PDA

View Full Version : Paladin Problems



Kingscourt
2011-02-07, 08:46 PM
So, I've been playing a 3.5 custom DnD campaign with a few friends of mine, as a Half-elf Paladin of Heironeous traveling with a LG Dwarf Cleric of Moradin, a TN human wizard, and another TN Dwarf fighter. Basically, my DM has decided to challenge my character with a large number of essentially moral dilemmas for the Paladin to face, which of course brings into question the extent of the Paladin's code, and the proper course of action in each situation. Of course I understand a certain amount of this comes from the DMs interpretation of Paladin's and what kind of moral restrictions they have, but I figured someone around here could help me figure out how to approach the problems facing my Paladin.

So far, we've been stuck in these mountains up north (in the winter), and are currently in the Port City of Darador, where we've discovered their leader (Daragon) has formed an alliance with a large Orc/Ogre tribe in the mountains, and are cutting of the food supplies from each town, by sending soldiers to collect all the food for 'rationing', and then using the Orcs (as well as some White Dragons) to block off the paths between towns. Meanwhile, all of the food has gone to Darador, and part of it is being used to keep the citizens happy (The city is run in a rather, psuedo-communist manner, everyone getting paid in food and shelter for doing their jobs, while anyone who speaks against the Government is sent to the mines forever) and ignorant of the fact that any of the other villages in the mountains are starving.

On top of that, my Paladin is currently traveling with a mysterious (openly evil (I detected it on him/her)) figure, but is unable to defeat him/her due to the fact that they are the only one who knows how to navigate an ancient Elven underground 'web-way', though there have been attempts to do so without our Guide. My question for anyone who has bothered to read all of this (And keep in mind my character is only 5th level at the moment):

-How to deal with the leader of the city Darador, and convince the people that they other towns were/are starving (keeping in mind the Government will silence anyone speaking out against them)
-How to deal with knowingly traveling with an evil character (though it explicitly states in the Player's handbook that they would not)
-Doing all of this while keeping a LG alignment, I'm trying to play my Paladin as more free-spirited (Well, as free-spirited as a Paladin can get) elf-like Paladin, without being overzealous and suicidal/rash.

VeisuItaTyhjyys
2011-02-07, 08:57 PM
In a later book, the "DO NOT ASSOCIATE WITH EBIL OMG" rule is softened somewhat, to explain that while circumstance may necessitate temporarily working alongside less-than-savory elements, it's not something the paladin likes and is something the paladin should abandon the second a better option presents itself.

Is everyone in the city's leadership equally corrupt? Find out if the guards know what's going on outside. Telling the people probably won't do much good, and paladins are usually more about changing the system from within than instigating an uprising. Convincing the people of the city, or their leaders, to give up the cushy status afforded by stealing others' food is probably harder.

Callista
2011-02-07, 09:08 PM
Yes, I would focus on trying to change the system rather than leading an uprising--those people are hungry and will just get slaughtered if they try anything; so that's not good strategy. You may have to engage in... ah... "aggressive negotiations"... but the only way to help everybody is to hit the problem at the center, with the leaders who are taking the people's food. Try diplomacy and fact-finding first. See where the corruption is and try to deal with it--maybe there are some key people you could depose to end this thing. Does your party have good sense Motive and Gather Information? Both those will be quite useful.

Your character is also probably somewhat rich, at 5th level; you may be able to spare enough to help at least a few people stay alive. Try to focus on kids, if you can; they're the most vulnerable and need the least food per person to stay alive. But unless your character is too foolish to think ahead, don't have him give everything away--he can't stop the famine if he can't survive himself.

Speaking of food: Chances are your party is suffering from the food shortage too... Depending on your DM's ruling, though, you may be able to survive on very little food for quite a while--you only have to eat every three days to avoid damage, and nowhere does it says you have to get a full meal. Your party cleric can also keep your party on their legs without having to deplete the locals' food supply since he can purify food and water magically. And remember that your character is immune to disease and thus capable of eating normally inedible things without becoming sick (hope you like roasted rat...).

This reminds me a great deal of the Russian famine of 1921 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_famine_of_1921)... is your DM perhaps a history buff?

Asheram
2011-02-07, 09:21 PM
Remember, the problem in front of you instead of what might become a problem. That's the paladin way.
The person might be evil but unless you've got proof that they've done evil you needn't do anything. Remember; being good is about giving help, acceptance and understanding. Leave the overzealousness to the Lawful Neutrals.

