Reccuring Miko (Spoilers)

[Child Conscript]

I was just rereading Oots and the thought came up. . .Miko and Roy meeting in the afterlife!? I see no complication as they are both LG, and they both go to the same afterlife cause in 493 we see an Auzrite soldier and paladin climbing the big mountain thing so there might be a chance that Miko may become a recurring villain!? (unless there is a special fallen paladin afterlife)
just a theory. . .

[Haleyintraining]

Wouldn't she be on the other side of the mountain:smallconfused:. (Comic 486)

[Mauve Shirt]

*facepalm* This has been said many million times before.
*takes cerebellum*

[lord of kobolds]

SPLEEN FOR YIPYAP!!!!!:smallbiggrin:

[Szilard]

I literally banged my head against the table.

[Echowinds]

I do believe that Miko, as a character, is not initially hated, but rather by the vast amount of threads about her.

[DraPrime]

Hmmm, I guess I get the colon. I've always needed a spare.

[Calinero]

I think I might have been amongst the first to make this thread. So, by virtue of that, I'm taking his brain. Or the space it should be, whatever.

[David Argall]

While one can never be certain in a comic like this, the odds are heavy Miko will be seen no more.

Miko was given an ending that was really final looking. The picture is a really great one, and would be seriously harmed by any reappearance.
Note here we have Soon passing judgement on Miko. This is a sign she is done.

We might also cover the matter of why she died at all. She is after all far and away the NPC who has appeared the most times before dying. The most popular theories are that she was too popular and detracted from the main chacters and/or that she was too controversial. These points both argue against bringing her back at all.


I do believe that Miko, as a character, is not initially hated, but rather by the vast amount of threads about her.
No, Miko gained haters real fast. I would say for bad reasons, but the reason wasn't because there were a lot of threads about her. Rather she gained lots of threads because a lot of people hated her [and a good number more had a more balanced picture].

[Draco Dracul]

While one can never be certain in a comic like this, the odds are heavy Miko will be seen no more.

Miko was given an ending that was really final looking. The picture is a really great one, and would be seriously harmed by any reappearance.
Note here we have Soon passing judgement on Miko. This is a sign she is done.

We might also cover the matter of why she died at all. She is after all far and away the NPC who has appeared the most times before dying. The most popular theories are that she was too popular and detracted from the main chacters and/or that she was too controversial. These points both argue against bringing her back at all.


No, Miko gained haters real fast. I would say for bad reasons, but the reason wasn't because there were a lot of threads about her. Rather she gained lots of threads because a lot of people hated her [and a good number more had a more balanced picture].

Her death could be also be symbolism for the fall of Azure City, as she is both the most promenent paliden in the strip and served as the means of bringing the Order of the Stick to Azure City. But that could be me finding symbolism that isn't there.

[chiasaur11]

Skeleton and pancreas.

[Mauve Shirt]

Is there a reason there are 2 threads like this?

[Raging_Pacifist]

Is there a reason there are 2 threads like this?

It's called not taking time to read previous threads.


3. Someone has posted your theory before. Really.

And, *takes lungs*

[Child Conscript]

Mauve Shirt
*facepalm* This has been said many million times before.
*takes cerebellum* Whoops I guess this is what i get for not reading threads :smallredface:

[Teron]

As usual, I will take the finger- and toenails.


We might also cover the matter of why she died at all. She is after all far and away the NPC who has appeared the most times before dying. The most popular theories are that she was too popular and detracted from the main chacters and/or that she was too controversial. These points both argue against bringing her back at all.
Mr. Burlew said he had the entire plot outlined in broad strokes a long time ago. I would guess that Miko's death was planned more or less as it happened before she ever found the Order of the Stick.

[FujinAkari]

Mr. Burlew said he had the entire plot outlined in broad strokes a long time ago. I would guess that Miko's death was planned more or less as it happened before she ever found the Order of the Stick.

Mr. Burlew has also said that he intended Miko to be a recurring antagonist throughout the entirety of the OOTS storyline, so it is somewhat safe to say he has diverged from his initial outline :P

[David Argall]

Mr. Burlew said he had the entire plot outlined in broad strokes a long time ago. I would guess that Miko's death was planned more or less as it happened before she ever found the Order of the Stick.

