|
I think that Roy attacking Miko probably ruined any chance of her realizing she was wrong, but at the same time I can't really blame Roy for doing so under the circumstances, as she just cut an unrarmed ally in half. I was still sort of hoping she worked things out, though. 
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2007 07:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 07:10 |
|
|
Calaveron posted:http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0329.html Jesus, I can't believe I forgot that. Now I gotta re read the comic again.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2007 07:31
|
|
|
Like I said, I'm not getting dragged into that debate, no matter how much I want, and I think the last few replies are proof enough that's a good decision. I said I wanted to avoid it, and this was followed by several posts condemning her absolutely and justifying Roy's actions on every level. I do wish to say though that I think Miko is the least realistic of the villians in the comic. Nale, and to a lesser degree Xykon are much more realistic because they know what they're doing is bad, freely admit it, and have a reason they keep doing it. I don't think most real murderers etc. are under the impression they're right. A few are, but not most. Miko would be the exception, and more to the point, the laymen taken to extremes. Most people commit small illegal acts be it jay-walking, petty theft or whatever on a regular basis and justify themselves, and that's her taken to the highest order, and thus unrealistic. Nale and certain members of his first crew are much more realistic in that they know they're bad, and have resolved that they're doing it for whatever reason. Like that dwarf girl for a start. tsob fucked around with this message at 07:38 on Feb 1, 2007 |
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2007 07:34
|
|
|
poo poo, quoted instead of edited. Sorry.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2007 07:36
|
|
|
No, Miko's a fanatic. She sees things only in black and white and can't see herself as being evil or bad no matter what. Have you heard of cognitive dissonance?
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2007 08:03
|
|
|
tsob posted:Like I said, I'm not getting dragged into that debate, no matter how much I want, and I think the last few replies are proof enough that's a good decision. I said I wanted to avoid it, and this was followed by several posts condemning her absolutely and justifying Roy's actions on every level. Look, if you're a policeman in the middle of an armed standoff with a criminal, you try to talk that criminal down until such time as the criminal starts firing wildly into a crowd of bystanders. Then you shoot. I don't know what you're talking about re: "absolute condemnation" and similar out-of-left-field hyperbole. Miko slashed someone in half and Roy moved in to stop her from doing it again. I imagine that his intent is to incapacitate her by dropping her below 0 hitpoints, but if she were to die it wouldn't be very different from the death of the trigger-happy criminal I used in an example above. Now, if you're enough of a bleeding heart to complain about Roy's hurtful remarks then I don't even know what to say to you. quote:I do wish to say though that I think Miko is the least realistic of the villians in the comic. Nale, and to a lesser degree Xykon are much more realistic because they know what they're doing is bad, freely admit it, and have a reason they keep doing it. I don't think most real murderers etc. are under the impression they're right. A few are, but not most. You really think a hotheaded murderous zealot is less realistic than a cackling megalomaniac who refers to himself as evil and wants to rule the world? Ferrinus fucked around with this message at 08:09 on Feb 1, 2007 |
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2007 08:05
|
|
|
I think Miko's bit about "It all made sense, for the first time in years..." suggests there's some backstory to her we haven't been given which might make her high-strung demeanor a bit more sympathetic.tsob posted:I don't think most real murderers etc. are under the impression they're right. A few are, but not most. I'm no murderologist, but I would imagine that the justification mechanism most murderers use is that while 'murder' as an abstract concept is wrong, the specific instance of murder they committed is excusable. I don't think even a reason for the exception is necessary, because all they would be doing is cognitive dissonance to reconcile a good self-image with society's disapproval of murder. Of course, this is just me guessing based on what I remember of psychology, but yeah. And it's really weird to me that people think any kind of majority of 'bad' people in real life honestly believe or are aware that they're bad. I'm not trying to insult you guys, or anything, it's just that that conclusion is completely foreign to my experience.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2007 08:07
|
|
|
tsob posted:I do wish to say though that I think Miko is the least realistic of the villians in the comic. With this one line you've convinced me that I certainly don't want to have a conversation with you, now or in the future.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2007 08:10
|
|
|
tsob posted:Like I said, I'm not getting dragged into that debate, no matter how much I want, and I think the last few replies are proof enough that's a good decision. I said I wanted to avoid it, and this was followed by several posts condemning her absolutely and justifying Roy's actions on every level. More evil is done in the name of good than it is otherwise.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2007 08:14
|
|
|
Dammit Who? posted:Of course, this is just me guessing based on what I remember of psychology, but yeah. Meh, I probably am wrong. Especially if someone who's done even a small bit of actual psychology study says so. I've never looked into that kind of thing at all. I'm just going on personal experience and popular entertainment. Lafarga posted:With this one line you've convinced me that I certainly don't want to have a conversation with you, now or in the future. Well, aren't you a happy pappy.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2007 08:26
|
|
|
tsob posted:Well, aren't you a happy pappy. Well to be fair you've just spent the last few posts explaining how little you want to talk about it anyway, so maybe you two are perfect for each other 
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2007 08:49
|
|
|
Beaver Patrol posted:Well, Durkon will die. Belkar just kills someone. The oracle's prediction was posthumously (after death) is when he may return to the dwarven lands, which is not specifically his own death. In this comic the letter to Durkon says that the former High Priest died and the new High Priest will allow Durkon to return home. So Durkon could die but it is uncertain if he will. Guardian 585 fucked around with this message at 09:04 on Feb 1, 2007 |
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2007 08:59
|
|
|
Guardian 585 posted:The oracle's prediction was posthumously (after death) is when he may return to the dwarven lands, which is not specifically his own death. No, it is specifically his own death. That's what posthumously means in this context.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2007 09:10
|
|
|
Dammit Who? posted:No, it is specifically his own death. That's what posthumously means in this context. Posthumously just means after death. There is a resurection clause there.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2007 09:22
|
|
|
CoolCab posted:Posthumously just means after death. There is a resurection clause there.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2007 09:27
|
|
|
CoolCab posted:Posthumously just means after death. There is a resurection clause there. Yes?  Durkon will die before returning to the dwarven lands. I thought that was what I said.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2007 09:34
|
|
|
Dammit Who? posted:Yes? Just pointing out it's not a death sentence, except in how it is.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2007 09:42
|
|
|
I don't recall, but did Rich ever explain why Durkon was exiled?
