Man in the Funny Hat
Hero
It is irrelevant whether the paladin really committed murder or not. That isn't the issue that matters. People will have differing opinions on whether they did or didn't because people have differing ideas of what various alignments and actions really mean, and what obligations paladins have above and beyond even all that. The issue that matters is whether the player knew the difference and whether what the player understood to be permissible agreed with what the DM understood to be permissible. The rules/rulings on that subject are the DM's to dictate. Not the books. Not the other players. Not an internet forum. If you haven't explained things about this to the players that YOU believe players at your table should know, it is not the players fault if they then violate your "double-secret alignment probation". It isn't their fault if they use their own solutions - even if those solutions are utterly self-serving and the players actually do know better. You left it up to them. The DM really doesn't get to say, "They SHOULD have known." Either it's black and white or it isn't. If it isn't then the DM is responsible for explaining where the line is at in all those shades of grey.
It seems clear the player did not know how YOU interpret that action. I mean, is the player in question waiting and wondering why you haven't ALREADY told them their character falls? If they knew that was going to be the consequence - and a paladin committing MURDER has OBVIOUS consequences - wouldn't they be expecting you to "throw the book at them" immediately? Of course they would. They knew it was the wrong thing to do and what the consequences would be, but did it anyway. If the player ISN'T just waiting in puzzlement wondering why you haven't lowered the boom already then isn't it most likely because they honestly thought this was a reasonable thing to do (even if it was a seemingly callous thing to place their own life in a position of higher importance to the world than that of the NPC)? Does the players assertion that they thought their contribution to the WORLD-saving adventure was more important than that NPC's life not hold any water with you? Why wouldn't they know that?
It can only be the DM's fault that the player would not know that. If a player is making that drastic a violation of their alignment you can't just let it happen. Players don't just spontaneously KNOW what the DM knows. They have to be TOLD. If you said NOTHING at that moment to the player then whether you knew it or not you effectively left it up to the player to make the decision about whether that action was right or wrong, allowable or unforgivable, practical (if nonetheless tragic and seemingly callous) or just cowardly. Alignment is there to GUIDE players to consistent and sensible actions for their characters. When players don't seem to be following that guide you don't just let it all go off the tracks. You slow down and find out what the problem is.
I say the player gets a pass. COMPLETELY. It is the DM's responsibility to be absolutely clear whether players are willingly taking on consequences of such actions, or simply haven't been told what your rules are on such things. If you fail to tell them - both before such things ever come up in the game, and again at the moment they do come up in the game - then BY YOUR SILENCE you leave it to them to decide, even if their decision utterly disregards what you wanted or expected, or what the rules say, or what any internet forum says. Players don't have ESP. Don't punish them in-game for not having it. Don't punish them for resorting to their own ideas of what their PC's may/should or may not/should not do when you don't correct them when they obviously take actions counter to what you expect.
It seems clear the player did not know how YOU interpret that action. I mean, is the player in question waiting and wondering why you haven't ALREADY told them their character falls? If they knew that was going to be the consequence - and a paladin committing MURDER has OBVIOUS consequences - wouldn't they be expecting you to "throw the book at them" immediately? Of course they would. They knew it was the wrong thing to do and what the consequences would be, but did it anyway. If the player ISN'T just waiting in puzzlement wondering why you haven't lowered the boom already then isn't it most likely because they honestly thought this was a reasonable thing to do (even if it was a seemingly callous thing to place their own life in a position of higher importance to the world than that of the NPC)? Does the players assertion that they thought their contribution to the WORLD-saving adventure was more important than that NPC's life not hold any water with you? Why wouldn't they know that?
It can only be the DM's fault that the player would not know that. If a player is making that drastic a violation of their alignment you can't just let it happen. Players don't just spontaneously KNOW what the DM knows. They have to be TOLD. If you said NOTHING at that moment to the player then whether you knew it or not you effectively left it up to the player to make the decision about whether that action was right or wrong, allowable or unforgivable, practical (if nonetheless tragic and seemingly callous) or just cowardly. Alignment is there to GUIDE players to consistent and sensible actions for their characters. When players don't seem to be following that guide you don't just let it all go off the tracks. You slow down and find out what the problem is.
I say the player gets a pass. COMPLETELY. It is the DM's responsibility to be absolutely clear whether players are willingly taking on consequences of such actions, or simply haven't been told what your rules are on such things. If you fail to tell them - both before such things ever come up in the game, and again at the moment they do come up in the game - then BY YOUR SILENCE you leave it to them to decide, even if their decision utterly disregards what you wanted or expected, or what the rules say, or what any internet forum says. Players don't have ESP. Don't punish them in-game for not having it. Don't punish them for resorting to their own ideas of what their PC's may/should or may not/should not do when you don't correct them when they obviously take actions counter to what you expect.