Possibly, and I would like to see her back, but Miko was also supposed to be Roy's love interest, and that lasted 50 strips instead of 500. So we have good reason to think the plans for her have changed, and she is gone from the plot.

[Renegade Paladin]

He said he had planned for her to be Roy's love interest but had abandoned that plan at the same time he said she was supposed to be a recurring character. And the paragraph after he said she was supposed to be a recurring character, he pointed out that death is not final in D&D, and that it would be trivially easy to bring back dead antagonists if he felt he needed them.

[Child Conscript]

Oh yeah btw sorry for 2 threads as when i was creating it my connection reset so I didn't know if it went through so i posted it again :smalleek: sorry again for wasting ppls time!!

[FujinAkari]

Possibly, and I would like to see her back, but Miko was also supposed to be Roy's love interest, and that lasted 50 strips instead of 500. So we have good reason to think the plans for her have changed, and she is gone from the plot.

There is absolutely no evidence that Miko was intended to be Roy's permanent love interest. In fact, Rich himself strongly denies this interpretation. Miko began as an attempt to create a LG character who realistically opposed the party.

While, yes, Rich did say that the love-arc didn't unfold as he had originally presumed, there is no reason to assume that he had intended the arrangement to be permanent, especially as Miko was INTENDED to oppose Roy.

That said, I for one think it plausible that Miko will re-emerge into the plotline, if only because the comic continues to reference her.

If you look over the strip, you will notice that a character that dies typically is immediately forgotten. Trigak, Zz'tiri, and the Chief of Newport Police have all been utterly ignored since their death. Their bodies are never shown, and they are never mentioned.

Miko, by contrast, has appeared in the comic as a corpse (something only she, Shojo, and Roy have done) and Tsukiko referenced bringing her back, but then decided against it. Additionally, O-chul discussed her when talking to Monster-san, and when Xykon challenged Tsukiko to create an undead warrior, it seems very likely that the reader was being led to consider Miko, given Tsukiko's previous musings, although of course that didn't pan out (yet).

The point is, of all the characters in the comic, Miko is -by far- the most active corpse (well, except Roy, but his resurrection is all but guerenteed). If Miko was dead and gone, I would expect her to stay dead, like everyone else. The fact that the plot keeps bringing her up makes me wonder how gone she really is.

Is it proof? Of course not. Haley referenced Samantha in her fight with Tsukiko, so there are exceptions, but Miko does seem to be referenced by the comic quite a bit in death.

[Paragon Badger]

There is absolutely no evidence that Miko was intended to be Roy's permanent love interest. In fact, Rich himself strongly denies this interpretation. Miko began as an attempt to create a LG character who realistically opposed the party.

While, yes, Rich did say that the love-arc didn't unfold as he had originally presumed, there is no reason to assume that he had intended the arrangement to be permanent, especially as Miko was INTENDED to oppose Roy.

That said, I for one think it plausible that Miko will re-emerge into the plotline, if only because the comic continues to reference her.

If you look over the strip, you will notice that a character that dies typically is immediately forgotten. Trigak, Zz'tiri, and the Chief of Newport Police have all been utterly ignored since their death. Their bodies are never shown, and they are never mentioned.

Miko, by contrast, has appeared in the comic as a corpse (something only she, Shojo, and Roy have done) and Tsukiko referenced bringing her back, but then decided against it. Additionally, O-chul discussed her when talking to Monster-san, and when Xykon challenged Tsukiko to create an undead warrior, it seems very likely that the reader was being led to consider Miko, given Tsukiko's previous musings, although of course that didn't pan out (yet).

The point is, of all the characters in the comic, Miko is -by far- the most active corpse (well, except Roy, but his resurrection is all but guerenteed). If Miko was dead and gone, I would expect her to stay dead, like everyone else. The fact that the plot keeps bringing her up makes me wonder how gone she really is.

Is it proof? Of course not. Haley referenced Samantha in her fight with Tsukiko, so there are exceptions, but Miko does seem to be referenced by the comic quite a bit in death.

