A Defense of Miko

[Grymar]

Why do we like Belkar far more than Miko?

Because Charisma shouldn't always be a dump stat.

 

[Asmo]

Miko who?

Asmo

 

[Thornir Alekeg]

Why does everyone think I'm worked about it? That implies that my facts are somewhat exaggerated but I listed everything straight from the comic. I mean, seriously Belkar is comic relief and he's perfect for a funny comic but would ANY good-aligned party actually adventure with a Belkar?

Sorry if I read your tone incorrectly. To me it seemed you were worked up about it because you kept SHOUTING at us when making your points.

 

[Kahuna Burger]

Miko who?

Asmo

A character in a webcomic that isn't as universal as it's fans might think.

 

[delericho]

I'll admit it, I'm weird. I liked Miko and think she got a raw deal....

Yes, she did. But not from the OotS, from Rich*, or from the fans. She got a raw deal from her life, which put her in very difficult circumstances. However, the circumstances were not impossible, and she made a lot of bad choices along the way.

* I'd best clarify this one, since the author has complete control, and so is ultimately responsible for all the events. However, he's written three things: Miko's backstory, Miko's actions, and the events of the 'campaign'. When I say Rich wasn't responsible for the raw deal, I'm referring to his writing the events of the campaign, rather than Miko's actions or her backstory.

Of course people like Hinjo since apparently all he did was stay at home. Its easy being a paladin if all you do is stay home and handle the administrative duties. Remember, even after her fall, she kicked Hinjo's ass so you know, he's got to be damn lower on the level chart.

The reason people like Hinjo is because... he's a likeable guy. Although he clearly has a strong moral code, he doesn't impose it on others, he doesn't constantly lecture, and he doesn't assume he has all the answers.

It's also important to note that Hinjo is not without his faults. I strongly dislike his notion of 'justice' as it relates to the deal with Belkar (he set sentence specifically to get around a deal he himself was offering, and he then used the Mark fo Justice to ensure Belkar's cooperation, stating that he wasn't bound to remove it... except that the Mark was essentially the bail condition Shojo had imposed, so he actually should have been bound to remove it (assuming something close to a real-world judicial system, which Azure City seems to have)). He's also going to be a fairly poor, and probably short-lived ruler. Shojo would have done a much better job handling the nobles, handling Zykon, and in general.

But in terms of being likeable? Yep, can't fault him there.

1. Miko was an orphan raised by monks. Seriously. Do we honestly expect Jim Carrey from that upbringing? Yet of course, since she's not funny like Belkar, she's a bitch and has a stick up her ass.

I have no problem with her not being funny. I have no problem with her being a bitch. And, in fact, I have no problem with her being arrogant... provided she has the goods to back it up. Unfortunately for Miko, she was utterly wrong, and arrogance combined with wrongness is unforgivable.

2. When she was frightened and crying after being unceremoniously taken from her only home, Shojo fills her head with "You have a great destiny". Remember, Miko was still a child when Shojo took her from the only family she knew. Oh yeah, Shojo is a GREAT leader. The ends justify the means. Did Shojo see her as nothing more than a weapon?

Shojo probably was a great leader. He wasn't a particularly Good man, but that's not necessarily a bad thing. But, simply saying "she had an abused childhood" doesn't make up for her actions. It might explain them, but that's not the same thing.

3. Miko is sent by Lord Shojo to capture the Oots...If the King of your nation comes up to your adventuring group and says "He's been accused of killing, raping and plundering entire villages and or diviners have determined it is this guy", are you or are you not going to out for blood.

On the way there, Miko hears MULTIPLE stories (not just one mind you) about the evils of this gang...

She finally catches up with them and CHECKS again and Roy radiates EVIL...

So, how would your gaming group handle the OoTs party after all of these facts?

Emphasis mine. Under those circumstances, I would expect the Paladin to do her duty... which is clearly spelled out as capturing the party. Especially since Azure City has a judicial system that requires the accused stand trial, in order to present a defense if nothing else.

Now, having just checked the archive, I've found that when she first meets the OotS, Miko does not identify herself as an agent of authority, she does not reveal herself as a paladin. No, she states that they have been charged with crimes for which the only possible sentence is death, orders them to surrender, and then threatens them. Of course they fight back... and the fault lies with Miko.

(a charge the OotS can't deny)

because they don't know what she's talking about, and she can't explain it either.

Notice already how Rich is making us think Miko is a bitch yet she hasn't done anything.

Apart from accusing them of capital crimes, ordering them to surrender, and threatening them?

did Miko DO and SAY anything mean to them other than the lecture about "filthy lucre"?

Constantly lecture them, you mean.

they ARE HER PRISONERS. She is under no freaking obligation to put them up

Actually, she is. Haley points out as much

Of course, the fact that SHE WAS RIGHT TO LECTURE THEM seems to escape most people's notice. It was Roy impersonating the king and Belkar running around like the killer he is, who blew up the inn.

I'll give you that one. Of course, no-one likes to hear "I told you so."

