|
I think the really important strips here are 405 and the one right after it, where Hinjo and Miko overhear Shojo talking about all the rules he had to break in order to get the Order of the Stick to do one of the things that the paladins were sworn to never let happen in the first plate.
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2007 05:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 20:13 |
|
|
Ferrinus posted:It's a convenient label, but it can't be a convenient label for the sum total of your past actions. Otherwise we have the silly Neverwinter Nights system where I remain Neutral by donating to charity on odd-numbered days and raping and murdering on even-numbered days. quote:A variant D&D ruleset where you have to explicitly earn any alignment beyond "true neutral" by adhering to stringent codes of behavior (and get cool bonuses for it and maybe Paladin becomes a hard-to-qualify-for and powerful prestige class) would be fun, but it's not how the game works now. You don't build up an alignment, you declare it. quote:Oh, certainly. There are strong guidelines in D&d for what constitutes Good and what doesn't (altruistic self-sacrifice concern for the dignity of sentient beings, yadda yadda) and it's up to the DM whether a given set of motivations or plans of action fall within it. For instance, I wouldn't call a ruler who just slaughters everyone infected with a certain disease in order to prevent it from spreading further Good in D&D terms, even though he would certainly describe his actions as being for "the common good". quote:But, if Miko's crazy delusions were true, her actions would still fall within the Lawful Good alignment as it seems to work in Order of the Stick. quote:After all, it's not like she wasn't a bloodthirsty slayer of men before she met the Order, and she still happily maintained Paladin status. quote:She fell for the same reason that a paladin who kills a bunch of imps who turn out to have been glamered children would fall from grace - the unknowing commitment of an inarguably evil act. quote:It's just occurred to me though that in the strip directly following that one, she appeared ready and willing to kill Hinjo before Roy smashed her into a wall. This kind of puts a dent in my position. I guess I could say she was just really angry and not thinking clearly...? She wasn't even toppling a ruler she felt was a threat, she was just killing whoever got in her way after she flipped the gently caress out. That was the whole point of the scene with Hinjo, he was giving her a chance to redeem herself, to step back from the precipice, and she threw it back in his face because she was to proud and fearful to accept her error. And in turn Hiro says "yep, you're loving done!" because she is.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2007 06:39
|
|
|
Ferrinus, if Happy Elf and I are in complete agreement than it clearly means you're totally wrong.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2007 06:57
|
|
|
Efreet saiid posted:No, you don't. You're setting up a false dillemma. Just because it's a convenient label doesn't mean it has to be poorly applied. That's not a "poor application", it's a demonstration of why making alignment literally consist of a summary of your past actions doesn't work. The slightly less extreme example is one I've already brought up - the murderous psychopath whose alignment is True Neutral because he's been locked up in jail his whole life and unable to actually kill anyone. quote:Well then your original claim is not valid: Saying you're good does not make you good. I mean that saying (honestly) out-of-character that you are Good by D&D standards makes your character Good. There's a difference between "My character is willing to torture and murder but tells himself that it's for the common good" and "My character is actually, honestly committed to saving the lives of good people but is extremely hot-tempered and doesn't often stop to think before drawing a weapon". If a character ostensibly works towards upholding the law and protecting innocents from harm at a personal cost, they are Good, even if greivous psychological flaws stand in the way of their accomplishing this! quote:No. She fell for the opposite reason, that being she juged evil where there was no evidence of it, as opposed to juging evil where there is (false) evidence of it. BTW paladins don't fall if that are mislead in that fashion anyway. Paladins must knowingly and willingly commit an evil act. Unless they acted rashly they are not blame. Wait, you're right, Paladins can't fall for acting on incorrect information. But, Miko had just heard Shojo describe the lengths he had gone to to break the big important Sapphire Guard oath thing and spy on the other gates and fake the Order's trial. She executed him because she thought that simply jailing him would be pointless since the entire legal system was obviously corrupt to start with, and she's definitely gotten away with overly-zealous and not-carefully-judged executions before. I had figured that she had previously just been lucky and/or supported by technicalities ("Hey, those two bandits were beginning to attack me, I was totally justified in eviscerating them instantly and mercilessly") but Shojo represented her first serious blunder re: murdering someone who neither had the Evil alignment or was even any kind of immediate threat. But since she has to willingly and knowingly do evil in order to lose her powers, we can pretty neatly assume that her monologue about everyone being servants of Xykon was pretty much ad hoc bullshit. The thing is, what about situations like a Good character finding his best friend in bed with his wife and killing them both in a fit of rage? It's definitely an evil act, but it doesn't mean an alignment change. Wouldn't someone whose chief priorities are obeying the law and defending the good against evil be Lawful Good, even if there's an unambiguously Evil act in their past that they refuse to repent about? Heck, even Miko was willing to put her insane and dishonestly-justified vendetta against the Order of the Stick on hold when saw that Azure City and the throne room were in danger.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2007 07:38