I doubt the references are any attempts at a Chekhov's Gun on the author's part... but more likely because Miko had basically been a catalyst for many of the plot-integral events of the comic.

Miko brought the Order to AC, where their quest for the gates began. She also destroyed one of the gates.

She's done far more for the story than Trigak, Zz'tiri, or the Chief of Newport Police... So it's only natural she gets a reference or two.

If Miko had never existed, the story would have gone much differently, I believe... The Order might not have even got to Azure City.

[Shatteredtower]

The point is, of all the characters in the comic, Miko is -by far- the most active corpse...Thank you. That is exactly the sort of visual I needed to start my day in a properly disturbed state.

(Context? What context?)

There's probably more to say on the subject of Miko, but not right now. Now's Banjo time.

[FujinAkari]

I doubt the references are any attempts at a Chekhov's Gun on the author's part... but more likely because Miko had basically been a catalyst for many of the plot-integral events of the comic.

Oh, no question. I'm not saying I expect Miko to come back, I was just disagreeing with David who said that there was extremely little chance for her to return due to the poignancy of her death scene, whereas I see the comic enduring to keep her in focus, rather than allowing us to forget. I feel like there must be a reason for that :)


Thank you. That is exactly the sort of visual I needed to start my day in a properly disturbed state.

(Context? What context?)

Mwahaha! My revenge is complete! Revenge? For What... meeeeh... I'm sure you did or will do something at some point!

*watches Thriller and pastes little Miko-heads on all the Zombies*

[Kish]

The point is, of all the characters in the comic, Miko is -by far- the most active corpse (well, except Roy, but his resurrection is all but guerenteed).
And Xykon and miscellaneous zombies, ghouls, ghasts, wights, and so on.

[FujinAkari]

And Xykon and miscellaneous zombies, ghouls, ghasts, wights, and so on.

*baps!*

Mom! Kishy is being a brat! :P

[David Argall]

He said he had planned for her to be Roy's love interest but had abandoned that plan at the same time he said she was supposed to be a recurring character.
Note "was supposed to be". The writer had planned for her to be the love interest and she was supposed to a recurring interest. Past tense in both cases. And, I fear, abandoned plans in both cases.


And the paragraph after he said she was supposed to be a recurring character, he pointed out that death is not final in D&D, and that it would be trivially easy to bring back dead antagonists if he felt he needed them.
If. And so far there has not been any "need" and the longer we go, the less reasonable any such need becomes.



There is absolutely no evidence that Miko was intended to be Roy's permanent love interest. In fact, Rich himself strongly denies this interpretation.
Can you cite a source for that opinion? It is new to me, and somewhat unlikely. While relationships in comics do end, those that last longer than what we can call one-night stands are routinely quite long lasting. Since the plan still had the romance active for 50 strips, the odds were good that 500 was planned on.


While, yes, Rich did say that the love-arc didn't unfold as he had originally presumed, there is no reason to assume that he had intended the arrangement to be permanent, especially as Miko was INTENDED to oppose Roy.
That's somewhat of a reason to assume it was permanent. The boy pursuing the unobtainable girl has obvious comic potential and has endless variations. A rocky relationship is much superior for our purposes, and effectively lasts longer as well.


That said, I for one think it plausible that Miko will re-emerge into the plotline, if only because the comic continues to reference her.

If you look over the strip, you will notice that a character that dies typically is immediately forgotten.
Miko, by contrast, has appeared in the comic as a corpse (something only she, Shojo, and Roy have done)
Strictly speaking not correct. The chief dies in 360 and his head appears in 361 & 2, and he is referred to in 363.


and Tsukiko referenced bringing her back, but then decided against it. Additionally, O-chul discussed her when talking to Monster-san, and when Xykon challenged Tsukiko to create an undead warrior,

[quote=FujinAkari] The point is, of all the characters in the comic, Miko is -by far- the most active corpse
But she was also the most active NPC among those that died, and by about the same margin. People who make a big splash just do get references.



Mom! Kishy is being a brat! :P
Since Kishy is an ogre and has an earlier join date than FujinAkari, Kishy is the older sister here [actual ages not to be inquired about by polite, or non-rash, males], and proper language is "Mom! Kishy is picking on me!".

