If you DMed like OotS?

[Lacuna Caster]

The Giant, as has been pointed out multiple times, had already had the story planned out. Some small changes were most likely made, sure. But Shojo is a pretty honking major part of the overall plot, and his motives regarding the Order area huge crux. No Shojo recruiting them, no knowledge of the other Gates, no stopping Redclosk and Xykon...

Uh... we do actually know, from the commentary to the .pdf version of paladin blues, that some fairly large revisions were made to the intended sequence of events, specifically in connection with the length of Miko's involvement in the plot, subsequent to the book's publication. So no, I don't really buy this 'small changes' argument.

Anyhoo, one can imagine a scenario where Shojo sends Miko off with orders to kill (or at least that are reasonably interpreted that way), but winds up summoning Eugene after she departs, and then decides to rig the trial and afterwards pretend to Roy that he gave nonlethal orders.

(Sure, this raises other questions- why not using a Sending spell to contact Miko and update her agenda?- but that leads to a whole thicket of similar unknowns, such as why the Guard don't just use Scry-and-Die tactics and a hired wizard to teleport straight to the Order's location with a party of 4-6 appropriately-briefed paladins and save everyone a lot of trouble. Do we really want to go there?)

[hamishspence]

Uh... we do actually know, from the commentary to the .pdf version of paladin blues, that some fairly large revisions were made to the intended sequence of events, specifically in connection with the length of Miko's involvement in the plot, subsequent to the book's publication.

Maybe you could copy-paste a snippet from the bits that are different from the book version of Paladin Blues?

As the Giant stated:

Miko, and only Miko, was intended to kill Shojo, fall from grace, and ultimately destroy the Azurite gate. No one else was ever considered for this role, and this role was assigned to her from before her first appearance in #200. It was the entire narrative purpose of her character. Of course, I couldn't SAY that in the notes to Paladin Blues, because none of that had happened yet.

[Lacuna Caster]

Excerpt below:

Spoiler

Show

I'm personally scratching my head as to how Miko was supposed to destroy the azurite gate much later in the plot if Xykon was already marching on azure city at the end of the same book, but who am I to argue?

[georgie_leech]

Excerpt below:

Spoiler

Show

I'm personally scratching my head as to how Miko was supposed to destroy the azurite gate much later in the plot if Xykon was already marching on azure city at the end of the same book, but who am I to argue?

They beat back Xykon by the skin of their teeth after heavy losses, who retreats to build up his forces and go after one of the other gates, and near the end of the story Miko has the same breakdown as she did in the strip that was actually written. Ta-da

Less tongue-in-cheek, When you have a character with the major flaws "believes she always knows best" and "believes she acts with divine authority in all she does," I'm not sure why it's so difficult to view her attempt at execution as being related to those flaws?

[Peelee]

Uh... we do actually know, from the commentary to the .pdf version of paladin blues, that some fairly large revisions were made to the intended sequence of events, specifically in connection with the length of Miko's involvement in the plot, subsequent to the book's publication. So no, I don't really buy this 'small changes' argument.

Unless you wish to contend that Shojo will, at some future point, order the execution of the Order of the Stick, I fail to see how revisions to the intended sequence of events would have made him want the Order dead at some point instead of telling them about the Macguffin.

[Kish]

I confess, now I'm curious about how Miko's death scene could be moved all the way to Book Seven without being completely rewritten, too.

(But no likely answer will change the fact that she used Shojo's orders as a fig leaf covering while doing as she pleased, and as she pleased was lethally violent.)

[Lacuna Caster]

Kish, can you explain to me what aspect of Shojo's orders, or even the fine points of the paladin code, strictly mandated that she pay for her prisoners to stay at the Hilton? Or that she obey Belkar's restraining order, given that she was supposedly committed to the law of god before the laws of man? Or that she use the favour of a king to pay restitution to the innkeeper? Or heal the wounded after battle?

I mean, there's a passage in the commentary on the inn scene where Rich gushes over Roy's willingness to temporarily embarrass himself to save Elan, while actively dissing Miko, who was nearly blown to pieces while trying to save the lives of total strangers. So yeah, if you want to totally ignore the moral significance of half her early behaviour, go ahead, you have company. I won't think especially highly of it, though.

[LadyEowyn]

Miko has many flaws, but no one had claimed that "unwillingness to risk her life to protect innocent civilians" is one of them. If it was, she would never have become a paladin.

