D&D 5E Paladin just committed murder - what should happen next?

[Nagol]

If I'm running the Paladin, and this happens, I say, "If you weren't afraid, you wouldn't be negotiating. Since we've already established that you are afraid, all that is left to establish is how afraid you ought to be."

Or/and...

"This is not a puny mortal that stands before you. I'm am a Paladin of the Order of the Ancients, and in this life or the next I will smite you if you come closer, foul beast."

Au contraire! I prefer my meat -- scared. Chomp.

Or/and...

"Hope prevails, or it doesn't. But if it fails, it will not be because I didn't stand in the light."

I mean seriously, it's a Paladin - one liners just roll of the tongue. This guy believes that he's ordained to roll natural 20's in this situation, and that if he dies, maybe it's just to show that he can be raised from the dead.

I'm more tongue-tied verbally than when typing. I'd never come up with stuff like that unless sitting down and thinking about it for minutes which doesn't happen often in the middle of a session.

How could anyone possibly argue that of course he should just run away in this situation and that there is nothing wrong with him doing so?

"You should have fought harder and this wouldn't have happened to you". "You were where? What were you thinking? Of course it's your fault!"

It's actually the DMs fault. The DM set up a situation where the paladin could do the heroic thing and probably die, do the clever thing if the player is fast enough with his mind and tongue... and possibly die anyway, or do the self-survival thing and get blamed for letting himself get into such a situation.

So in almost all the conceivable ways I can see this playing out... it ends with the player picking a new PC that's survivable next time.

 

[GameOgre]

It is always amazing to me how different people see alignment.

So to confirm, many people on this thread believe that if someone holds you at gunpoint, takes away someone from you, and you don’t try to get yourself killed by stopping them...that you are a murderer and an evil person.

Really? People really feel that way about this kind of situation?

It all depends doesn't it?
If you are a normal person on the street and you hear gunfire and people screaming, I am not going to hold it against you for not running in.

If you signed on the dotted line and trained and took an oath and made money off being the guy who runs in when you hear gunshots.....then yes. Yes I will hold it against you when you do not do the unbelievable brave and heroic thing and run towards the gunshots. When you do the very human thing of getting scared and hiding and letting other people face whatever dangers happen because you were too scared I will indeed hold it against you. I will understand, I will not hate you for it BUT...I will do everything I can to make sure you never let anyone else down like that again.

Being a Paladin of a good God is a lot like being signing on that dotted line. You are saying"Aid me Gods,because I hear battle and am charging in no matter what!" That's why you have power from the
Gods.

Now in the context of the game I do agree that the DM and player need to talk. I would try and talk BEFORE the action is done. A simply"Do you hand him over tot he dragon and go against every last instinct trained into you and every last code of your order?".

I mean the player is playing a game. Not living his life by a code. Give him a heads up.

 

[CleverNickName]

The people in this thread trying to play the victim blaming game for piss-poor DMing are disgusting. This scenario is like the worst combination of rocks fall everybody dies and the Orc baby massacre. Shame on you. Shame on all of you.

Take it easy now, the OP is a relative newcomer to these boards (at least their post-count is fairly low), and we don't have any grounds to pass judgment on what kind of DM they might be. We don't know anything about the adventure, the party and its resources, the events leading up to the dragon encounter, the alignment and backstory of this paladin, the experience of the players and DM, none of that.

Nobody is blaming or shaming anyone for anything. We are only responding to the OP's original question, "The paladin just committed murder, what should happen next?" Some of us (myself, for example) are of the opinion there should be negative consequences; others (you, for one) are of the opinion that there shouldn't be. There are no wrong answers, just different opinions.

 

[Celebrim]

And then the Adult Dragon says "No, I was being merciful. It seems that was a mistake," and then rocks fall - er, the Dragon attacks, and everybody dies ebcause the Dragon is CR 14 and the party's resources are spent.

The people in this thread trying to play the victim blaming game for piss-poor DMing are disgusting. This scenario is like the worst combination of rocks fall everybody dies and the Orc baby massacre. Shame on you. Shame on all of you.

You are conflating two very different things.

First, we are having a discussion of how a Paladin should behave in these circumstances and whether what this Paladin did was moral. That discussion is independent of what any of us think of the skills of the DM in this situation and whether it was good DMing to put the Paladin in that situation. This part of the discussion is an in game universe discussion.

Secondly, while we could have a discussion of the skill of the DM in this situation, it would be a conversation based on insufficient data and perhaps even more importantly, based around an argument from the counter-factual. That part of the discussion, which perhaps is its own thread, would be a discussion about the metagame.