[FujinAkari]

Can you cite a source for that opinion? It is new to me, and somewhat unlikely. While relationships in comics do end, those that last longer than what we can call one-night stands are routinely quite long lasting. Since the plan still had the romance active for 50 strips, the odds were good that 500 was planned on.

The commentary by page 198 of No Cure for the Paladin Blues discusses the origins of Miko. It is stated that Miko is a result of Rich asking himself if it were possible to make an "LG Villian" and goes on to say that "no question, Miko is an antagonist, someone for the OOTS to overcome."

No where in there does it say anything about Rich wanting to give Roy a love-arc or to give him a girlfriend. Your claim seems to be that Miko's role shift into antagonist was unplanned, despite the fact that Rich flatly states that her initial conception was as a villian.

We -do- know that the inn-arc changed, but we also know that Miko was intended to be an enemy of the OOTS. Claiming that she was supposed to be a permanent love interest is simply speculation. It is not backed by anything Rich says and actually goes against his commentary on the basis of the character.

[Jayngfet]

I'll take every muscle in it's body, I need it for my frankennoob(noobgolem, a lot of people are doing it.).

[FujinAkari]

I'll take every muscle in it's body, I need it for my frankennoob(noobgolem, a lot of people are doing it.).

... this thread has absolutely nothing to do with 4E... why the heck are you desecrating a body?

[Jayngfet]

... this thread has absolutely nothing to do with 4E... why the heck are you desecrating a body?

1. its fun

2.It's been done before, dozens of times a week, and has reached the point where It's neither taken seriously or played straight.(see "The middle gladiator is miko!!!")

3.well Dragonprime took his colon, and Teron took his tonails!

we should make a page on body part stealing rules, 4e is cool, new characters are not, therklas ok to rip apart(theory wise), and so on.

[FujinAkari]

2.It's been done before, dozens of times a week, and has reached the point where It's neither taken seriously or played straight.(see "The middle gladiator is miko!!!")

This is the biggest reason not to do it. The gesture loses all meaning if you do it in response to everything. Yourself, and everyone else who has wasted space in this thread with posts like that one should please refrain from such in the future.

Thank you.

Edit: Sorry to be a bit of a jerk, but seriously, its getting out of hand.

[Remirach]

The commentary by page 198 of No Cure for the Paladin Blues discusses the origins of Miko. It is stated that Miko is a result of Rich asking himself if it were possible to make an "LG Villian" and goes on to say that "no question, Miko is an antagonist, someone for the OOTS to overcome."

No where in there does it say anything about Rich wanting to give Roy a love-arc or to give him a girlfriend. Your claim seems to be that Miko's role shift into antagonist was unplanned, despite the fact that Rich flatly states that her initial conception was as a villian.

We -do- know that the inn-arc changed, but we also know that Miko was intended to be an enemy of the OOTS. Claiming that she was supposed to be a permanent love interest is simply speculation. It is not backed by anything Rich says and actually goes against his commentary on the basis of the character.

He doesn't specifically say he INITIALLY created her as an antagonist. He says she's the RESULT of him asking whether a Lawful Good character could turn into an antagonist. So she might have turned that direction when the "light romantic comedy" aspect of her character turned out to be nonexistent. Moreover, the Giant says that he came to realize that Roy and Miko were totally incompatible. If he had never intended for them to be a couple, he would have known that already.

[FujinAkari]

He doesn't specifically say he INITIALLY created her as an antagonist. He says she's the RESULT of him asking whether a Lawful Good character could turn into an antagonist. So she might have turned that direction when the "light romantic comedy" aspect of her character turned out to be nonexistent.

This seems unlikely given the position of the commentary. Why would Rich be talking about a change that was going to happen in about 80 comics just before Miko's introduction? Logically speaking, given that he puts this commentary at comic 198, just before Miko appears, then the characterization he gives her ("Lawful Good Villian" is the core of her character, the starting point he used to develop here.

The confusion seems to stem from his commentary at 224, where he talks about Miko's initial envisioning. I can easily see where people become confused with statements like "Miko would be a sexy Paladin who Roy wanted, but wanted nothing to do with Roy," as being the core of Miko's character. I, personally, disagree. I believe the story he tells at 198, as Miko is introduced, is the CORE of her character, and the Roy-romance angle came about from him fleshing out the concept, but is still less important to the character than the LG Villain concept.


