Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 7819456" data-attributes="member: 22779">Heh.  I should apologize for my own behavior.  I tend to get really, really snarky the longer a discussion goes on.  Particularly when you have folks jumping into the middle of the conversation who haven't bothered actually reading the thread or the background information the thread is based on.  My patience gets way too thin.  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f61b.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":p" title="Stick out tongue    :p"  data-smilie="7"data-shortname=":p" />As far as the check goes, well, persuasion isn't mind control.  This is quite possibly the best outcome a persuasion check could result in.  Sure, the DM could rule that the dragon just buggers off since the player rolled the persuasion check, but, that's not the only possible result.  IOW, a failed check just results in both dying.  A successful check results in the possibility of the paladin walking away.  The DM could rule that there is just no way the dragon is letting both walk away.  It's not an unreasonable result.The dragon is hungry.  It wants an easy meal.  Unconscious NPC is easy meal and the dragon just can't be asked to kill the paladin in the process.  Which can mean that the best result the paladin could hope for is not being turned into a high fiber snack.  Not that that's the only possibility, but it is a plausible one.Which returns us back to the paladin - did he violate his oath? Now, I've been clear here and saying that an Oath of Devotion paladin would get a really different result from me.   But Oath of Ancients?  With their tenets that specifically say to preserve your light?  I'd argue that suicidal charges is actually against their oath.Not that that's the only interpretation. But, that's how I would interpret it.</blockquote>

Verification