that character doesn't change what she may or may not be deserving of. I like Xykon, but I'm not about to say that he isn't deserving of death...er...re-death? Perma Death? Bleh, destroyed. Yeah, that one works. Anyways, you don't have to stop hoping for redemption or for her to at least escape justice for a time. Just don't declare she's free and clear of whatever fate she receives. She's certainly worked hard for it.

[Veridian]

To work from the original post only (as I'm not familiar enough with law to start trying to pretend I know what I'm talking about :smallwink: ), you claim that it matters what Tsukiko thinks, as to whether she should have been thrown in jail.

Society doesn't work that way, medieval, D&D, or otherwise. If I believed I was correct in stabbing someone's eye out, I'd still go to jail, yes? (Even if it was a justified action in my eyes, I'd still face legal action most likely) Thus, animating the dead (which I believe is generally considered a crime in most D&D societies, the lawful and/or good ones that is), is still a crime. She doesn't think it's wrong, but ultimately her opinion just doesn't matter.

I assume that she was thrown in jail for doing just that, as 'unnatural acts of wizardry' certainly says 'necromancy' to me. It should be fairly obvious that one doesn't try to use necromantic spells to raise corpses, in a city full of paladins, I'd have thought.

So, to sum up - if I break the laws, I expect to be punished. It doesn't matter what I personally think about said laws, if everyone believed that and never followed the law, then we'd have utter anarchy (see also - chaotic evil society :smallbiggrin: )

Just my two rambling pennies.

[EvilElitest]

Debatable. I believe Belkar is worthy of a death sentence because of his past crimes. However, I would also say that enacting that death sentence now would be impractical.

However at current he is serving time you might say (killing evil people for good ends though his personal motives are different) and thus protected from the death penalty until he is realized from service or starts killing innocent people again


then you misunderstand. I am trying to use insanity as a moral defense. Legality (whether modern or Oots) has very little to do with what I'm trying to say.
insanity only works as a defense via legal protection, as insanity doesn't protect you in D&D


I do get the sense that she doesn't understand why people think what she does is wrong. So, out of rage and frustration, you get some pretty heinous acts. This sense doesn't mesh well with reading about people wanting her death and worsefrom
that just implies that she is a sociopath, rage and frustration are never excuses for evil acts. Mind you, i've never asked for "worst than death" but i haven't seen anyone else do so, though i imagine worst than death would most likely be evil as well

I don't let WOTC's manufactured fluff responses dictate nuances in the worlds that I create. Why should Rich?
But OOTS follow the rules of WOTC (for the purpose of parody) until stated otherwise. I've seen no evidence that he has gone against the rules concerning insanity, no matter how strange they may be



Nearly all societies have recognized some form of not guilty by reason of insanity. Of course most have used the catch-22 If you are sane enough to plea insanity, you are not insane enough to be let off on that grounds.

modern legal insanity, making you immune to harsher sentences is the inability to comprehend the consequences of ones actions
thus she is not legally insane
Quote:


It does actually, tho a paladin, or a good many other good types might well feel the need for Atonement once they recover, and the spell versions of insanity are harsh enough to justify killing the insane in self defense.
No that is the spell insanity, not mental illness, which WOTC has made not statement on except that it is perfectly all right to kill people who suffer from Anti social disorder (serial killers) with death. Remember Thog is evil and by modern standards he would be mentally retarded, but Miko would not fall for killing Thog in combat

Less drastic forms of insanity would likely be judged by more or less modern standards, and how easy it would be to magically cure.

by modern standards Tsukiko isn't insane, just really weird


Belker is definitely a threat [See Roy's sleeping problems] and is definitely worthy of a death sentence. See Origens if you want to argue that nothing in the strip quite merits a death sentence. But even in the strip, it's been more a matter of having the right friends than justice.

But Belker has already been put under control, he is no longer a threat. His old crimes have not all been properly punished but giving him a death sentence now would be incorrect as he is already under arrest. As long as he obeys OOTS and commits no evil acts to innocent people he is excused from the death sentence (though he is still CE). He is serving time you might say. However should he escape OOTS and start his old habits, he will worthy of death


Definitely, tho we anarchists are generally heavily outnumbered and/or recognize that telling a man with a lot of guns he is not the legitimate government is not healthy.

Anarchy is a horrible system, might makes right is not a good way to live

Tsukiko is guilty of crimes worthy of death. However, should she surrender, that paladin dude will be honor bound to accept it (presuming it is not a trap) as killing the defenseless is an evil act

[WampaX]

Voice of the Wampinator:
Just a note,
Make sure you keep steering the discussion away from real-life politics.
So far so good.

[EvilElitest]

Voice of the Wampinator:
Just a note,
Make sure you keep steering the discussion away from real-life politics.
So far so good.