Now, to your problem with the towns.

What I would do in your shoes is to visit Darador and research if they're keeping these rules about sending people to the mines because of tradition, standard policy or because they just hate their people.
Do what you can, just remember that just because a paladin is lawful good, he doesn't have to have a stick up his bum. Change what you can, but some changes must come over time.

Kingscourt
2011-02-07, 09:44 PM
In a later book, the "DO NOT ASSOCIATE WITH EBIL OMG" rule is softened somewhat, to explain that while circumstance may necessitate temporarily working alongside less-than-savory elements, it's not something the paladin likes and is something the paladin should abandon the second a better option presents itself.

Is everyone in the city's leadership equally corrupt? Find out if the guards know what's going on outside. Telling the people probably won't do much good, and paladins are usually more about changing the system from within than instigating an uprising. Convincing the people of the city, or their leaders, to give up the cushy status afforded by stealing others' food is probably harder.

I haven't had much of a chance to figure out a lot about the City's leadership, I've had to keep a low profile in it because we killed a White Dragon that was causing snow to block a pass in order to get there... so I don't think their leader is too keen on talking to me. Though that's a good idea, if I could find a few people of high power that don't agree with Daragon...



Your party cleric can also keep your party on their legs without having to deplete the locals' food supply since he can purify food and water magically. And remember that your character is immune to disease and thus capable of eating normally inedible things without becoming sick (hope you like roasted rat...).


Yeah, soon our Cleric will be able to conjure food/water, so that'll help a lot (we've got get our spells back to spam him with lesser restorations though, he's at 2 str ATM...) Also that immune to disease thing is both hilarious and disgusting and something I will now exploit frequently.



What I would do in your shoes is to visit Darador and research if they're keeping these rules about sending people to the mines because of tradition, standard policy or because they just hate their people.
Do what you can, just remember that just because a paladin is lawful good, he doesn't have to have a stick up his bum. Change what you can, but some changes must come over time.

The mine's are more or less new, and many people are sent there for essentially no reason until they die, though they do keep actual prisoners in there too.


Well anyways, thanks so much for the responses guys, I think really I'm just trying to learn how to act correctly with a Lawful Good alignment (most of my past characters have been Chaotic and more selfish), and figure out what the 'correct' course of action is. While I have yet to prove the Daragon (the leader of the city) is officially evil (he more than likely has other motives for this) taking him out of power and restoring food to all the towns in the mountains, as well as combating the Orc/Ogre problem seems like the best course of action for now. Of course, I'll also have to deal with the people's reaction to me overthrowing their leader, so I'll need some allies from within the City to back me up...

Callista
2011-02-07, 10:08 PM
Don't worry about your character's alignment so much as his personality--this is the kind of person who would want to become a paladin, who would find the paladin's code attractive, probably even reassuring, and desirable to follow. His main goals are probably some personalized version of creating an orderly society in which everyone is treated with respect and decency. If you play that kind of a character, it's not nearly such a challenge--sometimes I think half the problem with paladins is that people try to play chaotic characters inexplicably bound by a paladin's code, and of course that's not gonna work out. Paladins are high-charisma people who tend to be generally all-around altruistic, trustworthy characters. They may not be the life of the party, but most non-evil societies know that if you're suffering injustice, you can trust a paladin to do his best to make it right.

Hawriel
2011-02-07, 10:16 PM
Why are these moral delemas only problems for you? The Cleric of Moradin (LG god) is also LG. this character should be right there with you to help salve these problems.

Callista
2011-02-07, 10:54 PM
The cleric's probably trying to solve them too; they're traveling together, after all.

bloodtide
2011-02-07, 11:08 PM
-How to deal with the leader of the city Darador, and convince the people that they other towns were/are starving (keeping in mind the Government will silence anyone speaking out against them)

There is nothing your character can do. At his current level and all, he can't take on a city. He won't like it, but he can't do anything. If he tries to start a rebellion, it won't get anywhere. The best thing he can do is take his time and keep his eye open for something he can use. and plan to come back someday and take out the government and ruler.



-How to deal with knowingly traveling with an evil character (though it explicitly states in the Player's handbook that they would not)

This is tricky. The PH says 'pallys never hang out with evil folks'. And sure that sounds great, on paper. But in the real world, what do you do when you encounter a evil person you can't kill and must work with?