The entire storyline just showed to me how to screw over a paladin since I can't see how Miko did anything wrond other than looking at the facts presented to her.

Miko was annoying, bitchy and rude, but those were all acceptable.

Where she went wrong was in sticking with her original assessment in the light of new and contradictory information. She let her hatred of the OotS blind her to the truth of the situation, and acted accordingly. Then, as new facts presented themselves, she wound herself deeper and deeper into her delusion, rather the reevaluation her preconceptions in light of reality.

But even then, she remained a Paladin until she struck down Shojo. At that point, she abandonned Law for her own notion of justice. She knew that the correct course of action was to arrest him and hold him for trial, but she did not. Then, when her gods chose to remove her status, she refused to accept the error of her ways, but rather declared that it must be one more step along her destiny.

She was a prideful blinkered religious fanatic, of a sort that is all too common, and is extremely dangerous. "Pride goeth before a fall," they say, and it's very true here.

 

[Henry]

ya know, it's one thing for the "new strip" threads to be in General, since they also alert us when Rich finally feels like posting one, but surely a discussion of a particular character belongs in the media forum?

Tough call, because I kinda hate separating OOtS discussion threads, and because it's so closely related to RPG'ing itself. (Plus, usually the occasional threads about sluggy freelance, PvP, etc. go here too.) I'm inclined to leave it here for now because it's just the one, but if there's a larger frequency of OotS discussion, and more threads about it, we may have to move the whole thing to Media.

 

[AllisterH]

Emphasis mine. Under those circumstances, I would expect the Paladin to do her duty... which is clearly spelled out as capturing the party. Especially since Azure City has a judicial system that requires the accused stand trial, in order to present a defense if nothing else.

Now, having just checked the archive, I've found that when she first meets the OotS, Miko does not identify herself as an agent of authority, she does not reveal herself as a paladin. No, she states that they have been charged with crimes for which the only possible sentence is death, orders them to surrender, and then threatens them. Of course they fight back... and the fault lies with Miko.

.

You know, that raises an interesting issue.

I assume a lot of us have taken part in the "Bounty Hunter" situation, but I'm kind of wondering, how should it be handled? IME, most people ambush the target and afterwards THEN they announce that they are bounty hunters.

Nobody does the "Open the doors, we have a warrant for your capture" in a campaign as that is seen as Lawful Stupid quite rightly (giving a party a couple of rounds of buffing is asking for trouble)

Now here's another question relating to the lecture. Are paladins obligated to "let slide" indiscretions if they see it? My understanding of the code is that they can't. They must speak up.

 

[mhensley]

5. Belkar. I just don't see the reason people love this homicidal halfling.

And I don't understand why anyone could not love homicidal halflings. :\

 

[Lord Mhoram]

So, how would your gaming group handle the OoTs party after all of these facts? Yet notice in the very next comic even after hearing what the charge is (a charge the OotS can't deny), the very first thought is, "let's just beat up this uppity bitch of a paladin and go on our way"...and worse yet, Rich presents it in a manner where we're supposed to like the OotS.


5. Belkar. I just don't see the reason people love this homicidal halfling. This is the EXACT same type of character most of us here would NEVER tolerate. Let's look at the situation in Azure City. Belkar BRUTALLY kills a guard, desecrates the body and then taunts Miko yet people were rooting for Belkar? Um, why?

It was this whole story arc that caused me to stop reading the strip.

Not in a huffy "Ohh I'm not going read this anymore.. stomp stomp stomp", but in an "This just isn't worth the time to read it anymore, I'll do something I actually enjoy."

Part of it is that I have never seen, IRL, the horrible paladin that everyone complains about. I've only seen well played ones, and it is a favorite archtype. I never saw the humor in Miko because I've never experience what it was mocking (I guess). That, and I keep wanting to see Belkar die- he is a character, that when he is on screen, I just want to skip to the next bit. Another bad player/character archtype I've never seen.

 

[delericho]

I assume a lot of us have taken part in the "Bounty Hunter" situation, but I'm kind of wondering, how should it be handled? IME, most people ambush the target and afterwards THEN they announce that they are bounty hunters.

Nobody does the "Open the doors, we have a warrant for your capture" in a campaign as that is seen as Lawful Stupid quite rightly (giving a party a couple of rounds of buffing is asking for trouble)

I would agree... if Miko had done that. Instead, she stood and challenged the party (essentially "surrender or die"). If she's going to open a dialogue like that, then she should have handled it differently.

(The other thing is that it's madness for a single character to take on a whole group of PCs; unless she was much higher level, she was almost certain to be beaten down.)

Now here's another question relating to the lecture. Are paladins obligated to "let slide" indiscretions if they see it? My understanding of the code is that they can't. They must speak up.

The paladin's code has no requirement to lecture others, or even to do anything to correct another's behaviour. The only requirement is that they don't associate with Evil characters. Miko wasn't required to lecture, she chose to do so. Besides, there's a huge gap between "letting it slide" and "high-handed moralising". Miko chose one end of the spectrum of possible responses, where something closer to the middle would have been more appropriate.