Was Redcloak evil since the beginning?

[Jason]

There are no 100% chances in statistics, the closest you can get is 99.999 recurring, and that is very rare.

We're not really talking statistics. The way the rules work, if you're a paladin and you willingly commit an evil act you fall. 100% of the time.

Not everybody that died is in that panel, there were dead paladins, and the redcloak before Redcloak isn't apparently there either, though how I'd spot him without his cloak I don't know. It's carnage, and mostly it was the paladins wot dun it, I think there is room to suspect that killing non-combatant goblins, children or not, is not good.

I agree. Even though we only saw one paladin killing one goblin child on-panel (along with one paladin wounding a goblin child and then being messily killed) it seems very likely that other paladins killed the other goblin children of the village off-panel. They state that their intention is to exterminate the village.

All the paladins in that panel are on foot and scowling

They are on foot because the Giant doesn't like having characters appear mounted on horses, and generally won't do it when he doesn't have to. Even though it's kind of a class feature and he did show some fighting from horseback initially, the majority of paladins we see in the sequence fight on foot.

I don't see how anyone can say for certain that none of them fell. It is also possible that the paladins that died included all the ones who fell, though that is unlikely.

You are correct, we can't say with any certainty that "no paladins fell as a result of this raid." The Giant said he didn't show any falling because it wasn't the point of the story, and that it's open to speculation as to how many and who fell.
We can be certain that no paladins are unambiguously shown as falling during the sequence. The Giant's comments in War and XPs imply that this is a very typical extermination raid by the Sapphire Guard and that raids with very similar results happened both before and after it.
Either they didn't consider the paladins who fell significant or no paladins fell.

Spoiler

Show

The paladin who kills a goblin child on-panel is not shown dying, and the massacre is pretty much over by that point anyway, so it seems unlikely that she was killed by a defending goblin. In fact, that's probably the same paladin standing in the upper left corner of the final panel with the 50+ dead goblins (same hair and cloak).

[Liquor Box]

But a "village" of 50+ adult goblins but only 2 children in it is not really much of a village.

Exactly. So if it is a village and there are 50 dead mature goblins, that would imply that the immature goblins got away. The dead goblins are skewed toward male so, if male goblins are more likely to be combatants than female (I have no idea), then that fits with lots on non-combatants fleeing.

Or maybe it's not a village. We see no structures or other signs of goblin habitation. Maybe Redcloak has invited his friends and family to watch his admittance to the priesthood. That would be consistent with his siblings being the only immature goblins present, and most of the goblins being male (assuming goblins follow the human pattern of tending to have more same sex friends).

The point is that there's no reason to think that more than one immature goblin was killed.

If you proceed under the assumption that killing goblin children is always an evil act, then the statistical chance of falling when killing a goblin child is 100%. In a decades-long campaign of extermination there must have therefore been at least dozens of paladins who fell. Since the Sapphire Guard appears to have never been very large that's a pretty good chunk of all of their paladins. They really should have realized what was causing them to fall and put a stop to it.

Why must that be the case? Killing immature goblins may be a rarity in the paladin attacks. I don't think we can extrapolate from one immature goblin being killed here, to the idea that one is killed on every attack, so there must have been dozens killed.

We do see that several paladins were killed. If we assume the attack on Redlcoak's gathering was representative of lots of attacks, then hundreds of paladins would die alongside the dozen or so who fell. In such circumstances I don't think the dozen fallees would be of particular note.

I'm also not sure it's accurate to call it a "campaign of extermination". I know one paladin used the term extermination, but he was referring to "the rest of them" and most of the remaining goblins may have been combatants.

[Peelee]

As you say, it's based on the DnD rules except where it's not. And nothing we've seen suggests that those spells are an exception that don't exist or don't work as per the rules.

That Redcloak's only known guidance regarding The Dark One had come from Jirix does suggest those spells are an exception that don't exist or don't work per the rules. Redcloak has openly lamented to Durkon his lack of guidance from his deity or agents thereof (with the sole exception of Jirix). We also know from Durkon that Thor (and almost certainly his agents) never answer Commune for Durkon either, as Durkon laments directly to Thor.