|
|
|
Efreet saiid posted:Well then your original claim is not valid: Saying you're good does not make you good. quote:Actually, no. Even if she was right, she's being reckless, muderously so, and wrathful, and that's not good. quote:Because after all, mortals are fallable... You're applying real-world gray-area moralistic reasoning to the "Dungeons & Dragons" Alignment system. I'm surprised that you haven't yet learned that this never has a satisfactory result. quote:...so for a mortal to be good, they must recognise their own falability, at least as far as not murdering their monarch on the crest of a war in a fit of pique and then trying to kill their heir and fellow paldin for attempting to talk you down. So, really, Miko didn't Fall because she misinterpreted what Shojo said and attacked him; she Fell because she killed a defenseless old man who had confessed to his crimes! If she'd just knocked him out instead of wasting him, she would not have Fallen. Robot Bastard fucked around with this message at 07:50 on Jun 6, 2007 |
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2007 07:45
|
|
|
Ferrinus posted:That's not a "poor application", it's a demonstration of why making alignment literally consist of a summary of your past actions doesn't work. quote:The slightly less extreme example is one I've already brought up - the murderous psychopath whose alignment is True Neutral because he's been locked up in jail his whole life and unable to actually kill anyone. quote:I mean that saying (honestly) out-of-character that you are Good by D&D standards makes your character Good. There's a difference between "My character is willing to torture and murder but tells himself that it's for the common good" and "My character is actually, honestly committed to saving the lives of good people but is extremely hot-tempered and doesn't often stop to think before drawing a weapon". quote:If a character ostensibly works towards upholding the law and protecting innocents from harm at a personal cost, they are Good, even if greivous psychological flaws stand in the way of their accomplishing this! quote:Wait, you're right, Paladins can't fall for acting on incorrect information. quote:But, Miko had just heard Shojo describe the lengths he had gone to to break the big important Sapphire Guard oath thing and spy on the other gates and fake the Order's trial. She executed him because she thought that simply jailing him would be pointless since the entire legal system was obviously corrupt to start with, and she's definitely gotten away with overly-zealous and not-carefully-judged executions before. quote:I had figured that she had previously just been lucky and/or supported by technicalities ("Hey, those two bandits were beginning to attack me, I was totally justified in eviscerating them instantly and mercilessly") but Shojo represented her first serious blunder re: murdering someone who neither had the Evil alignment or was even any kind of immediate threat. But since she has to willingly and knowingly do evil in order to lose her powers, we can pretty neatly assume that her monologue about everyone being servants of Xykon was pretty much ad hoc bullshit. quote:The thing is, what about situations like a Good character finding his best friend in bed with his wife and killing them both in a fit of rage? It's definitely an evil act, but it doesn't mean an alignment change. quote:Wouldn't someone whose chief priorities are obeying the law and defending the good against evil be Lawful Good, even if there's an unambiguously Evil act in their past that they refuse to repent about? quote:Heck, even Miko was willing to put her insane and dishonestly-justified vendetta against the Order of the Stick on hold when saw that Azure City and the throne room were in danger.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2007 07:55
|
|
|
I interrupt this fascinating argument to sayCowcaster posted:Miko's gonna murder that paralyzed guy trying to destroy the gate so hard. but she doesn't know about the gate, right? In fact, her not knowing stuff led to a lot of problems a while ago.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2007 08:16
|
|
|
Look, I think you're all working too hard at this alignment stuff. I don't think the alignment system is well-defined, so I say that if you consider her evil, then she's evil. That's that. And by "you," I mean the reader who stands outside the game world. Ignore the moral relativity that must exist for people living in the world, must exist for Miko, must exist for villains who think themselves to be heroes. That grayness shouldn't affect alignments. Zoolooman fucked around with this message at 10:25 on Jun 6, 2007 |
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2007 10:20
|
|
|
Ferrinus posted:"My character is actually, honestly committed to saving the lives of good people but is extremely hot-tempered and doesn't often stop to think before drawing a weapon". If a character ostensibly works towards upholding the law and protecting innocents from harm at a personal cost, they are Good, even if greivous psychological flaws stand in the way of their accomplishing this! The campaign setting of Ravenloft disagrees with you. quote:She executed him because she thought that simply jailing him would be pointless since the entire legal system was obviously corrupt to start with, and she's definitely gotten away with overly-zealous and not-carefully-judged executions before. Then at the very least she's not Lawful Good.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2007 10:59
|
|
|
I think we're missing the forest for the trees here. Miko has clearly had a moment of religious epiphany here that nobody's recognizing.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2007 12:36
|
|
|
Occam posted:I interrupt this fascinating argument to say http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0460.html , third panel from the end. She knows about the gate.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2007 13:03
|
|
|
http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0189.html What about this early appearence by Miko? Does not seem to show much respect for human life...
