D&D 5E Player agency and Paladin oath.

[auburn2]

So to start with I don't like Paladin PCs. Did not like them in 1Eor 3E, 5E is a little better but they still have that silly oath. They are great for that knucklehead NPC.

We have an oath of devotion Paladin in a game I am DM ing. His Deity is Tyr. He is Lawful good, the rest of the party is Chaotic (CN fighter, CG warlock/rogue and CN Barbarian). As an aside I am not a fan of CN players either but that is another topic.

Well there is constantly friction in the party as to how to handle things. For example they typically want to kill prisoners after interogating and promising to let them go, they have no problem lying and well acting Chaotic. The Paladin tries to role play his character with his oath but it is causing a lot of friction. It came to a head in the last game when they let a stone Giant go after they got done arguing with him. The two CN characters wanted to kill him because they thought he would come back and attack them. the Paladin stood his ground and said no way and drew a line in the sand, the CG warlock rogue sided with the Palidin but would have been fine with "looking the other way" if the Paladin did not make a big deal out of it. OF course they were ambushed by said giant and friends later that session. It could have been a TPK, and would have but I played the Giants poorly in battle, making some bad decisions and the party scraped out of it (barely).

I am really having trouble with this because I think in real life those characters would just part ways - the Paladin can't accept such behavior and the others can't stand the goody-goody Paladin. Of course in the real world parting ways means an end to our game. If it wasn't for his oath I think he would just relent and basically look at alignment as a guideline or belief instead of a code to live by.

 

[MGibster]

The paladin's oath isn't the problem here; it's a lack of communication between the players in regards to expected behavior of the PCs. And this is a pretty common problem in my experience. In the last campaign I played in, I was an LG Warlock of the Celestial and we were investigating a town whose residents had recently fled in the wake of a giant attack. One of the other characters decided to help himself to a suit of mail and my character balked at the theft. We went back and forth, he wouldn't budge, and I was faced with the dilemma of derailing the campaign with a stupid conflict or just shrugging my shoulders and ignoring it. We should have discussed expectations before the campaign started but we did not.

Before the campaign starts, it's best for all involved to sit down and have a chat. What does everyone expect from the campaign? Are your character's vicious mercenaries, stalwart protectors of good for the sake of good, or somewhere in-between? It's no fun if only one player wants to be heroic while the others want to play heartless cutthroats.

 

[bedir than]

It's time for your CN PCs to admit that they are evil.

 

[Jediking]

“OF course they were ambushed by said giant and friends later that session.”

That justifies the Chaotic players actions, and now the entire party knows to kill anyone they interrogate or else it will bite them in the ass.

it doesn’t sound like playing a LG (Paladin) character is supported in your game, by either the players or DM. That is a discussion to be had by everyone outside of gameplay

 

[iserith]

In an ideal situation, the paladin's player puts the character in the position of being able to look the other way when it comes to the other players' characters actions. And vice versa.

Only very important and dramatic conflict that will lead to character development should be the thing that gets screen time in my view. Otherwise it just leads to game-delaying debates and potentially dissatisfaction.

There's a whole world of villains and monsters to get into conflicts with - maybe don't look for conflict among your allies, I say.

 

[auburn2]

“OF course they were ambushed by said giant and friends later that session.”

That justifies the Chaotic players actions, and now the entire party knows to kill anyone they interrogate or else it will bite them in the ass.

it doesn’t sound like playing a LG (Paladin) character is supported in your game, by either the players or DM. That is a discussion to be had by everyone outside of gameplay

No first of all they have interrogated plenty of people previously and not had it bite them in the ass at all, in every other case they were weaker though. They would have been attacked by the giants anyway, although they would not have been ambushed if the giants did not know ahead of time. I think a party full of LG Paladin does what is right even knowing this is a likely conclusion (which they didn't really know at the time).

 

[MGibster]

In an ideal situation, the paladin's player puts the character in the position of being able to look the other way when it comes to the other players' characters actions. And vice versa.

That's less than ideal as the paladin's player likely doesn't want to be treated as lawful stupid.

There's a whole world of villains and monsters to get into conflicts with - maybe don't look for conflict among your allies, I say.

Yeah, better that everyone's on the same page before the game starts.

 

[lingual]

The Chaotic characters are evil. Sounds basically like a paladin with two CE characters. The CG characters are not Good since they are basically complicit. Superman wouldn't work well with the Suicide Squad. I suppose if they hate each other it's working as intended? Can the Paladin be a relative or childhood friend of one of the CN/E players? That would at least introduce some bond of loyalty to keep them together.

 

[iserith]

That's less than ideal as the paladin's player likely doesn't want to be treated as lawful stupid.

I don't know what that means. There are ways to just avoid most situations and only confront the situations that will result in the most character development and entertainment for everyone. One could argue that struggling with the oath is the whole point of having one, from a dramatic standpoint.

 

[Tonguez]

“OF course they were ambushed by said giant and friends later that session.”

That justifies the Chaotic players actions, and now the entire party knows to kill anyone they interrogate or else it will bite them in the ass.

it doesn’t sound like playing a LG (Paladin) character is supported in your game, by either the players or DM. That is a discussion to be had by everyone outside of gameplay

question for OP, why was the giant ambush inevitable? Why did the giant being let go by the paladin decide to reciprocate by letting the party pass unmolested.?

seems to me that the Paladin played to character, but the other players decided against mercy and the DM chose to punish it.

killing prisoners isn’t chaotic as the warlock proves so making that a standard is flawed

I agree players need to talk about their expectations
Characters need much clearer motivations

and Alignment sucks