The other spells work off percentage chance, and not only did I link a strip that explains that probability is the strip exists in service to drama/the narrative, but the universe does do as well (eg Tarquin's rise to power), further crippling the usefulness or potentially even existence of such divinations.

If you said nothing outright states those spells do not exist or work per the rules, my reupky would have been much shorter, but there definitely are suggestions they don't exist or work per the rules.

[brian 333]

There is a much simpler, much more logical explanation which requires no external validation.

The Giant wrote a story about Redcloak. Whether or which paladins fell has no impact on Redcloak's story.

In fact, depicting them being punished by the gods would distract from Redcloak's story by having this same argument but with, "They have already been punished, so Redcloak should accept that."

Redcloak is the same amount of angry whether the gods punished some of the paladins or not.

So why didn't the paladins notice? Shame, perhaps? They fell and didn't say anything.

[Liquor Box]

That Redcloak's only known guidance regarding The Dark One had come from Jirix does suggest those spells are an exception that don't exist or don't work per the rules. Redcloak has openly lamented to Durkon his lack of guidance from his deity or agents thereof (with the sole exception of Jirix). We also know from Durkon that Thor (and almost certainly his agents) never answer Commune for Durkon either, as Durkon laments directly to Thor.

The other spells work off percentage chance, and not only did I link a strip that explains that probability is the strip exists in service to drama/the narrative, but the universe does do as well (eg Tarquin's rise to power), further crippling the usefulness or potentially even existence of such divinations.

If you said nothing outright states those spells do not exist or work per the rules, my reupky would have been much shorter, but there definitely are suggestions they don't exist or work per the rules.

In that strip you link Redcloak only says he hasn't spoken to his god directly, and none of the spells Jason mentioned require you to talk to your god. The spell commune, which you mention, does not require direct contaact with the god, so it is not inconsistent with the rules that neither Thor nor the Dark one answer it. Is there someone else that RC says that he has never interacted with his god's agents?

[Peelee]

In that strip you link Redcloak only says he hasn't spoken to his god directly, and none of the spells Jason mentioned require you to talk to your god. The spell commune, which you mention, does not require direct contaact with the god, so it is not inconsistent with the rules that neither Thor nor the Dark one answer it. Is there someone else that RC says that he has never interacted with his god's agents?

If you want to read the comic as conservatively as possible then that's certainly your prerogative. I choose not to be bound by such constraints and have no issues believing that the high priest of a deity, whose only known guidance has come from a friend who met their diety directly with a specific message for him, and who has routinely been shown to be both quite intelligent and well in tune with his clerical powers, is not so stupid as to not try simple divination spells which would help guide his quest significantly more easily and directly and also let him know why his own deity isn't in direct communication with him, which is the only alternate explanation if such spells both exist and work as written.

[Jason]

So why didn't the paladins notice? Shame, perhaps? They fell and didn't say anything.

"Jiro-san, we're getting set for the attack on the next goblin village where is your special mount?"
"Uh, I am letting him have a vacation."
"Really? Now? Okay. Miko-san fell off of her horse and took some damage. Could you go use your lay on hands to heal her."
"Sorry, I already used what I have today."
"Really?"
"Yes. On Kimiko-san. She needed help after she fell of her horse."
"Oh. Say, I'm detecting some evil over behind that rock. What does your detect evil say?"
"Oh, uh, oh yeah. Definitely some evil back there. We should probably do something about that."
"There's no evil behind the rock. Jiro-san, you fell on that last raid, didn't you?"

[Peelee]

"Jiro-san, we're getting set for the attack on the next goblin village where is your special mount?"
"Uh, I am letting him have a vacation."
"Really? Now? Okay. Miko-san fell off of her horse and took some damage. Could you go use your lay on hands to heal her."
"Sorry, I already used what I have today."
"Really?"
"Yes. On Kimiko-san. She needed help after she fell of her horse."
"Oh. Say, I'm detecting some evil over behind that rock. What does your detect evil say?"
"Oh, uh, oh yeah. Definitely some evil back there. We should probably do something about that."
"There's no evil behind the rock. Jiro-san, you fell on that last raid, didn't you?"

