Is this Lawful Good or Lawful Stupid?

[Dr TPK]

A powerful golden dragon has a half-dragon daughter, and her daughter makes a big mistake that results in several people dying. The incident is properly and officially investigated and the daughter receives no punishment since the mistake wasn't criminal in any way, even though the consequences were dire. In distraugh, the daughter leaves on a self-imposed exile and tells that no one can follow her or visit her. The golden dragon pleas to her, but her daughter keeps her mind. The golden dragon manages to bargain with the daughter: if she tell the dragon where she will be going, the dragon will promise not to visit her. The daughter tells that she's going to an old abandoned temple in the jungle.

Several decades later a high-level group of good-aligned adventurers visit the golden dragon. They are interested in dragons and ask the dragon what they can do to help her. The dragon says that they should visit her daughter and check if she's ok. The adventurers are not allowed to mention the dragon to the daughter, but they are not allowed to lie either. She says that the daughter forbid anyone visiting her, but the adventurers have the right to defy that wish if they want to. She will not go against her daughter's wishes, especially since she has promised not to visit her.

I'm just thinking that if the dragon could easily visit the daughter and just go into the abandon temple, would she keep her word and stay out for decades? Also, would hiring a band of adventurers would be an alignment violation?

[TheifofZ]

Keeping her word, no matter how troubling, is an extremely Lawful act. Sending adventurers to check up on her daughter isn't going to break the promise that the dragon specifically not go, but might be a little gray depending on how strict her code is. This, however, only seems an issue of Law/Chaos, not Good/Evil.
The only issue is the potential breaking of a promise due to concern over her own daughter.
Being concerned for her daughter is not evil, nor is asking someone to check. Not looking after her daughter when her daughter is an adult capable of taking care of herself is an expected action that any adult should take, so there's no alignment issue there.
So consider the Exact Words of the promise given, as well as the actual Intent behind those words.

[Greenish]

If the dragon just promised not to visit her daughter, no conflict.
If the dragon promised not to send anyone after her either, that's potentially a non-Lawful action (in that she's not keeping her word), and insofar as Law and Chaos work like that in your interpretation, potentially Chaotic too. It's also probably a Good act, given the motivations.

As for "alignment violation", well, alignment isn't a straightjacket. You're allowed to bend it and even act against it occasionally without really affecting your alignment.


Of course, I submit to the "descriptive, not prescriptive" school of alignment.

[TheifofZ]

Well, unless she's a paladin. But even than, a single non-lawful act like fudging a promise out of concern for her daughter wouldn't be nearly enough to change her alignment to neutral, so she's still fine.
But yes, I like Descriptive Alignment far more as well. It makes more sense to me.

[Judge_Worm]

Several decades later...
I'm just thinking that if the dragon could easily visit the daughter and just go into the abandon temple, would she keep her word and stay out for decades? Also, would hiring a band of adventurers would be an alignment violation?

To a dragon, several decades isn't that long. Even a half dragon/human can spend 80 years as a prepubescent adolescent. So I'm considering this to be like 5 years human time. That being said, obeying her word is a very lawful thing to do. Sending adventurers to check up on your absentee daughter that you love very much despite your word (or using a loophole) is a very NEUTRAL thing to do. I see no lawful stupid here, maybe regular stupid on the daughter's behalf.

[Der_DWSage]

I'd honestly see that as lawful Good, through and through. She's breaking the promise, true-but she's doing it out of concern, and like everyone else said, that's definitely a Good act.

The lawful portion is...iffy, admittedly, but again comes from concern. I don't see that as a huge violation of privacy, nor as an attempt to wrestle control of her daughter. I honestly see that being far closer to the concerned mother who, after seeing her daughter leave home when highly emotional, asks a friend to check in on her and go 'I know you don't want to see me right now, but I'm concerned for you and want to make sure you're okay. (Because last time I saw you, I was afraid you'd hurt yourself or commit suicide to atone for others.)'

Also, mama dragon totally should've wrestled a 'Check in with me every decade or so, okay?' concession out of the daughter, but eh. Emotions, hindsight is 20/20, etc. etc.