Her flaws are that she is merciless (kills the bandits, who she knew almost mothing about and were low-level evil at worst), she is self-righteous, she lacking in compassion or generosity of spirit for anyone who falls below her personal standards, and she is incredibly ready to kill anyone who pings her Detect Evil regardless of whether she has witnessed them behaving in an evil manner. The last one is crucial: one or Rich's central themes in the story is that alignment (or an individual or species) is not, by itself, sufficient reason to kill someone.

[woweedd]

Miko has many flaws, but no one had claimed that "unwillingness to risk her life to protect innocent civilians" is one of them. If it was, she would never have become a paladin.

Her flaws are that she is merciless (kills the bandits, who she knew almost mothing about and were low-level evil at worst), she is self-righteous, she lacking in compassion or generosity of spirit for anyone who falls below her personal standards, and she is incredibly ready to kill anyone who pings her Detect Evil regardless of whether she has witnessed them behaving in an evil manner. The last one is crucial: one or Rich's central themes in the story is that alignment (or an individual or species) is not, by itself, sufficient reason to kill someone.

I'll actually excuse here that one. Unlike the Order, Samantha explicitly threatened her with death/slavery. Miko was justified there, at least. Her only failure in that situation was rolling badly on a Diplomacy check.

[Kish]

Not just threatened, cast a hostile spell on. Samantha's father, also, drew his swords and took a swing at Miko before she retaliated. There's no logic to saying Miko was in the wrong there--at most, you can say she didn't demonstrate a pacifistic commitment to sparing the lives of people who attacked her, but she never claimed to have that and no one in the comic ever hinted at thinking she should.

[factotum]

Yeah, the bandits thing is something Miko can't really be blamed for, given how they reacted when she freed them--chances are that if they'd just given her the information she wanted she'd have left them alive. (Assuming she didn't bother to do a Detect Evil on them, but she didn't really have any reason to do so). Everything else LadyEowyn says I thoroughly agree with, though.

[Lacuna Caster]

Unless you wish to contend that Shojo will, at some future point, order the execution of the Order of the Stick, I fail to see how revisions to the intended sequence of events would have made him want the Order dead at some point instead of telling them about the Macguffin.

Again, summoning Eugene after Miko departs would mean he has no particular reason to want them alive. Just as a hypothetical.

Miko has many flaws, but no one had claimed that "unwillingness to risk her life to protect innocent civilians" is one of them. If it was, she would never have become a paladin.

Her flaws are that she is merciless (kills the bandits, who she knew almost mothing about and were low-level evil at worst), she is self-righteous, she lacking in compassion or generosity of spirit for anyone who falls below her personal standards, and she is incredibly ready to kill anyone who pings her Detect Evil regardless of whether she has witnessed them behaving in an evil manner. The last one is crucial: one or Rich's central themes in the story is that alignment (or an individual or species) is not, by itself, sufficient reason to kill someone.

Again, I don't think this is well-supported. If Miko were reflexively willing to kill anyone who pings Evil, Belkar would never have made it to azure city alive (and she would probably have stabbed Samantha before releasing her.) Heck, during the inn scene, Miko could have ordered Roy/V/Haley to go evacuate the building, then gone tearing after the assassins herself, all without violating the paladin code. But when she had to choose between pursuing criminals or defending the innocent, she prioritised the latter. (Either that, or she was willing to demur to Roy's plan of action, which one would normally consider a sign of flexibility.)

She isn't tactful or sensitive or gracious, but she is, objectively, protecting or accommodating other people at significant personal cost, in ways that are difficult to account for besides being generous or compassionate. If you're going to say 'the paladin code requires it', I'll remind you one of the tenets of the paladin code is be good. Exactly what good deed could Miko perform that can't be written off as a technicality?

[hamishspence]

The idea may be that she only normally scans beforeexpected fights - she scanned Roy the first time - but not the others (only scanning them properly individually after Durkon requested it) - and every time she tried to scan Belkar, he put up the lead sheet.

For the second fight (the offscreen one) - she didn't bother with the scan, but went straight to the smiting.

We don't see her scanning Samantha and her father either - though that may be at least partly the Giant wanting to keep the fact that she's a paladin, secret from the audience at the time.