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2007 14:59
|
|
|
Sick_Boy posted:http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0189.html Come on, though, "You'll serve me or you'll die!" ? Show me the paladin who wouldn't have killed the bandit sorcerer who just attacked them shouting that. The sanctity of human life is a tricky thing in D&D, because although we try to apply our modern moral standards the setting is still tinged with the ramifications of a culture ruled by violence. You can be the most pious paladin that ever lived and kill Evil goblins all day long with no ramifications - goblins are not inherently evil and are capable of being Lawful Good if they feel like it, so it's not like they couldn't repent if you gave them the chance. Killing an Evil human in short order is really no different.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2007 15:07
|
|
|
She could have subdued them easily. Not to mention her attitude after she killed Lord Shojo, blaming the OOTS for "tricking her into killing her lord", when they did no such thing. She knows the OOTS (save Belkar) are NOT EVIL, but she persues her revenge with bloodthirst nonetheless. When arguing with Hinjo in http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0409.html she contradicted herself several times and showed an outstanding ability to ignore all evidence against her. Then she attacked him. Quote from that strip: "Allow me to pursue the holy plans the Gods have for me" THIS IS WHERE HER TRUE LOYATLTIES LIE: WITH HERSELF. And this little gem: "The gods have a plan for me, I know it! I am special, the most powerful Paladin in the sapphire Guard! They wouldn't do this to ME without a reason, I just need to figure out what it is" As stated earlier: megalomaniac bitch. Sick_Boy fucked around with this message at 15:30 on Jun 6, 2007 |
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2007 15:27
|
|
|
green leaf salad posted:Come on, though, "You'll serve me or you'll die!" ? Show me the paladin who wouldn't have killed the bandit sorcerer who just attacked them shouting that. The sanctity of human life is a tricky thing in D&D, because although we try to apply our modern moral standards the setting is still tinged with the ramifications of a culture ruled by violence. You can be the most pious paladin that ever lived and kill Evil goblins all day long with no ramifications - goblins are not inherently evil and are capable of being Lawful Good if they feel like it, so it's not like they couldn't repent if you gave them the chance. Killing an Evil human in short order is really no different. She didn't have to kill the father though. That was a little overboard. Yeah, he drew on her, but so would anyone else in that situation.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2007 15:31
|
|
|
Sick_Boy posted:She could have subdued them easily. But why risk being pursued later when she has more pressing stuff to do and they're clearly Evil anyway? Paladins don't need to be bleeding heart samaritans, especially not out in the violent wilderness. Roy's Lawful Good, are you saying he should be considered to be going against the spirit of his alignment every time he kills a goblin without reasoning with it first?
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2007 15:44
|
|
|
green leaf salad posted:But why risk being pursued later when she has more pressing stuff to do and they're clearly Evil anyway? Paladins don't need to be bleeding heart samaritans, especially not out in the violent wilderness. Roy's Lawful Good, are you saying he should be considered to be going against the spirit of his alignment every time he kills a goblin without reasoning with it first?
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2007 16:58
|
|
|
Ferrinus posted:I mean, at this point in the story her belief in her being Chosen By The Gods To Dispense Justice could easily lead to her defeating or driving off Xykon and Redcloak and saving Azure City's gate. Her being Chosen By The Gods To Dispense Justice might could also lead her into thinking Xykon and Redcloak are taking over the city for divine vengeance for being corrupted by the Order of The Stick. Who knows, the bitch is loco.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2007 18:11
|
|
|
All of the city's Paladins should know about the gate, but how many know about the pseudoghosts that act as the back-up squad? I don't think Miko knows about them. I'm pretty sure only Hinjo, and Shojo knew, which is why Miko's going to flip out. Again.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2007 18:59
|
|
|
Seriously, if the next comic is about the oracle or the mystic Theurge or something I'm going to pop a gasket. I want to know if/how Miko's going to doom the world of light forever!