Ignoring that you add "-san" to the end of names despite that none of the Azurites themselves do, you are expecting logical responses from paladins who are racist, which is not a logical belief to start with.

[Liquor Box]

If you want to read the comic as conservatively as possible then that's certainly your prerogative. I choose not to be bound by such constraints and have no issues believing that the high priest of a deity, whose only known guidance has come from a friend who met their diety directly with a specific message for him, and who has routinely been shown to be both quite intelligent and well in tune with his clerical powers, is not so stupid as to not try simple divination spells which would help guide his quest significantly more easily and directly and also let him know why his own deity isn't in direct communication with him, which is the only alternate explanation if such spells both exist and work as written.

We weren't talking about whether Redcloak tries spells or not, we were talking about whether divinations exist or work as per the rules in OotS. Nothing Redcloak says in the strip you linked to suggests that the spell doesn't work that way.

But since you raise it, nothing in that strip suggests he hasn't cast commune or other such divination spells. He might have cast them, but simply not talked to his deity directly. The spell doesn't require you to talk directly to the god. Indeed, Recloak seems unsurprised by Durkon having all that divine information until he mentioned Thor having told him directly. If anything that RC believed Durkon had all that info suggests that commune and other such divination spells are available and are usually not answered directly by gods.

[Ionathus]

you are expecting logical responses from paladins who are racist, which is not a logical belief to start with.

Not sure I'm following this; even fictional racists are capable of understanding basic causality or tactics or logic. Prejudice is a blight on society but it doesn't make people cartoonishly incapable of pattern recognition.

[brian 333]

Not sure I'm following this; even fictional racists are capable of understanding basic causality or tactics or logic. Prejudice is a blight on society but it doesn't make people cartoonishly incapable of pattern recognition.

But it does make people reluctant to question questionable ideas, quick to justify unjustifiable actions, and able to overlook the obvious. Once a mind is set on a particular belief structure, isolated from alternate views, and surrounded by minds similarly set, the most obnoxious ideas can be thought of as normal. It's how suicide cults, among other things, become successful.

[Liquor Box]

I don't think any racism by them is really relevant to whether they would notice that they were falling from killing immature goblins.

Again, it's a question of numbers. If lots of immature goblins were being killed so lots of paladins were falling, then it is suprising if they didn't figure it out and stop.

But there's no reason to think that many immature goblins were killed or many paladins fell from it, certainly not relative to the number of paladins that were killed.

Or maybe they did realise after Redcloak's sister was killed, and they didn't kill any immature goblins after that.

[Jason]

I don't think any racism by them is really relevant to whether they would notice that they were falling from killing immature goblins.

Right. Racism doesn't make someone stupid and illogical in everything. It's more like a blind spot over certain subjects.
You can argue that "the paladins will believe that goblin kids must be just as evil as adult goblins, so they will rationalize any paladins that fall killing goblin kids to something else," but I don't find it a plausible argument.
Over the decades-long extermination campaigns described in the commentary of War and XPs the paladins might not ever decide that goblin kids are in fact not evil (the racism blind spot), but they would eventually realize that for some reason killing goblin kids causes paladins to fall. And even if you argue that some of the obvious spells and other abilities that could be used to determine why paladins are falling don't exist in Stickworld, it's still the case that divination and gods speaking to their clerics does happen in Stickworld. Other methods are available. If for some reason the clerics attached to the Sapphire Guard can't get an answer then the paladins could consult Sangwaan in their own city, for instance. Or the oracle of the sunken valley. Either one could easily tell them "don't kill goblin kids," without going into details they will reject about why they shouldn't kill goblin kids.

Again, it's a question of numbers. If lots of immature goblins were being killed so lots of paladins were falling, then it is suprising if they didn't figure it out and stop.

But there's no reason to think that many immature goblins were killed or many paladins fell from it, certainly not relative to the number of paladins that were killed.

Or maybe they did realise after Redcloak's sister was killed, and they didn't kill any immature goblins after that.