[Lacuna Caster]

Yes, that's the point. Miko clearly doesn't pre-emptively scan everyone she comes across and smites given the slightest excuse (or she certainly wouldn't have offered to work with Sam/Pa.) Miko also wouldn't be using smite evil on Belkar if she didn't think he was evil (and it would be trivial to confirm after the combat)- she still doesn't kill him.

The worst you can say is that her- clearly-intended-as-comedy- remarks on the black dragon hoard indicate that she's possibly racist... though I dimly recall the author specifically rebutting that point many years ago. Unfortunately, I think the post was lost in one of the server crashes, unless someone can dig it up?

[woweedd]

Yes, that's the point. Miko clearly doesn't pre-emptively scan everyone she comes across and smites given the slightest excuse (or she certainly wouldn't have offered to work with Sam/Pa.) Miko also wouldn't be using smite evil on Belkar if she didn't think he was evil (and it would be trivial to confirm after the combat)- she still doesn't kill him.

The worst you can say is that her- clearly-intended-as-comedy- remarks on the black dragon hoard indicate that she's possibly racist... though I dimly recall the author specifically rebutting that point many years ago. Unfortunately, I think the post was lost in one of the server crashes, unless someone can dig it up?

I mean, it is intended as comedy, but comedy that still says nothing good (or Good, for that matter) about the people involved.

[Kish]

I can't dig up the specific quote, but yes, he did say that all her "then its destruction was just and necessary" line was meant to indicate was that she would let Roy off the hook for having killed a chromatic dragon, not that she wouldn't have used Detect Evil first herself. It would be silly to hold that line against her without also holding Roy's and Elan's lines against them, in any event.

[woweedd]

I can't dig up the specific quote, but yes, he did say that all her "then its destruction was just and necessary" line was meant to indicate was that she would let Roy off the hook for having killed a chromatic dragon, not that she wouldn't have used Detect Evil first herself. It would be silly to hold that line against her without also holding Roy's and Elan's lines against them, in any event.

I do, as it happens. I think, given the circumstances, their fighting the Dragon was justified, though their killing it was not, particularly given an obvious non-lethal method to take it out. And I think the fact that "It's scales weren't all shiny" is the best defense Roy could come up with reflects somewhat badly on him, even for a scene from just when the comic was emerging from its gag-a-day roots. I should note, by the way, I think far less people would bring up the YBD's murder, were it not for the fact that that murder totally did come back to haunt the Order and also, you know, the entire world.

[goto124]

were it not for the fact that that murder totally did come back to haunt the Order and also, you know, the entire world.

If OotS was a campaign, one of the biggest campaign highlights would be how the killing of a seemingly plot-irrelevant dragon eventually led to wide-scale killing. And everyone wondering what the wizard just decided to do.

[Lacuna Caster]

I do, as it happens. I think, given the circumstances, their fighting the Dragon was justified, though their killing it was not, particularly given an obvious non-lethal method to take it out.

What was the obvious non-lethal method? (Just curious, not a contradiction.)

Sure, I can see arguments that breaking into someone's home, stabbing them in the face disintegrating them, and taking all their stuff tends to be ethically dubious at the best of times. But this kinda speaks to the double-standards at play: Given all the previous occasions on which the Order had, e.g, gone about dicing up sentient creatures for obstructing their path to Xykon- it's not like they were detecting evil with any regularity- it seems telling that the readership developed an intense and penetrating interest in the rules of engagement the moment Our Lady Of Chaos came on-stage.

[woweedd]

What was the obvious non-lethal method? (Just curious, not a contradiction.)

Sure, I can see arguments that breaking into someone's home, stabbing them in the face disintegrating them, and taking all their stuff tends to be ethically dubious at the best of times. But this kinda speaks to the double-standards at play: Given all the previous occasions on which the Order had, e.g, gone about dicing up sentient creatures for obstructing their path to Xykon- it's not like they were detecting evil with any regularity- it seems telling that the readership developed an intense and penetrating interest in the rules of engagement the moment Our Lady Of Chaos came on-stage.

Huh. THis is embarrassing. I mis-remembered, i'll admit. I was referring to V"s Suggestion spell on the Dragon. However, as V mentions in the strip, the duration would run out remarkably quickly once V de-polymorphed. Thats aid, if V hadn't forced them to wait and de-polymorph theme before moving on, it could have been avoided, even if that isn't exactly an obvious solution. As for dicing up sentient creatures...Those creatures were serving under Xykon.