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2007 19:04
|
|
|
Efreet saiid posted:No, it does, it just has to be weighted differently and have a bunch of caveats and as noted, motives and such also play a role. But the chained-up psychopath doesn't have "a behavior". He sits there quietly and eats his gruel like everyone else. It doesn't stop him from being Chaotic Evil, because alignment isn't about what you do - it's about what you would do given the chance. quote:Um, neither of those are good if they result in a high body count. Maybe the latter is marginally chaotic good at best, more likely neutral or even evil. They result in a high body count for bad people  But really though, hot-headedness is not a feature of moral alignment. Heck, it's not even a feature of ethical alignment. It's a basic personality trait that any character can have. Good means that you are willing to make personal sacrifices to defend innocents against the depredation of monsters, not that you have good table manners and impeccable judgement. Obviously, being a Paladin requires both that you wish to protect innocents and that you have good judgement, which is why Miko is no longer a Paladin. quote:She lost her power because she did evil, not because she fits your previous bizzare standards of "evil only if I say I am". She did not have to willingly do evil in terms of "ha ha i am evil now", and being delusional due to pride is not a defence. No, I agree with you here, killing Shojo was definitely evil. But your alignment doesn't constantly change to match the last act you performed! quote:Yes it does. A paldin who kills in that situation would fall. BOOM! Oh, they'd definitely fall. But they'd still be Lawful Good. A single moment of weakness doesn't change your entire alignment if it doesn't change your basic intentions! quote:Nope. I guess you could argue formal repentence is not that big a deal, but they would have to have changed their ways or dealt with why they performed that act. Good people feel remorse. Well let's say the guy (he's a Ranger or something so leave the Paladin thing out of this) who killed his best friend/adulterous wife develops a huge obsession over the event and refuses to admit that he was in the wrong - but continues living as he did before as a Lawful Good character. He still donates to charity and protects villages from goblins and so on because he believes it's the right thing to do. He doesn't reconcile the wife thing with his other beliefs because he simply doesn't want to due to personal issues, even though it's obviously contradictory. What is he? quote:Yes but that doesn't make her good. The thing is, you don't have to have a good alignment to act good or to think you are. Most characters think that. The point isn't that everyone thinks they're lowercase-g good. The point is that the personalities and motives of some characters are structured in such a way that they honestly want to uphold the details of the Good alignment in D&D, which means altruism and do-gooding and general civic service.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2007 19:29
|
|
|
maltesh posted:http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0460.html , third panel from the end. Oh! Whoops. I guess I assumed she didn't know what it was since she came so close to chopping it in half.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2007 19:43
|
|
|
Ferrinus posted:But really though, hot-headedness is not a feature of moral alignment. Chaotic Evil posted:A chaotic evil character does whatever his greed, hatred, and lust for destruction drive him to do. He is hot-tempered, vicious, arbitrarily violent, and unpredictable. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2007 20:15
|
|
|
Yeah, she's probably evil. Her act that made her fall from Paladinhood does not make her evil. But I think there is a definable moment in the comic where she changes alignment, and you can actually visually see it in her eyes. http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0409.html The exact moment is panel 17. greatn fucked around with this message at 20:33 on Jun 6, 2007 |
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2007 20:18
|
|
|
greatn posted:Yeah, she's probably evil. Her act that made her fall does not make her evil. But I think there is a definable moment in the comic where she changes alignment, and you can actually visually see it in her eyes. Also, I think that while killing Shojo is the act which makes her fall, it is clearly the end result of a long arc of her descending further and further into delusional self absorption. As such while claiming the one act wouldn't cause her fall as part of a long standing process moving her away from lawful good it would definitely cause an alignment change, especially if you include her assault on Hinjo afterwards.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2007 20:21
|
|
|
UberJew posted:I so totally do not want to get into an argument over this, so if someone challenges me I will instantly concede defeat. But I have actually been thinking she is/has become CHAOTIC evil, not even lawful evil. She only seems to respect supreme strength (the 12 Gods) and then you have the "hot-tempered, vicious, arbitrarily violent, and unpredictable" thing. I mean, seriously; she claims to ostensibly be acting in concordance with her order's laws and ways all the time, but has she ever actually acted the same way twice in similar situations? I think she just makes everything up as she goes along, and loves to kill as many things in her path as she can. Please let the next strip come soon so we can stop talking about this.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2007 21:16