"[A] decades-long history of paladins exterminating entire villages of goblins and other humanoids at the behest of their gods (a point that is seen directly in the pages of Start of Darkness)...The Twelve Gods may have sanctioned the paladins’ massacres, but even the gods can’t stop Karma from kicking them in their divine asses once in a while."

It wouldn't be much of a decades-long history of extermination that condemns the city to destruction as the Giant says if they only killed the really evil goblin adult warriors and left all of the kids and non-combatants alive every time.

[brian 333]

Fallen paladin meeting his deity:
Why didn't you tell me that killing evil goblin children would cause me to fall?
Deity:
You never asked.

And that's what I see. The paladins were so certain they could do no wrong that they simply never questioned if they were doing wrong.

Posters keep mentioning paladins falling as if it must have been common. What if the only one to kill the goblin children was Dave? Dave fell a long time back and just keeps showing up at the meetings anyway. He's always the guy who rushed the rear 'to distract the warriors' and because he's a complete **** he never told anyone that he fell.

"Yeah, I never got a third level in Paladin, I been taking levels in Samurai to get the cool armor."

[woweedd]

There is a much simpler, much more logical explanation which requires no external validation.

The Giant wrote a story about Redcloak. Whether or which paladins fell has no impact on Redcloak's story.

In fact, depicting them being punished by the gods would distract from Redcloak's story by having this same argument but with, "They have already been punished, so Redcloak should accept that."

Redcloak is the same amount of angry whether the gods punished some of the paladins or not.

So why didn't the paladins notice? Shame, perhaps? They fell and didn't say anything.

Yeah, I very much doubt Redcloak would care, in the same way as someone finding out (some of) the cops who killed their family in cold blood got fired, but were otherwise given no punishment.
"You can't summon your magic horsey anymore? Oh, truly, a fitting punishment for killing everyone I knew and loved in front of me."

[Jason]

Fallen paladin meeting his deity:
Why didn't you tell me that killing evil goblin children would cause me to fall?
Deity:
You never asked.

And that's what I see. The paladins were so certain they could do no wrong that they simply never questioned if they were doing wrong.

That just makes the gods stupid rather than (or in addition to) the paladins. The Twelve Gods were trying to protect themselves from the Snarl. They told the paladins to go find the bearer of the Crimson Mantle and kill him. Withholding the information, "and if you kill any goblin kids you will lose paladin status," causes them to lose valuable servants who were following their orders and protecting their interests.
It seems more likely to me that the Twelve Gods simply bent the paladin code and didn't cause any falls simply for killing goblin kids.

Posters keep mentioning paladins falling as if it must have been common. What if the only one to kill the goblin children was Dave?

How can they have "[A] decades-long history of paladins exterminating entire villages of goblins and other humanoids at the behest of their gods" and only ever have one paladin kill one goblin/other humanoid child?

[Peelee]

That just makes the gods stupid rather than (or in addition to) the paladins. The Twelve Gods were trying to protect themselves from the Snarl. They told the paladins to go find the bearer of the Crimson Mantle and kill him.

[Citation needed]

[Jason]

[Citation needed]

War and XPs commentary, right after 473b:

There's a certain degree of "what goes around, comes around" at play here, too. Azure City stood as a nation dedicated to all that was good and holy...but in many ways, failed to live up to its own ideals. Scratch the surface just a little, and you found a leader who ruled with lies, a paladin who believed herself infallible, and a ruling class willing to abandon the common people when push came to shove. Most damning, though, is a decades-long history of paladins exterminating entire villages of goblins and other humanoids at the behest of their gods (a point that is seen directly in the pages of Start of Darkness). That the city's undoing should be orchestrated by Redcloak, a villain that they themselves accidentally created, is only fitting. The Twelve Gods may have sanctioned the paladin's massacres, but even the gods can't stop Karma from kicking them in their divine asses once in a while.

Emphasis mine. To sum up, the Giant says that Azure City and the Twelve Gods in some ways had it coming, since they had sent their paladins out on extermination raids against the goblins and other humanoids for decades. The raid seen in Start of Darkness appears to be a typical example of what went on in those raids, and Redcloak's survival is from the point of view of the Twelve Gods an accident.