[Kish]

Everyone who's read Start of Darkness knows that they were also draftees, who joined Xykon under threat of gruesome death. Fighting them is justifiable as necessary to reach Xykon; killing them in their sleep, or yelling "DAMN IT!" when they run away instead of standing, fighting, and dying, not so much. The difference between "Coup de grace! Coup de grace!" and "explicitly tried to hang all of you, so let's just tie her up and leave her here" appears to be green skin and fangs (and a hundred fifty strips or so, yes, but Rich explicitly said he would have made it clearer that the goblins were hostile combatants but wouldn't have changed Roy killing them in their sleep).

Hanging around in the dragon's cave for hours (at least 11 hours, for the Suggestion spell to wear off) so that they could use the dragon as a weapon to threaten their party with and then showboating about killing the dragon with utter callousness was just beyond the pale. (Stealing the starmetal at all, even leaving the dragon and the rest of the hoard, would have been questionable at best.)

[factotum]

Again, I don't think this is well-supported. If Miko were reflexively willing to kill anyone who pings Evil, Belkar would never have made it to azure city alive (and she would probably have stabbed Samantha before releasing her.)

Belkar had his lead sheet to prevent himself pinging Evil to Miko. Given he had to do that, it certainly seems likely that he was afraid she'd just kill him once she found out he was Evil. In fact, she might have been forced to do so, because to willingly associate with an Evil person is grounds for losing your paladin status--at the very least, she'd have been forced to take him as a prisoner long before they got to the inn.

[Kish]

Belkar's fear is palpable.

And neither Hinjo nor Thanh fell for associations with Belkar which were far closer than Miko's association with him was ever likely to be.

[woweedd]

Everyone who's read Start of Darkness knows that they were also draftees, who joined Xykon under threat of gruesome death. Fighting them is justifiable as necessary to reach Xykon; killing them in their sleep, or yelling "DAMN IT!" when they run away instead of standing, fighting, and dying, not so much. The difference between "Coup de grace! Coup de grace!" and "explicitly tried to hang all of you, so let's just tie her up and leave her here" appears to be green skin and fangs (and a hundred fifty strips or so, yes, but Rich explicitly said he would have made it clearer that the goblins were hostile combatants but wouldn't have changed Roy killing them in their sleep).

Hanging around in the dragon's cave for hours (at least 11 hours, for the Suggestion spell to wear off) so that they could use the dragon as a weapon to threaten their party with and then showboating about killing the dragon with utter callousness was just beyond the pale. (Stealing the starmetal at all, even leaving the dragon and the rest of the hoard, would have been questionable at best.)

Yeah, anything in DCF should be treated as semi-canonical at best, in my opinion. That was back when the strip barely even HAD a continuing story.

[Lacuna Caster]

Did Thanh ever know that Belkar was evil? I don't recall that Hinjo actually spent much time in the same party.

Belkar had his lead sheet to prevent himself pinging Evil to Miko. Given he had to do that, it certainly seems likely that he was afraid she'd just kill him once she found out he was Evil. In fact, she might have been forced to do so, because to willingly associate with an Evil person is grounds for losing your paladin status--at the very least, she'd have been forced to take him as a prisoner long before they got to the inn.

That's all true, sure, but the description of their second fight scene includes Miko using smites on Belkar, so she already suspected he was evil. (On account of her, you know, not being an idiot.) Anyway, once the order were beaten, there was nothing to stop her using DE and finishing him... if she had wanted to.

Huh. THis is embarrassing. I mis-remembered, i'll admit. I was referring to V"s Suggestion spell on the Dragon. However, as V mentions in the strip, the duration would run out remarkably quickly once V de-polymorphed. Thats aid, if V hadn't forced them to wait and de-polymorph theme before moving on, it could have been avoided, even if that isn't exactly an obvious solution. As for dicing up sentient creatures...Those creatures were serving under Xykon.

After the trial scene, a lot of people objected to the idea of Miko attacking the whole order just to get at Belkar, and I would actually agree with that. It's one thing to forcefully drag people to a fair trial, but you can't easily justify lethal violence against good-to-neutral people just to get at a single evil-doer. I would have zero problem with Miko beheading Belkar irrespective of the legal niceties, but killing 5 other people to do it somewhat defeats the purpose.