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2007 13:13
|
|
|
Spaceship Zero posted:I don't recall, but did Rich ever explain why Durkon was exiled? I don't remember where I read it, but he was exiled because the hih priest if Thor had a vision that if Durkon were to hang out in Dwarven lands some more death and destruction would strike them. The way I see it, if Durkon returns to dwarven lands, he'll be followed by Xykon and friends, then he'll die there.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2007 15:01
|
|
|
Beaver Patrol posted:Jesus, I can't believe I forgot that. Now I gotta re read the comic again. The quoted comic, along with the current strip, have convinced me that Belkar is about to bite it. Miko, for all intents and purposes, has just killed a NPC. If she slaughters an entertaining and in this case, helpless PC? Well, that will really turn everyone against her. Hopefully what Belkar is saying is true, but I'm still worried
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2007 15:25
|
|
|
Semiru posted:The quoted comic, along with the current strip, have convinced me that Belkar is about to bite it. Miko, for all intents and purposes, has just killed a NPC. If she slaughters an entertaining and in this case, helpless PC? Well, that will really turn everyone against her.  All of the predictions will come true to the letter but rarely to the intent in some biting way. Durkon will return to the dwarven lands as a zombie. Elan will end up magically lobotomised and happily drooling as Nale kills his friends. Etc.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2007 15:49
|
|
|
Speaking of Durkon and the prediction... If you're killed and raised, wouldn't all of your actions after that point be posthumous? Goddamned prophesies and resurrections all making with the semantics
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2007 17:00
|
|
|
Spaceship Zero posted:I don't recall, but did Rich ever explain why Durkon was exiled? There was a "Volume 0" book titled "On the Origin of PC's" that gave backstories on all the members of the Order. The comics in that book are not available online, so if you want to read them you'd have to get the book. My local comic shop has been able to get Vol. 2 in, so your comic store might be able to get it for you, or just buy it from the Giant's website.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2007 17:03
|
|
|
Awesome. For some reason I thought that On the Origin of PC's was just the first collection of online strips. I shall order it posthaste.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2007 17:43
|
|
|
Here is Miko's first appearance. Anyone who thinks she has any genuine good within her is dumb as a box of rocks.  An additional note to those planning a Banjo the Clown avatar: You can't have one without inserting a Banjulhu panel as a suprise. The Werle fucked around with this message at 18:38 on Feb 1, 2007 |
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2007 17:58
|
|
|
I just thought of something. Now that Miko has been unpaladinned, what happens to her horse? Does it die? Or just return to the celestial dude ranch from whence it came?
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2007 21:23
|
|
|
I don't have the books in front of me but the Paladin's horse is summoned for a period of time based on the Paladin's level, so it would probably just go poof, if not immediately then after its time is up. In any case I doubt it'd let her ride it in her non-Paladin status. Were I the DM I'd probably have it give her a solid bite before vanishing.