As for that discussion, the truth is we have absolutely no idea what might have happened had the Paladin done something else. The DM could have been planning to have the dragon flee, or reinforcements to arrive unexpectedly, or some sort of divine intervention, or to have the PC be raised from the dead by an ally/mentor character that shows up. Or heck, the Paladin could rolled 5 20's to the dragon's 5 1's. The DM could have had a narrativist perspective where you challenge character beliefs, and then you play to the cue that they give you from that challenge and that is good DMing. We don't know. All of that could be potentially good scenes, and in any event, you aren't guaranteed to win. Martyrdom is a possibility that is always out there when you play a Paladin, and we really don't know what (if any) mistakes were made by players that put them in this pinch.

In short, we should proceed from a principle of charity before we start making claims that the DM needs to have their life choked out of them by your bare avenging hands.

 

[MonsterEnvy]

Honestly alignment does not matter at all for this discussion only if they broke the oath. Which given the Oaths of the Ancients I would say they did.

 

[Celebrim]

Au contraire! I prefer my meat -- scared. Chomp.

Unless this is intended to be a twist, that's a terrible one liner, because the scared meat here clearly isn't the hypothetical Paladin.


Now, if that's a twist, then if your dragon is being honest then he was with his earlier bargain deceiving the Paladin and intended to eat him if and only if he shows fear.

In this version of the fight, I guess the dragon chomps the terrified NPC and leaves anyway, taking trivial damage from the Paladin and now we can play out crisis of faith/renewed oaths sort of scenes?

Or perhaps in this version the Paladin's heroic speech convinces the NPC to buck up, and since neither person was suitably seasoned with fear, the dragon goes elsewhere in the buffet for food?

It's actually the DMs fault. The DM set up a situation where the paladin could do the heroic thing and probably die, do the clever thing if the player is fast enough with his mind and tongue... and possibly die anyway, or do the self-survival thing and get blamed for letting himself get into such a situation.

So in almost all the conceivable ways I can see this playing out... it ends with the player picking a new PC that's survivable next time.

And?

 

[GameOgre]

A encounter you can't win is one of the best things about D&D. Do you Die? Do you go around it? Do you go under it? Do you instead make it your encounter and now you have new followers?

I'm laughing at people expecting the game world to be any more fair than the real world is....I mean I guess more power to you.....whatever floats your boat.

I have never played the game that way or know anyone else who has. No win situations happen to us all the time. That's when we run away, bluff our butts off or active backup plan B,C and D.

or just get real dead real fast....happens.

 

[Mort]

Oath of the Ancients

Kindle the Light. Through your acts of mercy, kindness, and forgiveness, kindle the light of hope in the world, beating back despair.
Shelter the Light. Where there is good, beauty, love, and laughter in the world, stand against the wickedness that would swallow it. Where life flourishes, stand against the forces that would render it barren.
Preserve Your Own Light. Delight in song and laughter, in beauty and art. If you allow the light to die in your own heart, you can't preserve it in the world.
Be the Light. Be a glorious beacon for all who live in despair. Let the light of your joy and courage shine forth in all your deeds.

So stripped of flowery language:

1. Be kind, mercifull and forgiving. Through these acts, inspire hope in others.

2. Stand against evil and those that would do evil. Protect life.

3. Have fun and spread joy ( definitely different from oath of devotion here, a hedonist paladin)

4. Show courage in all things.

So in this scenario (leaving aside, for the moment, the merit of the scenario) the paladin very clearly violated tenants 2 and 4 of his oath. He very well may be in divine hot water.

Next: while I don't love the scenario, as presented it reads very much - heads I win, tails you lose for the paladin - I like the players response even less.

It was, basically, "ok, here you go." There should have been some attempt at deflection and resolution other than death of the victim (I realize the player had little to go on).

At the very least the player should have broken character and said something like "seriously? A no win?" And the DM could have engaged in a conversation re: expectations.

 

[CamHallulis]

As for that discussion, the truth is we have absolutely know idea what might have happened had the Paladin done something else. The DM could have been planning to have the dragon flee, or reinforcements to arrive unexpectedly, or some sort of divine intervention, or to have the PC be raised from the dead by an ally/mentor character that shows up. Or heck, the Paladin could rolled 5 20's to the dragon's 5 1's. The DM could have had a narrativist perspective where you challenge character beliefs, and then you play to the cue that they give you from that challenge and that is good DMing.

The DM could have planned this as a test of faith for the paladin and if he had stood his ground gave him a huge reward or enlightenment have occurred. IMO the deity the paladin aligns with should have a “Come to (insert deity name here) moment” kind of a “Oh ye is little faith” sermon persay.

 

[Mort]

The DM could have planned this as a test of faith for the paladin and if he had stood his ground gave him a huge reward of enlightenment have occurred. IMO the deity the paladin aligns with should have a “Come to (insert deity name here) moment” kind of a “Oh ye is little faith” sermon persay.

Yes, it must be remembered, this isn't the real world!

Here the Paladin's conviction (a) God stands with him is actually true!

Now is that enough to save him from the hungry Adult Dragon? Maybe not, but if not, the paladin then gets his eternal reward in the realm of his God, so still a win.