What would you do with this oathbreaking paladin?

[Kaji]

Ok,
My player is mad at me again. Here's the story:

He is a paladin of Osiris (FR). At one point, he is given a n arrow of dragon slaying by another paladin. This paladin makes him swear that he will not sell it, because then it could be bought by bad guys and used to kill good dragons. They must either use it themselves to kill bad dragons, or give it to other good creatures. Got it? Seemed simply to me.

Anyhoo, years later, they still have it. They have sent to meet an ancient blue dragon and get something from her (stuff, information?, they don't really know yet.). So, she comes out, and gives them a little roughing up to see how they take it. Our friend decides to pull out his arrow of dragon slaying, places it on the ground, and (wait for it)...offers it up as a sign of good will to the evil dragon.

I was stunned. I was shocked. I was aghast.

I also dropped his paladinhood on the spot.

Well, he got pretty hot about that one (I'm mean, my guy would have remembered about the oath, blah blah blah...)

The other party members did not forget. In fact, one tryed to stop him, but there was no time. I'm just looking to get a second set of eyes, as it were. I don't think I was too harsh, but sometimes it's easy to get carried away.

Any thoughts

 

[Haradim]

This would not qualify as a significant enough deviation from the CoC for me to penalize a character.

 

[Matafuego]

I kinda liked what the paladin did...
I just think the oath was weird, he didn't sell it nor get any personal gain from it, when he needed information, for a greater good I suppose, he did what he had to do to get in amicable terms with an evil dragon.

 

[purple knight]

Sounds to me like the oath was not to sell it, which he did not do. You said yourself that the characters did not know if they needed to slay the dragon or just obtain information from the dragon. Since the presence of a Paladin should indicate a good-aligned party, is it safe to assume that the information gained was to enable the party to further some greater good than to just slay one dragon?

SO, instead of simply taking the "typical" paladin route and slay all evil regardless of the overall goals, the Paladin chose to use the tools at his disposal to spare his comrades from a possibly life ending combat in order to get the information needed to accomplish the greater task. For doing what is needed to accomplish the greatest good and ensure the survival of his comrades to see that greater task done, his god rewards him by stripping his paladin hood away over an oath taken years ago over a single magic item. Would not the adherence of an oath also be suborninate to accomplishing the greater good, and such matters judged by the circumstance?

And I am not advocating that the ends always justifies the means, but in this case, the means was not an evil act.

 

[BSF]

Hm, the character decided to negotiate with Evil and broke an oath to another Paladin?

OK, from the SRD:

Code of Conduct: A paladin must be of lawful good alignment and loses all class abilities if she ever willingly commits an evil act.
Additionally, a paladin’s code requires that she respect legitimate authority, act with honor (not lying, not cheating, not using poison, and so forth), help those in need (provided they do not use the help for evil or chaotic ends), and punish those who harm or threaten innocents.
Associates: While she may adventure with characters of any good or neutral alignment, a paladin will never knowingly associate with evil characters, nor will she continue an association with someone who consistently offends her moral code. A paladin may accept only henchmen, followers, or cohorts who are lawful good.

There are a few considerations here. First of all, are all Blue Dragons Evil in your game? If so, then the PC is associating with an evil character. Do you consider breaking an Oath an affront to Honor, or just a really dumb mistake?

The other considertation is whether you and the player have really sat down and discussed the Code of Conduct. This is a crucial step whenever you have character with a Code of Honor, Code of Conduct, etc. Both of you need to have a fairly good expectation on what the limitations are and what will be construed as a code violation. It is quite possible to write a very acceptable code that is more lenient in some ways and much more strict in others for your campaign. There have been a ton of threads on the Paladin's Code here on EN World.

With the core rules, this particular situation, and no other mitigating circumstances, I sure would be tempted to yank the Paladin's status as well. The Paladin is trying to negotiate with an Evil creature that should be detroyed. That arrow should have been presented to the dragon by a bow. He has insulted another Paladin by breaking his trust and violating an Oath. All of those circumstances together would be bad.

 

[CrusaderX]

I don't think a lie should equal the stripping of his Paladinhood on the spot. The party had to deal with and interact with the dragon anyway.

I'd maybe drop a few Paladin abilities temporarily, to remind the player that breaking an old promise isn't good behaviour (and the Paladin should realize this, even if he has to reflect on it after the fact). But I wouldn't strip the Paladinhood away. I'm not very big on the whole "You do one thing wrong and BOOM! No more Paladin!" school of thought when it comes to these things.

Now if the Paladin worshipped some type of Dragon-hating deity, then that might be a different story. But if it's your average deity of justice or goodness or whatever, pushing the Paladin back in the right direction is better than yanking the entire rug out from under him for a transgression such as this.

 

[BSF]

I kinda liked what the paladin did...
I just think the oath was weird, he didn't sell it nor get any personal gain from it, when he needed information, for a greater good I suppose, he did what he had to do to get in amicable terms with an evil dragon.

I read the Oath as being a preventative measure to keep Evil from using an Arrow of Dragon Slaying to kill a Good Dragon. It certainly would not be unlikely that an Evil dragon would want to kill a Good dragon. So, the Paladin may have just equipped the Blue dragon with the perfect way to take out the Gold dragon that lives in the mountain range nearby. So, did the Paladin work to the greater good, or did he enable the Blue dragon to commit a greater evil?

That is why Paladins do not have associations with evil creatures. Evil creatures are not to be trusted as they will lie and cheat.

 

[CrusaderX]

Associates: While she may adventure with characters of any good or neutral alignment, a paladin will never knowingly associate with evil characters, nor will she continue an association with someone who consistently offends her moral code.

Associating with and interacting with are two different things. The quote from the PHB above is mentioned in the context of adventuring with others, not simply interacting with others.

A Paladin shouldn't adventure with an evil beings. But in a land such as the Forgotten Realms, a Paladin is going to interact with evil beings, without necessarily trying to automatically slay them all.

The Paladin is trying to negotiate with an Evil creature that should be detroyed.

Lawful Good does not equal Lawful Stupid. What if the Paladin in this case is 1st level and the dragon is a powerful adult creature? The Blue Dragon here could be more of an NPC used to advance the story rather than an actual foe meant for combat during this encounter.

 

[Hypersmurf]

It certainly would not be unlikely that an Evil dragon would want to kill a Good dragon. So, the Paladin may have just equipped the Blue dragon with the perfect way to take out the Gold dragon that lives in the mountain range nearby.

"Oh, no," says the Gold Dragon. "A Fort DC20 Death Effect against my +28 Fort Save and Death Ward. The perfect way to take me out."

"Gibber, gibber. Wake me up for dinner, would you?"

-Hyp.

 

[Matafuego]

Even if he were a 20th level Paladin. He needs information the Blue Dragon has, and I suppose it's for a greater good, otherwise not even a regular Fighter would be talking to an evil dragon...
If he slays it... no info...
As someone pointed out, Lawful Good isn't Stupid Stupid
And negotiating is not associating.
What if the Blue Dragon had ten villagers and asked to the paladin for the arrow in exchange of their lives?
Al those moral things are tricky questions, and I don't see the paladin action something that should be punished