You can look at the paladin as more like a cop transporting a criminal. You are there to keep an eye on the criminal, to make sure he does no evil as long as your around.

You can also say that he does not 'travel' with the evil person, they are just 'on the same road'.

CapnVan
2011-02-08, 01:34 AM
There is nothing your character can do. At his current level and all, he can't take on a city. He won't like it, but he can't do anything. If he tries to start a rebellion, it won't get anywhere. The best thing he can do is take his time and keep his eye open for something he can use. and plan to come back someday and take out the government and ruler.

QFT. There's nothing in the paladin code that demands a useless gesture that can only end in ignominious defeat. You aren't required to march out and find the first red wyrm that you can and challenge it. LG gods don't like it when their paladins get slaughtered for being stupid.

In this case, there's nothing to be done by a 5th level party *you're not going to overcome an entire city on your own. However, you can take part in the conflict by concentrating on removing some of Darador's allies, as well as developing links with the people who are suffering, who may, when later, you are powerful enough to take on a city, prove useful allies.


This is tricky. The PH says 'pallys never hang out with evil folks'. And sure that sounds great, on paper. But in the real world, what do you do when you encounter a evil person you can't kill and must work with?

But this isn't real life that's the whole point. The alignment system doesn't reflect the real world it's a D&D construct. As such, what applies in RL very specifically isn't in play in D&D.

OP doesn't make it clear why the presence of this evil individual is required, other than as a guide through a particular area. Is getting through that area absolutely crucial to Good? Are you positive that there isn't anyone else in the campaign world who knows the path? Why are you there? Just general adventuring? Trying to develop a path for food to be supplied to cut-off villages?

There are probably circumstances under which a dutiful paladin will associate with an evil NPC *they should be exceptionally rare and of short duration.


You can look at the paladin as more like a cop transporting a criminal. You are there to keep an eye on the criminal, to make sure he does no evil as long as your around.

That's a misunderstanding of what a paladin is. He's not a police officer, employed to maintain order, and more specifically, defend property rights.

A paladin is a holy warrior, dedicating his very life, and everything in it, to the specific cause of Law & Good. He lives with absolute certainty of the righteousness of his cause and the reward for his dedication.

It's not enough to simply momentarily pause the march of evil in the world. It has to be actively combatted.

CapnVan
2011-02-08, 01:43 AM
Basically, my DM has decided to challenge my character with a large number of essentially moral dilemmas for the Paladin to face, which of course brings into question the extent of the Paladin's code, and the proper course of action in each situation.

There are plenty of DMs who love to do this. For reasons that continue to surpass my understanding, they'll generally ignore the alignment system and let players do whatever they want, unless they choose to play a paladin.

As, I believe it was Hawriel, mentioned: Where's your cleric in all of this? He's LG, too. Why is he associating with an evil individual?

Is that individual benefitting from his clerical talents? Why is Moradin allowing him to do so? Moradin has no interest in providing healing to an evil NPC evil folk have their own gods for that. Divine spells are not a guaranteed way of getting whatever a cleric wants if his prayer for cure light wounds is being used in a way that his god doesn't approve, that spell ought to simply fizzle and be lost. If the cleric continues to attempt to act in a way that his god wouldn't like, it's amazing how quickly his prayers won't be answered.

As I said, you really didn't give much detail on that. But if your DM is focusing on you as a paladin, and not the other PCs, feel free to have a chat with him and ask why.

The point of DMing a paladin is not, actually, to get him to fall, despite what many DMs seem to think.

Quellian-dyrae
2011-02-08, 02:28 AM
Am I correct that Darador's alliance with the orcs and ogres is generally either not well known or even actively kept secret? If so, go thrash the orcs and ogres. Return to the city with full fanfare, reporting how you defeated the foul creatures who were blocking off the kingdom's roads and stealing food from the neighboring towns. Darador won't be able to openly move against you* without blowing his cover - you might even be able to get a reward out of him (well maybe not you, but perhaps the neutrals in your party). Subtly moving against you is still possible of course, but you're the PCs, random assassination attempts are to be expected.

If it's not a secret, then your best move is probably going to be to find someone higher up than him, if there is such a person, and proving his corruption, or failing that, holding off until you have sufficient levels to overpower him and his forces...which probably goes right back to taking on the orcs and ogres.

