Villainess makes a deal with the party that her brothers, 13 ogres, won't sack the nearby town if the group turns over the magic sword the group's paladin carries, one year to the day after the deal. (The sword was created by the villainess' grandmothers and is a McGuffin they hope to use at some point in the future.)
After much adventuring, the group returns to find the town more or less sacked already and kill a number of ogres, although not 13 of them, and not in any sort of organized invasion.
They finally catch up to the villainess, who previously had threatened to slaughter the paladin's family if he didn't hold up his end of the deal, and she's tied to a stake outside the longhouse she and her brothers occupy. She tells the group that the deal with the paladin caused a rift in the family, and the ogres went to war amongst themselves, and some of the brothers left her here, tied up, when they went off to destroy the town.
The paladin executes her on the spot, for past crimes and her future evil intentions.
So, does this impact his paladin status in your campaign? Why or why not?
Executing a helpless opponent, with whom he had made a deal, and who had upheld her end of the deal as much as was in her power (her only failure was overestimating her control over her brothers)?
It depends, very heavily, on the particular oath the Paladin has taken. In every group where I play a Paladin, I try to hash out at least a basic code/oath with the DM so that I can know where I stand. That way, I (hopefully) don't have to deal with
catch-22 situations from a DM who tries to hamstring me over a deeply-binding oath that isn't spelled out, and thus can have utterly irreconcilable flaws (e.g. never break a law, never do an evil deed; some laws are evil, thus the code is self-defeating, but the Paladin is held responsible for the "violation.") Were I to DM for someone else, who expressed a desire to play a Paladin, I would expect to have a conversation about their oath with them--and if they did not bring it up, I certainly would, because I have no desire to become what I hate!
You probably want an actual
answer though. So, if I were DM, but (God forbid) hadn't actually discussed a code of conduct? Probably going to require an Atonement. Since I prefer to play 4e, where Paladin power is a matter of investiture and not constant divine nannying, nothing would directly impact the character's abilities, but the character would get some clear signs that something was wrong. Let's say it's a Paladin of Pelor (allowing adaptation for any other deity, e.g. Bahamut would use draconic imagery rather than solar). He has a dream of a beautiful, sunny day, suddenly darkened by an eclipse--with the sun turned to blood, which then changes and refocuses to a droplet of blood falling from his own sword, freshly pulled from the ogre woman. If it is completely ignored--e.g. the character doesn't do or say anything about it for a couple of days--then it becomes his dream
every time he sleeps. If he visits a temple of Pelor, a meaningful sign might occur, like clouds covering the skylight as he walks through its beam and clearing as soon as he leaves it, and whatever other "clearly Pelor is not happy" signals I could give (and I would expressly state "these signs are well-known to signify Pelor's displeasure with one of his faithful").
Should these warnings also be ignored, then the next time they're in a large town or small city, a priest of Pelor's church would seek him out and explain "my son, Pelor has sent me to you--I know not why, only that you are in need of guidance. Have you anything to confess?" If even this situation--a priest
explicitly saying "Pelor wants you to atone" (though probably in different words)--doesn't get some change out of him, the next encounter would not be so nice. Avengers--Pelor's rarely-used and even more rarely-seen internal police--would come and request that he accompany them, peacefully, into the Temple's custody so that he can atone in the eyes of their shared deity. If he resists, they would attack to subdue (non-lethal damage only), and would intentionally try to refrain from attacking anyone else (only the minimum for self-defense); he would then be held at the Temple until he agreed to seek Atonement. Should he escape the Avengers sent to detain him, he would be marked as deviating from the faith, and further, better-armed and better-prepared parties would be sent after him (as time allows); although all his powers would remain (again, 4e) he would be classified as a Fallen Paladin, and any beings sensitive to the spiritual world would, eventually, be able to detect it.
Of course, this only outlined the "worst case" scenario, with all attempts at him giving in willingly roundly refused. Ideally the initial dream would be enough, or at least the "obvious signs of displeasure." Should the Paladin accept that Atonement must be made, either an official of the church would assign an appropriate penance (along with accepting personal penance on the Paladin's behalf), or Pelor himself would provide instructions (in one form or another) on what kind of penance would do. Since the act was nominally for a good cause (punishing past crimes) but was done in the wrong way and at the wrong time, the penance could be:
- having to help the victim(s) (or relatives thereof, if dead) of someone else engaging in "vigilante justice"
- having to actually take the judgment-seat on crimes of difficult, thorny character with few clear answers
- getting sent to a specific place on a specific day, where the consequences of his action will unfold
Essentially, each of them is an attempt to make him face (a) the complexity of the situation, (b) the fact that such judgments are better left to officials and their finer ability to discern the facts, (c) the pain and suffering such rash, "vigilante justice" can cause both in the victims and the perpetrators, and (d) the realization that, while his choice certainly granted
vengeance for deeds done, it was not justice, and would simply perpetuate the cycle of hate and violence rather than ending it. If the Paladin comes out of it stronger in the faith, a wiser man, awesome. If he comes out of it thinking "why the eff did I become a Paladin of
Pelor," that's awesome too--because now we can address the crisis of faith that comes of it. Perhaps it is proof that he was seduced by high-minded rhetoric while training in the temple, but has a far too pragmatic outlook when push comes to shove. Perhaps it will be complex and difficult, something he struggles with for the rest of his life--being truly faithful to Pelor, while not actually
agreeing with Pelor. Perhaps he will defect to a different faith, such as Kord, Avandra, or Erathis.
---
However, let's say instead that this was my own Paladin, whom I play in a Dungeon World game. I have an oath spelled out--I could get you the document, but it's longer than is really appropriate for pasting here (multiple paragraphs) and you probably don't care about the exact details. Suffice it to say that it is specific enough to have
something to say about situations of this kind. Not specifically
this situation, but "conflicts of law and good" etc. Something vaguely like it (though with a less-explicitly villainous victim) even happened in play.
My character would need to atone. His deity would clearly express his disappointment; my character as a palpable link to his deity (Bahamut) and thus does not need words or a sending to understand that something is wrong. The exact nature of the atonement would vary, but the one I had to do (for dishonorably slaying a fleeing opponent) involved a not-insignificant threat, as well as having to face this threat without the benefit of his spells. (My undead-killing sword, on the other hand, still worked just fine!
) In this case, it was a "you took a life you did not need to; now you must risk your own even though you don't have to" kind of deal. It actually spawned an interesting in-character theological discussion, albeit a brief one, and has formed a new cornerstone of the character's perspective on the divine. (His story has, essentially, involved a good deal of his own slow ascent to apotheosis, though he himself would see it more as...each struggle in a child's life is it learning to stand on its own, and the more he learns, the more he sees Bahamut as a stern but compassionate "father.")