Does talking about the legal definition of Insanity count?
from
EE

[factotum]

Does talking about the legal definition of Insanity count?
from
EE

Why would the legal definition of insanity have anything to do with real-life politics? Unless you start turning it into a rant as to why politician X shouldn't be in power because they're mad, of course... :smallbiggrin:

[Kish]

Why would the legal definition of insanity have anything to do with real-life politics? Unless you start turning it into a rant as to why politician X shouldn't be in power because they're mad, of course... :smallbiggrin:
Politician X is a completely appalling ruler! :smallfurious: :smallfurious: :smallfurious: :smallfurious: :smallfurious:

[EvilElitest]

Politician X is a completely appalling ruler! :smallfurious: :smallfurious: :smallfurious: :smallfurious: :smallfurious:

Fun fact, from the third window second story from building Y you can get a clear line of sight to his office. Also weapon C is often stored in a suit case near the trash can in that same room. Just a fun fact:smallwink:
from
EE

[David Argall]

However at current he is serving time you might say (killing evil people for good ends though his personal motives are different) and thus protected from the death penalty until he is realized from service or starts killing innocent people again

Belker has already been put under control, he is no longer a threat. His old crimes have not all been properly punished but giving him a death sentence now would be incorrect as he is already under arrest. As long as he obeys OOTS and commits no evil acts to innocent people he is excused from the death sentence (though he is still CE). He is serving time you might say. However should he escape OOTS and start his old habits, he will worthy of death


This logic will not do, except possibly in the eyes of the OOTS. The party is not a legal authority and is not recognized as the lawful agent of any. [The deal Roy made with Shojo involved Shojo exceeding his legal authority.]
Any agency able to and wanting to arrest Belkar would not hesitate to do so merely because he is currently working for the cause of good.
That Belkar might be considered an agent of Hinjo and/or the legal government of AC also is of no legal interest. Even a friendly government need feel no legal duty not to arrest Belkar.
Now Belkar's lawyer might be able to persuade any arresting agency he would be more useful as a freed agent forced to work for good ends, but this is a pragmatic argument and the government might not see it as convincing.
On a more hopeful point, both individuals and governments tend to work on the "out of sight, out of mind" theory, and a Belkar who has fled and is never coming back is almost as good as a Belkar dead. So Bekar shouldn't have to worry much about anyone trying to hunt him down, or his crimes coming back to haunt him well, not until the next book anyway

[Milandros]

No, but I think placement in a mental institution capable of handling/restraining her while encouraging her redemption is more suitable a sentance than death. :smallwink:


The difference is that I don't think Xykon can be redeemed. I also wouldn't "let him off the hook" even if he was capable of redemption.



Haley has harmed those who had done no wrong to her and allied herself with powerful forces of destruction. Does she get the rope as well?

I quite agree that it would be justifiable to kill her in combat. But not because "she deserves death". Also, this has nothing to do with any imagined "treason" on her part.



I don't see anyhjting that makes me really think of Tsusiko as insane at all, to be honest. It depends on one's definition of insanity.

Of course, to be evil, either in real life or in D&D, I think you have to be insane, by one definition of insanity. No genuinely sane person would rape and murder children. Genuinely sane people simply don't do that. No genuinely sane person kills for fun. No genuinely sane person would become one of our RL nasty dictators, or terrorist leaders, or genocide committer, or etc etc etc.... How can you ever justify any of these actions by an form of rational, logical argument? How can you justify any form of fundamentalism through logical, rational, sane argument?

And yet, these people are coherent, have stimulus/response activities, don't have visual or auditory hallucinations, have working memories, don't have brain damage - so are they insane, or have they simply chosen an evil path? It all depends on one's definitions.

If someone with Tsusiko's beliefs killed your family then animated them as slaves, thus denying (in D&D rules) their souls their eternal rest, would they deserve death?

Perhaps, perhaps not - the death penalty is controversial, and most of the western world doesn't have it. We run on the "we're better than they are" principle, where we'll throw them in a cell, feed them and protect them from the elements, but never let them out to hurt others again. On the other hand, even in the nations without a death penalty there's often a lot of anger at the very worst crimes and a desire to see the criminal killed. Not an easy argument to resolve - I personally can't conclude either way.

However, in this drama, I'll happily see her taken down. She's a nasty person who kills people and steals their bodies. Evil antagonist all the way, with less moral justification than Miko (though she's a lot less annoying than Miko).

[Zencao]

I personally don't believe you have to be insane to be evil, if you don't fear death (Or hell, want to die) and you feel like it, killing someone wouldn't be INSANE it'd just be wrong. Doing what you find fun, isn't insane, finding murder fun isn't insane (Hell, anyone who's played a violent video game can attest to that) but doing it is WRONG.