Start of Darkness has one of the paladins giving the explanation for their raid: "Wretched goblins of these forsaken wastelands: The Twelve Gods have judged your hearts and found them to be Evil. Further, one among you threatens the very foundation of creation itself." As soon as the high priest attracts their attention they say "The red cloak! Sapphire Guard, converge and execute!" After the high priest's death they say "Exterminate the rest and let us be done here."

To sum up: the raid was justified because the goblins were detecting as evil and because the Guard knew that the goblin high priest was there and he "threatens the very foundation of creation itself." Once the high priest is dead they see exterminating the rest of the goblins as essentially "mopping up".

Spoiler

Show

In How the Paladin Got His Scar, when Gin-Jun appears and O-Chul asks him for his authority he says "The most supreme authority of all, soldier: That of the Twelve Gods of the South themselves. We are their sacred warriors, and have come to search this den of evil for an unholy abomination." After their first attack is thwarted, Gin-Jun makes it clear that they are searching for the Crimson Mantle, and that at the time of the attack on Redcloak's village they thought it was merely a symbol of office and that it was the high priest himself that was the threat. They've been searching for the Mantle with divinations for years, and the hobgoblin fortress is the only goblin town on the continent that is shielded from them. One panel makes it clear that Recloak isn't on the Southern Continent at that time, and it becomes clear in the course of the story that Gin-Jun doesn't really have the backing of the Twelve Gods, but it is left unclear exactly when Gin-Jun left the rails and lost their support. He doesn't seem to have fallen from paladin status. The other members of the Guard clearly believe that the Twelve Gods have sent them after the Crimson Mantle, because once O-Chul gives them evidence that the Mantle may not be in the hobgoblin settlement several of them lose interest in attacking it.

So yes, at some point the Twelve Gods told the paladins to go out and kill the bearer of the Crimson Mantle. Redcloak's village was a casualty of that pogrom. When Redcloak left the Southern continent the Southern Gods apparently stopped actively sending their paladins after him, as he was out of their sphere of influence, but the Sapphire Guard continued to raid goblin and humanoid settlements while looking for the bearer of the Crimson Mantle. The Twelve Gods don't seem to have done anything to actively stop what they had started. That was up to O-Chul, Hinjo, and a few friends (none of which were paladins or clerics at the time) to accomplish.

The most plausible explanation seems to me to be that the Twelve Gods (collectively at least) don't care about goblin lives so long as they are being protected from the Snarl.

[Liquor Box]

"[A] decades-long history of paladins exterminating entire villages of goblins and other humanoids at the behest of their gods (a point that is seen directly in the pages of Start of Darkness)...The Twelve Gods may have sanctioned the paladins’ massacres, but even the gods can’t stop Karma from kicking them in their divine asses once in a while."

It wouldn't be much of a decades-long history of extermination that condemns the city to destruction as the Giant says if they only killed the really evil goblin adult warriors and left all of the kids and non-combatants alive every time.

I have to admit, this does suggest that a paladin killing an immature goblin isn;t as rare of an occurance as I had thought.

Assuming every paladin who kills and immature goblin falls, this still doesn't suggest that as many paladins fall as die though.

[Jason]

I have to admit, this does suggest that a paladin killing an immature goblin isn;t as rare of an occurance as I had thought.

Assuming every paladin who kills and immature goblin falls, this still doesn't suggest that as many paladins fall as die though.

Maybe.

The on-panel death count for paladins during the raid on Redcloak's village is nine, and there seem to have been around 20 paladins and at least one cleric (the one who casts hold person) at the start of the raid.

Spoiler

Show

Two by Redcloak's eldest brother with an axe, four by the high priest with various spells, two by Redcloak's uncle ("Arrowed!"), and one by Redcloak's Smite. At least two of the paladins who attacked the goblin high priest are injured but alive afterwards. One of them appears to be the leader of the raid, as he's giving the orders. Also, judging by his hairstyle that's probably Gin-Jun, the villain of How the Paladin Got His Scar standing next to the leader after the goblin high priest is killed.

There are about 50 visible dead goblins in the last panel of the sequence, most of which died off-panel.