Callista
2011-02-08, 05:50 AM
That's a misunderstanding of what a paladin is. He's not a police officer, employed to maintain order, and more specifically, defend property rights.

A paladin is a holy warrior, dedicating his very life, and everything in it, to the specific cause of Law & Good. He lives with absolute certainty of the righteousness of his cause and the reward for his dedication.

It's not enough to simply momentarily pause the march of evil in the world. It has to be actively combatted.In general I agree with you, but I have to say for the record that a paladin can be like a police officer; can, for that matter, be employed as a police officer. He wouldn't be an average cop; but he could very well adopt a town or a city to keep it safe, bring in criminals, and keep order. Not all paladins go questing, after all. Some stay at home and make it a better place for their children to grow up. They do tend to be proactive, but the more peaceful types would prefer to use Diplomacy rather than a Holy Avenger, and that's an entirely legit way to combat evil.

hamishspence
2011-02-08, 05:57 AM
In a later book, the "DO NOT ASSOCIATE WITH EBIL OMG" rule is softened somewhat, to explain that while circumstance may necessitate temporarily working alongside less-than-savory elements, it's not something the paladin likes and is something the paladin should abandon the second a better option presents itself.

That book was Defenders of the Faith. It also mentions that the possibility of redeeming those evil characters should be taken into account as part of the decision to work with them.

BoED also says similar things for Exalted characters- they might have to work alongside evil characters to thwart a "greater evil".

Greenish
2011-02-08, 06:01 AM
What the player says: I want to play a paladin.

What the player means: I want to be a holy warrior and kick evil's ass.

What the DM hears: I want to face complex and/or unsolvable moral dilemmas everywhere I turn.

:smalltongue:

Callista
2011-02-08, 06:15 AM
What I as a DM hear: "Ooh... the party has a fear-immune character who can detect evil like a geiger counter detects radiation. I must use this." :smallamused:

Not to mention, paladin's going to be close to either his deity or the upper planes, and it's entirely sensible to send him visions, ten-foot angels, or similar as a plot hook. And paladins simply can't ignore people in distress, so unless he knows there's someone else in worse distress, you've just hooked him. They're very convenient to have around, really.

VeisuItaTyhjyys
2011-02-08, 06:16 AM
You know what I wish you saw more of? DMs trying to moral dilemma barbarians into becoming lawful.

More seriously, I think the really particular paladin alignment, and the emphasis on it, is the reason for DM's doing this, and to some degree I think that's a good reason and a cool thing to do, but it can get overdone really easily. On the one hand, being Good-with-a-big-G is what Paladins do; it's what they are. Always doing the right thing in a moral dilemma, even to one's own detriment or even death, is a paladin's bread-and-butter, and having to make the hard choices is part of what makes playing one unique and exciting; however, having to make the too-hard choices, or lose-lose choices, can just make it frustrating. The best part of being a holy warrior and kicking evil's ass is always being a holy warrior and kicking evil's ass.

Leon
2011-02-08, 06:19 AM
What the player says: I want to play a paladin.

What the player means: I want to be a holy warrior and kick evil's ass.

What the DM hears: I want to face complex and/or unsolvable moral dilemmas everywhere I turn.

:smalltongue:

What the other slightly evil player thinks Excellent a paladin to kill off / make trouble for

VeisuItaTyhjyys
2011-02-08, 06:34 AM
Haha, actually, the first partykill I ever saw was someone in the party trying to do just that when I was playing a paladin. We had a Red Wizard masquerading (none of us knew even OOC) as a regular wizard, who revealed himself to be evil at what I guess he thought was an opportune moment, when we were all without weapons. My paladin took it pretty well and tried to use it as a moment to convert him to the side of good ("Have you not seen the more precious rewards wrought by virtue?" and such) and, failing that, was just going to part ways with him and tell the party to make their own decisions. Then the wizard gave a Hannibal Lecture about the folly of morality and how he had used us dimwitted "heroes" as a guise under which he could spy on our lands so his nation could conquer them. Then the barbarian bellowed, "NO MAN WILL MAKE ME A SLAVE!" and beat him to death with a table. I feel like it was not how anyone expected it to turn out.