Moreover, the Giant says that he came to realize that Roy and Miko were totally incompatible. If he had never intended for them to be a couple, he would have known that already.

Go back and reread 224. Even in this commentary, Miko wanted "nothing to do with Roy." and the inn sequence was initially the story of how "Roy tried to woo Miko and failed.

There is finality in that language. It doesn't say "Roy's initial attempt to woo Miko" or "Roy unsuccessfully tried to woo Miko," it says he failed. The language seems to reaffirm the idea that Miko and Roy would -never- end up together and, unlike David, I tend to believe that Miko was always intended as a villainous character, she didn't "become" more villainous after the inn sequence... although she might possibly have become antagonistic more rapidly as a result.

[Remirach]

This seems unlikely given the position of the commentary. Why would Rich be talking about a change that was going to happen in about 80 comics just before Miko's introduction? Logically speaking, given that he puts this commentary at comic 198, just before Miko appears, then the characterization he gives her ("Lawful Good Villian" is the core of her character, the starting point he used to develop here.

The confusion seems to stem from his commentary at 224, where he talks about Miko's initial envisioning. I can easily see where people become confused with statements like "Miko would be a sexy Paladin who Roy wanted, but wanted nothing to do with Roy," as being the core of Miko's character. I, personally, disagree. I believe the story he tells at 198, as Miko is introduced, is the CORE of her character, and the Roy-romance angle came about from him fleshing out the concept, but is still less important to the character than the LG Villain concept.

The commentary is often out-of-step with the narrative order. This is true to such a large degree that there's one point where a spoiler is revealed in the notes with an "oops! Better read the strips before you read this!" remark. It seems expected that most people who've bought the book have already seen all the strips.


Go back and reread 224. Even in this commentary, Miko wanted "nothing to do with Roy." and the inn sequence was initially the story of how "Roy tried to woo Miko and failed.

There is finality in that language. It doesn't say "Roy's initial attempt to woo Miko" or "Roy unsuccessfully tried to woo Miko," it says he failed. The language seems to reaffirm the idea that Miko and Roy would -never- end up together and, unlike David, I tend to believe that Miko was always intended as a villainous character, she didn't "become" more villainous after the inn sequence... although she might possibly have become antagonistic more rapidly as a result.

I have to disagree, I don't see how "failing" to do something is considered more final and conclusive than "unsuccessfully" trying to do something. The initial plot was that Roy would put on the belt in order to get some "girl-talk" in with Miko -- that's a kind of half-baked idea that DEMANDS failure, but doesn't rule out further attempts or even eventual success, especially if he becomes more mature in his pursuit.

[Child Conscript]

My god. . .This is getting a bit out of hand. . .Make a thread about Miko and sit back and watch the ferocious debates fly. o.O

[FujinAkari]

The commentary is often out-of-step with the narrative order. This is true to such a large degree that there's one point where a spoiler is revealed in the notes with an "oops! Better read the strips before you read this!" remark. It seems expected that most people who've bought the book have already seen all the strips.

That is the exception, not the rule. When you have one section titled "The Paladin Herself." and another called "Love and Gender Changing." Which sounds like it deals with Miko, and which is merely commentary about why a section of the strip is a certain way?


I have to disagree, I don't see how "failing" to do something is considered more final and conclusive than "unsuccessfully" trying to do something. The initial plot was that Roy would put on the belt in order to get some "girl-talk" in with Miko -- that's a kind of half-baked idea that DEMANDS failure, but doesn't rule out further attempts or even eventual success, especially if he becomes more mature in his pursuit.