As has already been discussed, if Redcloak and his brother are the only survivors of their village then there must have been other goblin children killed off-panel, along with other adult goblins. Presumably there were a few other paladins at least injured as well, if not killed.
The one paladin we see actually kill a goblin child on-panel survives the battle. So if killing a goblin child results in a fallen paladin then there was at least one at this raid.

If 10 paladins are killed and, say, 2-3 paladins fall with every raid from killing goblin kids (which is a deliberately conservative estimate) then that's pretty significant overall losses - more than half of the paladins that fought in the raid. Finding out why those 2-3 paladins fell and avoiding it in the future would prevent 20% of their casualties.

It's possible that this particular extermination raid was more dangerous for the Guard than normal, since the goblin high priest was present, and several other goblins appear to have had class levels:

Spoiler

Show

At the least the high priest and the other clerics of the Dark One, Redcloak's eldest brother, and possibly Redcloak's uncle the archer. And Redcloak himself, of course.

But if the number of dead paladins on other raids is usually less than this one then the number of fallen paladin "casualties" becomes an even higher ratio of the casualties, and therefore presumably a bigger priority for the Guard to resolve.

[halfeye]

Maybe.

The on-panel death count for paladins during the raid on Redcloak's village is nine, and there seem to have been around 20 paladins and at least one cleric (the one who casts hold person) at the start of the raid.

Spoiler

Show

Two by Redcloak's eldest brother with an axe, four by the high priest with various spells, two by Redcloak's uncle ("Arrowed!"), and one by Redcloak's Smite. At least two of the paladins who attacked the goblin high priest are injured but alive afterwards. One of them appears to be the leader of the raid, as he's giving the orders. Also, judging by his hairstyle that's probably Gin-Jun, the villain of How the Paladin Got His Scar standing next to the leader after the goblin high priest is killed.

There are about 50 visible dead goblins in the last panel of the sequence, most of which died off-panel.

As has already been discussed, if Redcloak and his brother are the only survivors of their village then there must have been other goblin children killed off-panel, along with other adult goblins. Presumably there were a few other paladins at least injured as well, if not killed.
The one paladin we see actually kill a goblin child on-panel survives the battle. So if killing a goblin child results in a fallen paladin then there was at least one at this raid.

If 10 paladins are killed and, say, 2-3 paladins fall with every raid from killing goblin kids (which is a deliberately conservative estimate) then that's pretty significant overall losses - more than half of the paladins that fought in the raid. Finding out why those 2-3 paladins fell and avoiding it in the future would prevent 20% of their casualties.

It's possible that this particular extermination raid was more dangerous for the Guard than normal, since the goblin high priest was present, and several other goblins appear to have had class levels:

Spoiler

Show

At the least the high priest and the other clerics of the Dark One, Redcloak's eldest brother, and possibly Redcloak's uncle the archer. And Redcloak himself, of course.

But if the number of dead paladins on other raids is usually less than this one then the number of fallen paladin "casualties" becomes an even higher ratio of the casualties, and therefore presumably a bigger priority for the Guard to resolve.

Most of what you say here is fairly sensible, but then you seem to keep trying to extrapolate from that to "therefore no goblins were killed", and that's not even close to sensible.

[Jason]

Most of what you say here is fairly sensible, but then you seem to keep trying to extrapolate from that to "therefore no goblins were killed", and that's not even close to sensible.

I think you may have me confused with another poster.

My take is that hundreds and hundreds of goblins were killed by paladins of the Sapphire Guard over the course of decades. This included hundreds of goblin children who were too young to be evil-aligned. No paladins ever fell for indiscriminately killing innocent goblin kids, though, because the Twelve Gods didn't care how many goblins died as long as the paladins were at least nominally protecting the gate and their own divine backsides.
In Stickworld it's the gods the paladin worships that determine when a paladin falls, not some silly code of conduct.

[Peelee]

I think you may have me confused with another poster.

My take is that hundreds and hundreds of goblins were killed by paladinsnof the Sapphire Guard over the course of decades. This included hundreds of goblin children who were too young to be evil-aligned.

I'm with you here, that likely happened.

