D&D 5E Paladin oath. What constitutes willingly breaking your oath/code?

[Oofta]

Maybe in some sense you aren't responsible, but don't you want to be responsible?

And the things that you want, therefore are. So take credit for killing that Paladin! Who is going to say otherwise, a dead Paladin?




Well, as a basic principle people should be paying attention to traffic. But as a basic-er principle, people should always be looking out for opportunities to kill Paladins.






I mean, do players even know what they are doing half the time? Most players are like dogs chasing cars. They wouldn't know what to do if they caught one- they just, you know, do things. "I wanna roll some dice and see what happens! Whaddya mean, launching a fireball in a 10' x 10' room isn't a great idea? FIREBALLS ARE ALWAYS A GREAT IDEA!"

But all of this aside, how you approach it is up to you, but I would say that in the end, it doesn't matter much. Trying to import current legal standards (and ideas about culpability and mens rea) into a made-up, pseudo-medieval world doesn't make much sense, for the most part. I mean, for some time there was idea of guilt that was attached to the object (look up deodand some day if you're curious) and many early societies had a conception of what we would call "strict liability" for a lot of their criminal, civil, and ecclesiastical law- the idea that the consequence was your responsibility, regardless of your intent.

But does it matter? It's a game. No one (I HOPE!) is playing Lawyers and Liches.

So what you're saying is that if you push a paladin off a cliff so that it lands on a gnome, the paladin would be considered a deodand and literally given to god?

 

[Maxperson]

Can you not imagine an example with a dragon demanding an NPC where the paladin could have done more to save the npc?

Sure, but that doesn't matter. Every situation is different and in the example in this thread, the player/paladin believed that it was over. He tried his best and there was nothing more he could do.

 

[Maxperson]

But does it matter? It's a game. No one (I HOPE!) is playing Lawyers and Liches.

We played Liches and Loopholes.

 

[FrogReaver]

Sure, but that doesn't matter. Every situation is different and in the example in this thread, the player/paladin believed that it was over. He tried his best and there was nothing more he could do.

can an individual have unreasonable beliefs?

 

[Maxperson]

can an individual have unreasonable beliefs?

Sure, but that doesn't turn willing into unwilling or vice versa. If the paladin believed(reasonably or unreasonably) that he was doomed and had to comply, he was forced. It happened against his will. In this case, though, it was a very reasonable conclusion to come to.

 

[FrogReaver]

Sure, but that doesn't turn willing into unwilling or vice versa. If the paladin believed(reasonably or unreasonably) that he was doomed and had to comply, he was forced. It happened against his will. In this case, though, it was a very reasonable conclusion to come to.

See that’s where I disagree.

Believing something unreasonable isn’t a justification for anything

 

[Maxperson]

See that’s where I disagree.

Believing something unreasonable isn’t a justification for anything

I didn't say it was. I said it doesn't change willing vs. unwilling. However, as I said before, in this case it was very reasonable to believe that he had no choice.

 

[FrogReaver]

I didn't say it was. I said it doesn't change willing vs. unwilling. However, as I said before, in this case it was very reasonable to believe that he had no choice.

What does willing or unwilling matter if an
act is still unjustified?

 

[Hussar]

Can you not imagine an example with a dragon demanding an NPC where the paladin could have done more to save the npc?

But, again, at that point, we're just negotiating the price. You're allowing the paladin to try and fail, right? If the paladin does X, Y, and Z, but, none of those work, then he's okay. What if he just tries X, and Y but, not Z? How about only X? As soon as you allow for "try and fail" then, well, it doesn't really matter. How much is "enough" is a personal judgement and not a reason to cause the paladin to fall.

 

[FrogReaver]

But, again, at that point, we're just negotiating the price. You're allowing the paladin to try and fail, right? If the paladin does X, Y, and Z, but, none of those work, then he's okay. What if he just tries X, and Y but, not Z? How about only X? As soon as you allow for "try and fail" then, well, it doesn't really matter. How much is "enough" is a personal judgement and not a reason to cause the paladin to fall.

Not a personal judgement. Nothing is ever unreasonable to the one doing it.

If someone dies because you did or didn’t do something that was reasonable for you to do then you are at fault and rightfully so. Doesn’t matter how much you believe your actions to have been reasonable.