Of all the words in the English Language, Fail is the most definitive. When benchmarks are set, they are "Pass / Fail" tests. If you don't meet standards, then penalties get assessed, there aren't second chances. I am probably reading too much into this, but I do not believe Rich ever intended Roy to have an ongoing relationship with someone he envisioned as a villain... and I -certainly- don't think there is sufficient evidence to be stating that as fact :)

[King of Nowhere]

If Miko was intended to be a permanent love interest for Roy, then Roy wouldn't have had his story with Celia. And if Roy hadn't had his story with Celia, there would not have been the story arc when Celia takes Haley and Belkar out of Azure city.
That's a pretty big part of the plot, so I think it's unlikely that the Giant changed so much the plot after the inn sequence. The other changes he made at the plot (V ambigous gender and Thog and Sabine recurring characters) don't mess with the grand scheme of things.
My interpretation is that Rich always intended Celia to be Roy's lover, and that the change he made was just Roy going away from Miko quickly. Anyway, I'm very courious to see what the commentaries to War and XP say on the subject.

Also, Rich said that she was intended to be a recurring character "for the rest of the story arc", which leaves the ambiguity if he referred to the story arc that involved Soon's gate, or the whole story. He also said that she come back in "unexpected" ways. And other recurring characters stayed dormant for more than 100 strips, so it could really happen everything.

[Beholder1995]

My first Organ Harvest.... I'm so happy.... *takes kidneys*

I actually posted in the other thread that has the exact same name as this that was started by this exact person. I stand on my theory that Miko's either still atoning or going to some sort of "crazy person's heaven".

[Renegade Paladin]

Note "was supposed to be". The writer had planned for her to be the love interest and she was supposed to a recurring interest. Past tense in both cases. And, I fear, abandoned plans in both cases.
Oh, for the love of... Look, that doesn't mean anything, because he was speaking of an already past event! He "was soon to introduce" Miko; since the commentary was written well after Miko's actual introduction, the past tense is appropriate. The rest of it is simply subject-verb agreement. There is no indication in the commentary for No Cure for the Paladin Blues that plans to make her a recurring villain had changed.

[Raging Gene Ray]

How about this theory:

Miko was given the ultimate second chance and reincarnated, allowing her to live a good life with a proper upbringing that would steer her clear of the traps she had fallen into.

As with her previous life, she would be born into a family of nobles...her parents would even have alliterative names like her...

Miko is the unborn child of Kazumi Kato.

There wouldn't have to be any actual story surrounding this, just some variety of Celestial Authority could let it slip while discussing something else.

[David Argall]

The commentary by page 198 of No Cure for the Paladin Blues discusses the origins of Miko. It is stated that Miko is a result of Rich asking himself if it were possible to make an "LG Villian" and goes on to say that "no question, Miko is an antagonist, someone for the OOTS to overcome."
a- Sigh, I am just going to have to overcome my cheapness and get NCPB

b-Of course she is intended as an antagonist. That has nothing to do with whether she is also a love interest. In fact we find that having the hots for somebody on the opposite side is something of a cliche. It is entirely reasonable, even highly plot useful, for Roy to fall for somebody unsuitable.


No where in there does it say anything about Rich wanting to give Roy a love-arc or to give him a girlfriend.
A statement that it wasn't working out is rather clear proof that he did.


This seems unlikely given the position of the commentary. Why would Rich be talking about a change that was going to happen in about 80 comics just before Miko's introduction?
Several possibilities. We are essentially working on the footnotes here, which means location can be rather erratic from our view since other needs were being met.


The confusion seems to stem from his commentary at 224, where he talks about Miko's initial envisioning. I can easily see where people become confused with statements like "Miko would be a sexy Paladin who Roy wanted, but wanted nothing to do with Roy," as being the core of Miko's character. I, personally, disagree. I believe the story he tells at 198, as Miko is introduced, is the CORE of her character, and the Roy-romance angle came about from him fleshing out the concept, but is still less important to the character than the LG Villain concept.
But having said that, you are rejecting your argument against the Roy-Miko romance being permanent. There is no claim here that Miko was not an antagonist [or at least a problem for the party. As a LG, she is technically on their side and thus not an antagonist, but that does not prevent every action of her's hampering the party]. She is easily able to be both antagonist and love interest.
Indeed, being both can be highly useful for the story. You gain a reason for the two antagonists to be on stage together and to avoid permanent resolution of the situation.


Go back and reread 224. Even in this commentary, Miko wanted "nothing to do with Roy."
One sided romances are entirely suited to stories like ours.


and the inn sequence was initially the story of how "Roy tried to woo Miko and failed.