No paladins ever fell for indiscriminately killing innocent goblin kids, though, because the Twelve Gods didn't care how many goblins died as long as the paladins were at least nominally protecting the gate and their own divine backsides.

Youve lost me here. That likely did not happen.

In Stickworld it's the gods the paladin worships that determine when a paladin falls, not some silly code of conduct.

And I'm completely gone on this. Even if all paladins are shackled to gods (unknown and IMO unlikely), they still have their code of conduct, which likely differs from what you think it should be.

[Jason]

Youve lost me here. That likely did not happen.

Well, your take seems to be that, "plenty of paladins fell from killing goblin kids over the decades, but their leadership was always either too stupid or too blinded by racism to ever put two and two together and realize that killing goblin kids was causing the paladins to fall. And the Twelve Gods never bothered to point it out to them or any of their clerics either."
If I'm wrong then I'm ready to be corrected.

And I'm completely gone on this. Even if all paladins are shackled to gods (unknown and IMO unlikely), they still have their code of conduct, which likely differs from what you think it should be.

If just disobeying the code causes a paladin to fall in Stickworld then the whole scene at Miko's fall with the thunder and lightning and the Twelve Gods gathering together in the heavens to collectively remove her powers by knocking her back with divine fire and instantly changing the color of her outfit was all rather gratuitous, wasn't it? It looked to me rather like the Twelve Gods were making good and sure that everyone knew what specific action caused Miko to fall.

Did they never do that when a paladin fell for killing goblin kids? That would mean that having the leader of Azure City get killed by one of their paladins was much more important to the Twelve Gods than having some random goblin kid being killed by one of their paladins.

[Peelee]

Well, your take seems to be that, "plenty of paladins fell from killing goblin kids over the decades, but their leadership was always either too stupid or too blinded by racism

You're acting like those are mutually exclusive. It's difficult to reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into. And slaughtering children because you earnestly believe they are evil is not something that is reasoned into.

Besides, if one is covered in warts, they may refuse to look at themselves in the mirror because they know they won't like what they see.

If just disobeying the code causes a paladin to fall in Stickworld then the whole scene at Miko's fall with the thunder and lightning and the Twelve Gods gathering together in the heavens to collectively remove her powers by knocking her back with divine fire and instantly changing the color of her outfit was all rather gratuitous, wasn't it?

No. This is even pretty well spelled out by the author directly:

Suffice to say that the Twelve Gods are not beholden to put on the same visual display they did for Miko for every paladin who transgresses, and that all transgressions are not created equal. It is possible that some of the paladins who participated in the attack crossed the line. It is also possible that most did not. A paladin who slips up in the execution of their god-given orders does not warrant the same level of personal attention by the gods as one who executes the legal ruler of their nation on a glorified hunch. Think of Miko's Fall as being the equivalent of the CEO of your multinational company showing up in your cubicle to fire you, because you screwed up THAT much.

That's the same post where the author all but said other paladins fell but it wasn't shown because it wasn't important to the story.

[dancrilis]

I think it might be worth noting that some people who do something wrong and lose their power likely think 'I didn't do anything wrong why would someone do this to be'.

As such paladins who lose their power may think 'who did this to me' and blame losing power on a curse or something else rather then their own actions.

[RatElemental]

I think this whole argument kind of becomes moot if you recognize that "morally wrong" and "an evil act" need not be exactly the same thing. One is an appeal to moral systems and whatnot, and the other is a thing that makes paladins fall. If they aren't different ways to refer to the same set of things then it becomes pretty obvious how the SG could keep their crusade going without all falling, and rather than painting them as being "good" for their atrocities it paints whoever defined the set of "evil acts" as a horrible person.

[Jason]

You're acting like those are mutually exclusive. It's difficult to reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into. And slaughtering children because you earnestly believe they are evil is not something that is reasoned into.

Granted, both could be true to some extent.
I think I still find my version more plausible. Gods making exceptions to the rules to allow their servants to protect the gate at the expense of both the goblins (with their lives) and the paladins (by letting them continue to believe racist ideas); rather than extremely stupid paladins who can't figure out what they're doing wrong despite multiple examples and gods that don't care to make themselves more clear in their orders to their own servants even though it's costing them souls. My version at least seems more practical, if immoral, on the gods' part.

