Maxperson
Morkus from Orkus
Seriously? You're now arguing that a paladin cannot do an act which is neutral. It's good or nothing? It must suck to have to starve to death, because eating is not a good act.
D&D 5E Paladin just committed murder - what should happen next?
- Thread starter firstkyne
- Start date
Maxperson
Morkus from Orkus
Um. The paladin's situation was...
Dragon: You may go and I won't kill you, but only if you give me the NPC.
That's the same situation. It's a horribly justified choice where the NPC is going to die anyway, but if you don't give up the NPC(killed before being sacrificed), the world might be destroyed(a hell portal opening on Earth).
Maxperson
Morkus from Orkus
That and Cap has done some questionable things. Some things on this list are not what you would call being a pure paladin.
14 Surprisingly Dark Moments in Captain America Comics
It’s a well-known fact that violence in comic books has long been a controversial topic. Brutal vigilantes like The Punisher blur the line between good and evil, spreading gore and carnage across the page. However, there remain a few superheroes who can still be described as wholesome. Chief...
www.ranker.com
I don't think so - I think I've said that the paladin has acted wrongly, has been dishonourably and has fallen short of the standard/code he is committed to upholding. I'll admit that I haven't gone back through every one of my posts over 10+ pages, but I did scan a couple of recent pages and the only thing I saw that I said was evil was shooting hostage A to save hostage B.
I never said the paladiin should kill himself. I did query why he didn't offer himself instead. Or force the dragon's hand
I'm not putting forward a metric. And I'm not saying anything about the GM. I'm talking about what I see as the morality of the situation, taking as a premise the paladin's framework of a morality of duty and an ethic of honour.
How is "leave X and you can go" an ultimatum? Or a threat to kill?
My understanding of the situation is that the paladin persuaded the dragon to spare him because of his importance to saving the world (which includes the dragon).
TaranTheWanderer
Legend
I came to this discussion late but would like to give my two copper pieces:
I definitely think handing over the NPC was against the tennents of Oath of the Ancients. Just look at the reginal effects dragons have on the land. They are usually a blight to the land. Their very presence causes fear and hopelessness.
As a DM, if I were to present a player with the OP's situation, I would tell him as much. Then I would discuss, out of character, how this might impact the character if he were to give in to the dragon's demands. But I would also tell the player that the character knows it's odd the dragon would offer them a choice as opposed to just taking what it wants:
TL;DR: I'd have hinted or told the player there was another way out of this situation. I'd go so far as to tell the player that this was designed to test the character's Oaths. Maybe the outcome is dragon takes the NPC anyways and the Paladin is wracked with guilt for being unable to save him. Nonetheless, it leads to interesting Role playing.
I definitely think handing over the NPC was against the tennents of Oath of the Ancients. Just look at the reginal effects dragons have on the land. They are usually a blight to the land. Their very presence causes fear and hopelessness.
As a DM, if I were to present a player with the OP's situation, I would tell him as much. Then I would discuss, out of character, how this might impact the character if he were to give in to the dragon's demands. But I would also tell the player that the character knows it's odd the dragon would offer them a choice as opposed to just taking what it wants:
TL;DR: I'd have hinted or told the player there was another way out of this situation. I'd go so far as to tell the player that this was designed to test the character's Oaths. Maybe the outcome is dragon takes the NPC anyways and the Paladin is wracked with guilt for being unable to save him. Nonetheless, it leads to interesting Role playing.
Hussar
Legend
JUst teasing this one out.
You realize that when I say, "kill himself", I mean challenge the dragon in any way? That any challenge to the dragon, that "forces the dragon's hand" means that the paladin will die.
Yes, I'm not being overly pedantic and writing out "paladin should continue to talk to the dragon and find some way to save the man until the dragon gets fed up and eats the paladin" every time. I'm just shortening it to "paladin commits suicide".
Again, remember, the paladin has NO chance of survival here. No chance of winning this fight. None. We effectively have put a gun in his ear and said, "if you don't leave, you die".
I'm frankly shocked to be honest, how far people are willing to go to place moral blame on the paladin. It's rather horrifying to be honest.
L
lowkey13
Guest
*Deleted by user*
I'm done with this thread. It hasn't gone anywhere for a long time.
My advice to the OP or anyone else in the same situation is simple. Talk to the player. If they say they thought they had done the best they could and saw no way to save the NPC, believe them. Learn from your mistakes if this was not supposed to be a choice between the lesser of two evils. If you thought there was a way to save the NPC be sure to clue the player in on that.
Read the PHB and the section on "Breaking Your Oath". Paladins do not need to be perfect, they can't save everyone, they are allowed to not read your mind that they could have talked down the dragon. Not all oaths are the same. Give them a slap on the wrist if you want. Do not tell them they are now an oath breaker paladin. If this is something that continues to happen, talk to the player about what their oath means and work something out.
As far as everyone stating that all paladins must be lawful stupid death before imagined dishonor types that must sacrifice themselves in futile attempts to save everyone: it's a game. It's supposed to be fun, not impossible. I think the whole "martyrdom with no possible perceived gain" theory offensively glorifies suicide. Paladins in this edition aren't particularly powerful compared to other classes. The rules specifically allow for minor transgressions. If you tell people how they must run their PC, don't be surprised if no one plays a paladin.
Have a good one.
My advice to the OP or anyone else in the same situation is simple. Talk to the player. If they say they thought they had done the best they could and saw no way to save the NPC, believe them. Learn from your mistakes if this was not supposed to be a choice between the lesser of two evils. If you thought there was a way to save the NPC be sure to clue the player in on that.
Read the PHB and the section on "Breaking Your Oath". Paladins do not need to be perfect, they can't save everyone, they are allowed to not read your mind that they could have talked down the dragon. Not all oaths are the same. Give them a slap on the wrist if you want. Do not tell them they are now an oath breaker paladin. If this is something that continues to happen, talk to the player about what their oath means and work something out.
As far as everyone stating that all paladins must be lawful stupid death before imagined dishonor types that must sacrifice themselves in futile attempts to save everyone: it's a game. It's supposed to be fun, not impossible. I think the whole "martyrdom with no possible perceived gain" theory offensively glorifies suicide. Paladins in this edition aren't particularly powerful compared to other classes. The rules specifically allow for minor transgressions. If you tell people how they must run their PC, don't be surprised if no one plays a paladin.
Have a good one.
Last edited:
TaranTheWanderer
Legend
One of the favoured pass-times of evil dragons is tormenting Paladins with moral dilemma...
Similar Threads