There is finality in that language. It doesn't say "Roy's initial attempt to woo Miko" or "Roy unsuccessfully tried to woo Miko," it says he failed.
You read too much into the language. It also doesn't say "Roy's only attempt to...." "Failed" has a finality to it, but it is a very limited finality. It says nothing about later attempts and we find nothing wrong on that score with "He failed, but the next attempt..."



The language seems to reaffirm the idea that Miko and Roy would -never- end up together
Which is not at all incompatible with her being Roy's love-interest. I would deem her having a [probably violently denied] interest in him a more useful idea, but his chasing her and her rejecting him could power the comic for a very long time.


she didn't "become" more villainous after the inn sequence... although she might possibly have become antagonistic more rapidly as a result.

Now this is pretty much a contradiction. It still points to Miko being "rapidly" written out of the plot.


When benchmarks are set, they are "Pass / Fail" tests. If you don't meet standards, then penalties get assessed, there aren't second chances.
?? 2nd [and 3rd and ...] chances are in fact routine. Depending on the test, you might be simply told "You fail. Fix that flaw here and now, and we can continue with the test."


I do not believe Rich ever intended Roy to have an ongoing relationship with someone he envisioned as a villain...
Why not? Especially after we have SoD? That book has produced all sorts of theories that are in violent conflict with the strip. So why should we assume such limits on our writer's intentions?
Particularly limits that seem highly restrictive. As mentioned, fraternizing with the enemy is a very common story element. Why shouldn't we expect such?



If Miko was intended to be a permanent love interest for Roy, then Roy wouldn't have had his story with Celia. And if Roy hadn't had his story with Celia, there would not have been the story arc when Celia takes Haley and Belkar out of Azure city.
Story elements can be switched in and out with great ease. And Celia is far from the hardest case. In fact, Celia as romantic partner looks to me to be a rather weak vinilla patchjob where a more successful [in the short run at least] Roy-Miko romance was originally intended. [Maybe Miko assigns herself the job of spying on Roy during the celebration, and things happen, ending with them waking in bed, and not remembering if anything happened. Miko of course would put a rather poor interpretation on this...]
There are also a lot of ways to get Celia's talisman to Roy. They include her taking over the role of some minor NPC we will now never see. Alternately, Celia could have simply deemed the talisman a business card and intended it to be used to summons her next time he was in legal difficulties.

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Argall
Note "was supposed to be". The writer had planned for her to be the love interest and she was supposed to a recurring interest. Past tense in both cases. And, I fear, abandoned plans in both cases.


that doesn't mean anything, because he was speaking of an already past event! He "was soon to introduce" Miko; since the commentary was written well after Miko's actual introduction, the past tense is appropriate. The rest of it is simply subject-verb agreement. There is no indication in the commentary for No Cure for the Paladin Blues that plans to make her a recurring villain had changed.
There is, more precisely, no indication plans had not. The language fits the image of Miko being intended to be a pest and a love interest for Roy for the rest of the story. We know the love interest was abandoned. Why should we assume that the rest is being kept?
One problem we have with Miko as recurring villain is what she is doing there. The party is running all over the world. What is she doing in all these places? Now as messenger paladin, we do have an excuse for her popping up anywhere. She is taking a message to or from Azure City, and will interrupt that as she did with the ogres for a good cause [which means bothering the party] Alternatively, with a love interest, we can have Roy chase her or her chase Roy. But now with her dead, we are really having to reach to get her back in the plot.



There wouldn't have to be any actual story surrounding this, just some variety of Celestial Authority could let it slip while discussing something else.
Entirely unsatisfactory.
Much too little for those who want to see more of Miko [and we would mean Miko, not some washed out sorta copy] and entirely too much for those who hate her.
Her death scene is almost certainly the last for her and any return will have to be substantial, or not at all.

[Jayngfet]

This is the biggest reason not to do it. The gesture loses all meaning if you do it in response to everything. Yourself, and everyone else who has wasted space in this thread with posts like that one should please refrain from such in the future.

Thank you.

Edit: Sorry to be a bit of a jerk, but seriously, its getting out of hand.

fine(puts bones in upside down) only for 4e threads.