Similarly, however, I think there are serious questions about cutting down dozens of goblins and ogres- some of whom will statistically be non-evil- just to get at one Xykon. I mean, one can imagine that his minions are launching raids on neighbouring villages, or somesuch, but it's never really touched on- Roy is mainly there just to fulfil his family oath, and knows nothing about the plot to control the Gates, so it's hard to make a serious 'greater good' argument. And unless the goblins are conveniently color-coded, the party makes no particular effort to separate the good sheep from the bad. They all go down the same... even before Elan trips the self-destruct switch.

To be clear, I had no particular problem with this at the time. It was a gag-a-day stick-figure comedy-webcomic. I was not taking any of these events particularly seriously, and liked it just fine. But I also had no particular problem with Miko briefly coming to blows over a case of mistaken identity and randomly overreacting for the sake of humour. That seemed... entirely par for the course. One could even argue she was actually a little nicer then average. Didn't stop the forums going completely ape****.

[woweedd]

Did Thanh ever know that Belkar was evil? I don't recall that Hinjo actually spent much time in the same party.


That's all true, sure, but the description of their second fight scene includes Miko using smites on Belkar, so she already suspected he was evil. (On account of her, you know, not being an idiot.) Anyway, once the order were beaten, there was nothing to stop her using DE and finishing him... if she had wanted to.


After the trial scene, a lot of people objected to the idea of Miko attacking the whole order just to get at Belkar, and I would actually agree with that. It's one thing to forcefully drag people to a fair trial, but you can't easily justify lethal violence against good-to-neutral people just to get at a single evil-doer. I would have zero problem with Miko beheading Belkar irrespective of the legal niceties, but killing 5 other people to do it somewhat defeats the purpose.

Similarly, however, I think there are serious questions about cutting down dozens of goblins and ogres- some of whom will statistically be non-evil- just to get at one Xykon. I mean, one can imagine that his minions are launching raids on neighbouring villages, or somesuch, but it's never really touched on- Roy is mainly there just to fulfil his family oath, and knows nothing about the plot to control the Gates, so it's hard to make a serious 'greater good' argument. And unless the goblins are conveniently color-coded, the party makes no particular effort to separate the good sheep from the bad. They all go down the same... even before Elan trips the self-destruct switch.

To be clear, I had no particular problem with this at the time. It was a gag-a-day stick-figure comedy-webcomic. I was not taking any of these events particularly seriously, and liked it just fine. But I also had no particular problem with Miko briefly coming to blows over a case of mistaken identity and randomly overreacting for the sake of humour. That seemed... entirely par for the course. One could even argue she was actually a little nicer then average. Didn't stop the forums going completely ape****.

One could also imagine that an obvious flashback was imaginary. You seemed to be cool with that.

[goodpeople25]

I don't think that's quite how statistics work. (Not a surprise though since 98.36303087% of people don't know and 83.5196% are made up)

[Lacuna Caster]

Sure, it's easy enough to fill in the blanks and imagine that Xykon is some kind of rapacious warlord, even back in the DCF era. But is it so hard to imagine that otherwise well-meaning goblins, pressed into service, might react poorly to a band of raiders invading their home and killing their conspecifics? After all the heat that Miko got for not being super-delicate with, say, Pa? Does that become okay now?

I'm not trying to retroactively dump on Roy & Co. here. My main point is that the strip's readership at the time was largely unconcerned with the fine points of adventuring ethics. It was only when Miko appeared on-scene- when the main cast were at risk of being beaten or skewered for presumed wrongdoing- that the fanbase sat up and got very very serious about standards of evidence, minimal force, situational empathy and the proper chain of command.

[hamishspence]

For me, it was On The Origin of PCs that first led me to take a hard look at adventuring ethics - which was published around the time Miko met the Order, or just after - I read the first two books before reading the online strip.

Roy calls out the rest of his party for mistreatment of Durkon, and for wanting to "kill monsters because it's slightly more convenient than talking to them" (the monsters were orc music fans wanting to attend a concert).

And he starts a new party - initially consisting of just him and Durkon.

[goodpeople25]

What chain of command issues would there really be before Miko? That she was in one (Well was known to have a lord/boss/master in anycase) is part of the different circumstances which don't go out the window just because there is a (far) larger online reaction. (That I can buy, the idea that ethics and the like in regards to the comic only started to matter to everyone when Miko showed up and because she was a danger to the protagonists is ridiculous to me, nor do I think the specific timing of a fourm change is all that important or relevant) And by all means if you did have an issue with the orders actions in the dungeon do so, you'd hardly be the first.