|
|
|
Quarex posted:She only seems to respect supreme strength (the 12 Gods) and then you have the "hot-tempered, vicious, arbitrarily violent, and unpredictable" thing. I mean, seriously; she claims to ostensibly be acting in concordance with her order's laws and ways all the time, but has she ever actually acted the same way twice in similar situations? I think she just makes everything up as she goes along, and loves to kill as many things in her path as she can.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2007 22:55
|
|
|
Yeah, as I already said, anyone who considers themselves to be the ultimate law is inherently chaotic.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2007 23:06
|
|
|
greatn posted:Yeah, as I already said, anyone who considers themselves to be the ultimate law is inherently chaotic. And anyone who considers themselves to be the only servants of good is evil. I think her one chosen-one mindset is her downfall. She is egoistical, has no regard for life (the bandit leader was not evil, only the daughter was; the OOTS are not evil and she knows it, etc.), belives to be superior to everyone ("I'm the best Paladin!")... EVIL. Also, the gods agree with this analysis.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2007 02:57
|
|
|
Sick_Boy posted:Also, the gods agree with this analysis. The rest of your post is right but taking away a Paladin's powers doesn't require an alignment change and shouldn't be seen as a god's stamp of alignment change. You can break your alignment without undergoing an alignment change.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2007 03:05
|
|
|
UberJew posted:Oh yeah chaotic evil characters are often hot-tempered therefore anyone who is hot-tempered is chaotic evil 
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2007 03:12
|
|
|
 New Strip Oh Miko you wacky kidder you.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2007 05:48
|
|
|
Aghh Miko! That was a frustrating strip. I mean... I just... Miko! Arghh! 
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2007 05:56
|
|
|
Hahaha, now I'm really confused. I was coming around to the idea that Miko doesn't actually believe all that stuff about being the chosen one and just sort of reflexively spews it out to rationalize murdering the people that she, personally, doesn't like. But at this point she just looks straight-up insane. What can she possibly imagine herself to be accomplishing? I seriously can't figure out how smashing the gate helps in any sense, real or imagined  EDIT: VVVV Oh, yeah, that works. VVVV Ferrinus fucked around with this message at 06:04 on Jun 7, 2007 |
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2007 05:59
|
|
|
I think it makes perfect miko-sense. She lost her powers not for killing Shojo, but for failing to destroy the gate, and the gods let her out of prison to atone for that by giving her another opportunity before the gate fell into the hands of the evil lich and his minions. Edit: I wanted to include that Soon hosed Xykon and Redcloak up and that was awesome. farraday fucked around with this message at 06:06 on Jun 7, 2007 |
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2007 06:02
|
|
|
I'll be interested in learning the explanation for this, given that Miko already knows what the Gates are and what they do. edit: I think this is the first time I've ever actually been edit gently caress beaten. Robot Bastard fucked around with this message at 06:12 on Jun 7, 2007 |
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2007 06:02
|
|
|
Yeah, I remember there was some justification given at some point as to why destroying the gate made sense (obviously, since the bald paladin was just about to do exactly that). Was it not something like how it was better to destroy it than to let Xykon get his hands on it? Obviously, that would make sense with how there was no longer any need to destroy it now that Xykon was about to run off/die.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2007 06:04
|
|
|
God dammit Miko! gently caress you! Let this lay to rest any questions, that crazy oval office is evil. At this point I'm not even sure she's Lawful.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2007 06:07
|
|
|
Quarex posted:Yeah, I remember there was some justification given at some point as to why destroying the gate made sense (obviously, since the bald paladin was just about to do exactly that). Was it not something like how it was better to destroy it than to let Xykon get his hands on it? Obviously, that would make sense with how there was no longer any need to destroy it now that Xykon was about to run off/die. Yeah, she saw what O'chul was trying to do and finished the job. She didn't realise that Soon was actually kicking rear end and if she'd helped him out instead the Gate could safely be left intact. So she did what she thought was best, it was just poor judgement and lack of information.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2007 06:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 20:13 |
|
|
green leaf salad posted:Yeah, she saw what O'chul was trying to do and finished the job.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2007 06:13
|
|