Myok fucked around with this message at 21:31 on Feb 1, 2007 |
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2007 21:26
|
|
|
Dammit Who? posted:I think Miko's bit about "It all made sense, for the first time in years..." suggests there's some backstory to her we haven't been given which might make her high-strung demeanor a bit more sympathetic. I can't exactly cite strips on this, but I always kind of got the impression that Miko was a bit isolated amongst the other paladins for her pigheadedness and obsession with justice, honour, etc. to the extent of all else. She seems to think that her order should be much stricter than it actually is (that one strip where Shojo's sending her off and she actually sighs when he tells her not to kill the Order), and that it isn't and she's in no position to change that has, I kind of get the feeling, brewed dissatisfaction in her. Roots of rebellion and all that. I dunno, just a theory.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2007 22:01
|
|
|
Myok posted:I don't have the books in front of me but the Paladin's horse is summoned for a period of time based on the Paladin's level, so it would probably just go poof, if not immediately then after its time is up. Where does it say this? I do have the book in front of me, but I've never played a Paladin and can't find it at the moment. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2007 22:06
|
|
|
bgaesop posted:Where does it say this? I do have the book in front of me, but I've never played a Paladin and can't find it at the moment. It's the Special Mount ability gained at 5th level, according to this site (best I can do for now). My paladin died and was reincarnated as a big brown bear (3.0 rules) so now there's a bear and horse tag team running around the woods.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2007 22:13
|
|
|
Myok posted:I don't have the books in front of me but the Paladin's horse is summoned for a period of time based on the Paladin's level, so it would probably just go poof, if not immediately then after its time is up. In any case I doubt it'd let her ride it in her non-Paladin status. Were I the DM I'd probably have it give her a solid bite before vanishing.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2007 22:13
|
|
|
Myok posted:It's the Special Mount ability gained at 5th level, according to this site (best I can do for now). My paladin died and was reincarnated as a big brown bear (3.0 rules) so now there's a bear and horse tag team running around the woods. I thought to look in the Paladin's Mount sidebar but not the Class Features section. Oy. Still, there's something interesting there:quote:Each time the mount is called, it appears in full health, regardless of any damage it may have taken previously. The mount also appears wearing or carrying any gear it had when it was last dismissed. Calling a mount is a conjuration (calling) effect. And yet:  
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2007 22:33
|
|
|
bgaesop posted:I thought to look in the Paladin's Mount sidebar but not the Class Features section. Oy. I'm not familiar with Paladin rules enough to know whether its the case, but do they have to prepare their daily spells like a wizard or cleric does? If that is the case, maybe she only prepared one "Conjure Celestial Mount" spell for the day and the time she refers to is waiting til the next day when she could resummon Windstriker at full health.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2007 22:38
|
|
|
The Werle posted:I'm not familiar with Paladin rules enough to know whether its the case, but do they have to prepare their daily spells like a wizard or cleric does? If that is the case, maybe she only prepared one "Conjure Celestial Mount" spell for the day and the time she refers to is waiting til the next day when she could resummon Windstriker at full health. Ahh, yes, that's it. It's actually a supernatural 1/day ability, but same difference. The mount also only stays for 2 hours per level, so if anyone feels like reading through a bunch of back strips and figuring out the longest the mount stays out, we can determine Miko's level.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2007 22:41
|
|
|
bgaesop posted:Ahh, yes, that's it. It's actually a supernatural 1/day ability, but same difference. The mount also only stays for 2 hours per level, so if anyone feels like reading through a bunch of back strips and figuring out the longest the mount stays out, we can determine Miko's level. If she's higher than 11 we would never be able to tell.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2007 23:28
|
|
|
Semiru posted:The quoted comic, along with the current strip, have convinced me that Belkar is about to bite it. Miko, for all intents and purposes, has just killed a NPC. If she slaughters an entertaining and in this case, helpless PC? Well, that will really turn everyone against her. Maybe he's responsible for her death in that she is executed for murdering him. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2007 23:49
|
|
|
gothfae posted:If she's higher than 11 we would never be able to tell.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2007 00:02
|
|
|
green leaf salad posted:I can't exactly cite strips on this, but I always kind of got the impression that Miko was a bit isolated amongst the other paladins for her pigheadedness and obsession with justice, honour, etc. to the extent of all else. http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0265.html - She gets sent on the long travel missions to get her away from everyone else. edit: Dammit Who? posted:I think Miko's bit about "It all made sense, for the first time in years..." suggests there's some backstory to her we haven't been given which might make her high-strung demeanor a bit more sympathetic. She might be referring to her hosed up sense of what happened. (i.e: Why Shojo was acting all crazy, pulling her away from the monastery, etc.) It doesn't excuse her actions. Sock fucked around with this message at 02:10 on Feb 2, 2007 |
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2007 00:06
|
|
|
I watched a load of season 4 of Babylon 5 today after I went home from work and was just wondering...in one episode (6 I think) Sheridan refers to the Vorlons and Shadows as "Giants in the Playground". Is this where the sites name originates, or is the saying more popular than I know in other parts of the world? I've just never heard it before, and it kinda jumped out at me.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2007 00:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 07:10 |
|
|
the_steve posted:I agree with alot. I think it can be assumed that the bandit dad was moving to strike her (he drew his weapons after all) and she simply won initiative, and we can't see it for certain because comics are static. Giant in the Playground is explained on the site. If I remember correctly it's just an image Rich thought up and liked.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2007 01:19
|
|