Leon
2011-02-08, 06:58 AM
Turned one into a Air to Ground to Water missile (although he did help in his own demise with a ill conceived plan to get out of the water involving ice) the other was frequently annoyed by my unwillingness to get the lycanthrope issue sorted out (CE Wolf every night)

Killer Angel
2011-02-08, 08:54 AM
Basically, my DM has decided to challenge my character with a large number of essentially moral dilemmas for the Paladin to face, which of course brings into question the extent of the Paladin's code, and the proper course of action in each situation.

I suggest to obtain asap a phylactery of Faithfulness, so your DM will stop to act as a moron.

hamlet
2011-02-08, 09:01 AM
Well, couple of things.

1) Your party member, there, might detect as evil, but that doesn't mean you have to draw steel and slit his throat, nor do you have to kick him out on his rump. A better solution, with loads better opportunity for role play, might be to sit down and have a talk with him. Maybe not convert him, but convince him to change his ways to a more beneficent or neutral outlook on life. A live convert beats a dead apostate any day. Plus, his help can aid you in doing great good. Abandoning him now simply on principle greatly inhibits your ability to help the helpless. That, in itself, might be a breach of your ethics depending on how you want to interpret things.

2) You're "only" 5th level. You probably shouldn't be looking at taking on the powers that be in the city directly at thsi point, except in long term goals. Instead, a more productive target, and lower hanging fruit would be to go out robin hood style and target the roving squads keeping the villages isolated from each other and collecting all the food. Build up the towns' power base so that they are able and willing to challenge the authority of the city themselves. Remember, you're not just good, you're lawful. That means that, in your mind, the best good can be effected by good laws within the framework of a society acting rather than rogue heroes. A libertarian you ain't.


Remember, take these challenges to your moral code as exactly what they are: challenges and opportunities. It's not neccessarily the DM jerking you over. Paladins walk a very fine, grey line between failures on either side, and tremendous success at the fore. You're a bit like the CIA, in that regard. Your failures are known, your successes are not.

CapnVan
2011-02-08, 12:06 PM
In general I agree with you, but I have to say for the record that a paladin can be like a police officer; can, for that matter, be employed as a police officer. He wouldn't be an average cop; but he could very well adopt a town or a city to keep it safe, bring in criminals, and keep order. Not all paladins go questing, after all. Some stay at home and make it a better place for their children to grow up. They do tend to be proactive, but the more peaceful types would prefer to use Diplomacy rather than a Holy Avenger, and that's an entirely legit way to combat evil.

Absolutely true, no argument here.

The point I was trying to make was this: When I think of cops, some of them are heroes, a few of them are villains, but most of them are just trying to make it safely through their shift and their career and get home to their families.

Paladins, on the other hand, are all supposed to be heroes, and more than willing to lay down their lives whenever necessary. Cops, in general, would much prefer to get safely home.

I'm reminded of watching The Town, the relatively new Affleck movie. When they get out of their getaway car and find a cop sitting there on construction detail. The cop looks at them in their masks, armed with automatic weapons, and turns the other way while they make their getaway.

In RL, a completely reasonable response. One unprepared cop, sipping his coffee, against 4 guys with automatic weapons? He probably wouldn't get a shot off.

In D&D, the paladin might make the same choice and, importantly, particularly in this context of a 5th level paladin up against the resources of a whole city, that's not necessarily something that should make him fall, but he probably should suffer some kind of penalty. Maybe a loss of lay on hands for a week?

As I said, paladins don't need to jump into a hopeless fight if they can reasonably be expected to make up for it later. But they do need to make up for it.

In RL, cops don't.

CapnVan
2011-02-08, 12:16 PM
...Then the barbarian bellowed, "NO MAN WILL MAKE ME A SLAVE!" and beat him to death with a table. I feel like it was not how anyone expected it to turn out.

And yet, it's sheer, unmitigated genius. :smallbiggrin:

But then, in fairness, I'd probably say that anytime a barbarian uses household furniture as a murder weapon. I just find that kind of thing amusing.

CapnVan
2011-02-08, 12:27 PM
A live convert beats a dead apostate any day. Plus, his help can aid you in doing great good. Abandoning him now simply on principle greatly inhibits your ability to help the helpless. That, in itself, might be a breach of your ethics depending on how you want to interpret things.

1. I don't think it can ever be effectively argued that refusing to deal with a known evil NPC can be construed as in any way violating the paladin's code. Even if greater good can be accomplished by associating with an evil character (a stretch, really, considering the basis of the alignment system), the rules are fairly clear on that. The newer rules might allow you to continue your association, but I think encouraging that would be a misreading.