[The_Jackal]

There will be no more Miko because her relevance to the story and the characters is at an end. Stripped of her paladin abilities, she can present little threat to the party as a nemesis, and it's highly doubtful given her tragic flaw of self-obsessed moral relativism that she'll ever achieve atonement. Sorry if you're among the vocal minority of Miko fans, but she's done.


It is stated that Miko is a result of Rich asking himself if it were possible to make an "LG Villian"

That's interesting, because if that was his aim, I'd say he failed. Not in making the villain part, but in making her Lawful Good. Lawful Good antagonist? Perhaps. In the early stages where Miko is merely a reactionary, narrow-minded twit, she's certainly an obstacle to the Order, but hardly a villain, in the traditional sense. It's only when she engages in decidedly unlawful and evil acts that she really achieves villainhood.

Summary execution of an accused traitor (in this case, Lord Shojo) might, in some circumstances be lawful, and in others, might even be considered good, but it can't be both at the same time. Miko might have BELIEVED she was doing good, but she certainly couldn't have thought she was obeying the law, no matter how delusional she was.

[Laurellien]

Once again, dibs on the teeth!

[David Argall]

There will be no more Miko because her relevance to the story and the characters is at an end. Stripped of her paladin abilities, she can present little threat to the party as a nemesis, and it's highly doubtful given her tragic flaw of self-obsessed moral relativism that she'll ever achieve atonement.
I agree with the conclusion, but not the reasons. As we already know, defeated recurring villains can manage to get retooled so they are once again a threat to the party. Just how this would be done with Miko is a mere technical problem.

And while D&D is heavily a battle game, that is not the only sort of obstacle one must overcome. Miko might be very useful in bothering the party in non-combat ways. [An idea I had earlier was that Miko was going to be sent with the party as a guard on Belkar. As such, the party can't attack her, but she is always on the scene to get in the way. Given Miko is currently dead, and under criminal charges this is a bit unlikely, but with a little work, it could still be managed.]
Atonement really deserves its own story. In the current story, it is likely to be too large to avoid being a distraction, or have to be just brushed off in a page or less. So the likely conclusion is that it just won't happen.


That's interesting, because if that was his aim, I'd say he failed. Not in making the villain part, but in making her Lawful Good.
I'd question too whether she was a successful character, but not in this respect. Hard to put up with, definitely, but also definitely LG until she fell.


Lawful Good antagonist? Perhaps. In the early stages where Miko is merely a reactionary, narrow-minded twit, she's certainly an obstacle to the Order, but hardly a villain, in the traditional sense.
This limitation seems to make the task impossible from the start. But if we loosen the definition to one who is in the wrong vs the heros and dedicated to that error, she does quite well as a villain.


It's only when she engages in decidedly unlawful and evil acts that she really achieves villainhood.
But that is where she gains challenges to her status of LG.


Summary execution of an accused traitor (in this case, Lord Shojo) might, in some circumstances be lawful, and in others, might even be considered good, but it can't be both at the same time.
Of course it can. [The very admission it can be either good or lawful, combined with the rules allowing things to be both, makes this almost a given.] And if Miko's ravings were proven instead of just wild claims, Shojo's death would certainly qualify. He was alleged to be a leader of a massive evil conspiracy that was about to bring ruin on the city, and if he was not killed right away, he could not be stopped. As the top [possibly only] remaining legitimate official, Miko had the duty to stop him, and since she would save a number of lives in the process, it was also a good thing to do [assuming of course that she was dealing with facts instead of fantasy].



Miko might have BELIEVED she was doing good, but she certainly couldn't have thought she was obeying the law, no matter how delusional she was.
Of course she did. Shojo was no longer the legitimate ruler and given the interactions we had seen between Miko and Hinjo, she was thus the ranking official [A situation that both likely agreed would change once he was formally installed as the new lord, but that had not happened yet, and lawfuls can consider such details quite important], and so the duty of trying and executing Shojo fell to her. The magistrates being only Shojo's tools [in her view], the case could not be trusted to them. So it is entirely lawful for her to act as she did, had she been in the situation she insisted she was.