No. This is even pretty well spelled out by the author directly:

I have read the quote a few times. I see more than a little support for my ideas in it:
For one thing, it seems to support the idea that it's entirely up to the gods when a paladin falls. The Giant says it may not be as flashy every time it happens, but the gods are still the CEOs of the company doing the firing.

Also, the Giant seems to be referring to the massacre of Redcloak's village as "god-given orders" that some paladins may have "slipped up in executing". That would seem to be saying that they were ordered by the gods to go and destroy the bearer of the Crimson Mantle, and the "slip up" was that they extended the "destroy" order to "and all of the goblins in the village he's in, including the children."

[Peelee]

Granted, both could be true to some extent.
I think I still find my version more plausible. Gods making exceptions to the rules to allow their servants to protect the gate at the expense of both the goblins (with their lives) and the paladins (by letting them continue to believe racist ideas); rather than extremely stupid paladins who can't figure out what they're doing wrong despite multiple examples and gods that don't care to make themselves more clear in their orders to their own servants even though it's costing them souls. My version at least seems more practical, if immoral, on the gods' part.

You're still assuming things that may take place in game worlds you play or stock D&D rules that are almost certainly not the case in OotS. The biggest being that of tact with deities for clear instructions happens. From all indications, this is downright rare. Redcloak, high priest of his god who wants to upend the entire status quo, received instructions only from an artifact and then the only known communication was a 4-word sentence from a cleric who had to die to make the message possible. Durkon openly laments that Thor never answers Communes. Prophecies to anyone but the Oracle are vague and poorly understood (and most of the Oracle's are as well). Notable high level, zealously religious mortals have looked for banal signs as indications of what their deity wants (and are typically incorrect about such interpretations to boot). Hel is an exception, but she was also an exception in that she had literally one single cleric to work with and there was even discussion among the gods about how she needed to be watched at one point to prevent her from defying the rules.

You keep assuming that divine communication is the standard in this world, but every indication is that it's not.

I have read the quote a few times. I see more than a little support for my ideas in it:
For one thing, it seems to support the idea that it's entirely up to the gods when a paladin falls. The Giant says it may not be as flashy every time it happens, but the gods are still the CEOs of the company doing the firing.

The gods designed the world, yes. That doesn't mean they can unilaterally take action like deciding when a paladin falls. In fact, we're told in comic that the gods can't take unilateral action, even in their own lands under their own domains.

I have no issues with the story as is. Everything makes sense. You do have issues and need the paladins to be mind-boggling lt stupid or the gods to be malicious or incompetent (or perhaps both) to have everything make sense. I've stated on multiple occasions this is because you keep making likely incorrect assumptions on how Stickworld functions. I've tried to help show how things are resolved. It hasn't seemed to work, so I don't see much purpose in continuing to try after this.

[Jason]

You're still assuming things that may take place in game worlds you play or stock D&D rules that are almost certainly not the case in OotS. The biggest being that of tact with deities for clear instructions happens. From all indications, this is downright rare.

If you are correct, it raises the question of why does Stickworld differs from D&D in this regard? Why is augury, a 2nd level cleric spell that all clerics get, not commonly used in Stickworld?

Sangwaan would seem to be another exception who does routinely get divinations that are clear, to the point that she offers to tell Therkla all about the day of her (Therkla's) death.

The gods designed the world, yes. That doesn't mean they can unilaterally take action like deciding when a paladin falls. In fact, we're told in comic that the gods can't take unilateral action, even in their own lands under their own domains.

I'm unsure. I read, "the Twelve Gods are not beholden to put on the same visual display they did for Miko for every paladin who transgresses," and "A paladin who slips up in the execution of their god-given orders does not warrant the same level of personal attention by the gods as one who executes the legal ruler of their nation on a glorified hunch," to imply that the gods do have to take an active choice to make a paladin who "slips up" fall, they just don't need to make it as flashy as what happened to Miko.

And it does seem to confirm that they gave orders for their paladins to kill the bearer of the Crimson Mantle.