2. That being said, I think it's always fair for a paladin to make a "turn" attempt. Particularly with regard to intelligent NPCs, there's always a chance that it will work out.

3. But, if that "turn" effort doesn't work, at some point, regardless of the effectiveness of the evil NPC in forwarding the paladin's goals, the recognition that the paladin and the evil NPC do not share long term goals can't be ignored without serious penalty, and, eventually, falling. Under the (admittedly arbitrary) alignment system, evil's goal is ultimately evil. It may be a different kind of evil than the one that's currently in place in the OP's game, but it's not good, or even neutral. While the paladin's goals may benefit from the evil character's participation, at the same time, he's allowing himself to aid evil.

And that's a no-no.

hamlet
2011-02-08, 12:43 PM
1. I don't think it can ever be effectively argued that refusing to deal with a known evil NPC can be construed as in any way violating the paladin's code. Even if greater good can be accomplished by associating with an evil character (a stretch, really, considering the basis of the alignment system), the rules are fairly clear on that. The newer rules might allow you to continue your association, but I think encouraging that would be a misreading.


You're misinterpreting what I said.

My meaning was not that failure to associate with an evil character for the mission would be a violation of ethos, but that booting the evil character, who was helping accomplish the mission (even if his reasons were less than wholesome) on simple principle, and especially when you had no other realistic way to accomplish the goal, thus leaving the helpless in trouble, might possibly, in a very strict interpretation, constitute a minor infraction of ethos (i.e., permitting others to suffer in order to avoid a stain on your own honor).

Afterword, of course, it's either convert or go your separate ways. But in order to accomplish a good deed, the Paladin might have to be reasonably expected to swallow that bitter pill and work with the evil person for a time, perhaps having to "go to confession" later on to use a Catholic term.

Callista
2011-02-08, 04:39 PM
Seems to me like trying to help redeem an evil fellow isn't "refusing to deal with" him--you don't have to be smite-happy.

Yeah, I guess I've got a thing for paladins as peacemakers and negotiators... they just happen to be peacemakers who have an excellent reason for you to sit down and listen to them, 'cause otherwise they are gonna get out the Smite.

They're Good-aligned, after all. However much they're willing to do it if necessary, however much they're soldiers trained for it, killing people isn't really the way they'd choose to solve problems if they had their way about it. Sometimes there's no other way, but if there is another way, they'll usually prefer that. Should be true of Good-aligned people in general, that if they can avoid killing another creature without endangering the innocent, they'll prefer the option that preserves life.

hamishspence
2011-02-08, 04:43 PM
Seems to me like trying to help redeem an evil fellow isn't "refusing to deal with" him--you don't have to be smite-happy.

Yeah, I guess I've got a thing for paladins as peacemakers and negotiators... they just happen to be peacemakers who have an excellent reason for you to sit down and listen to them, 'cause otherwise they are gonna get out the Smite.

They're Good-aligned, after all. However much they're willing to do it if necessary, however much they're soldiers trained for it, killing people isn't really the way they'd choose to solve problems if they had their way about it. Sometimes there's no other way, but if there is another way, they'll usually prefer that. Should be true of Good-aligned people in general, that if they can avoid killing another creature without endangering the innocent, they'll prefer the option that preserves life.

Most definitely. With all its flaws, BoED is still one of the very few D&D books that takes this line (Savage Species, in its Chaotic-Accepting model, is another)- which is one of the reasons I'm willing to pass over those flaws and stress its good points.

HenryHankovitch
2011-02-08, 05:11 PM
On the surface this may seem like a dumb-adventurer solution to the problem, but why not go after the orcs and ogres rather than tackling Daragon head-on? From the sound of it, they're a major part of his power base, allowing him to isolate the city and control its food supply, no doubt also providing him an excuse for heavy-handed policies. Your little group doesn't have to kill all of them, of course--you may only need to make it unprofitable to continue their partnership.

Then, when you come back to town with a much better reputation and a couple more dragon heads on your belt (and possibly more allies outside the city), you're in a stronger political position to tackle Daragon's regime. Taking the "the crisis is over, this dictatorship/rationing isn't necessary any more" gives you a moral and populist argument against Daragon, and would cast him as a tyrant if he continued.