Oath of vengeance quandary

[Lagueppe]

In a recent game I'm DMing, our paladin violated his oath of vengeance. I'm trying to figure out an appropriate response.

Here's what happened: the party fought their way to the bottom of a treasure vault, where they encountered an NPC. The NPC offers the paladin a drink, and the paladin, an alcoholic, accepts. Over the course of the encounter, the party figures out that this npc is the BBEG, but they maintain a conversational tone. Believing themselves too bloodied and exhausted to take the BBEG down, the party lets him walk away, treasure in tow. The paladin doesn't resist this outcome.

I'm torn about the appropriate response. The paladin played up his flaw, and the party made a tactically sound decision to actually not kill someone for a change. On the other hand, what's the point of an oath of vengeance if you can just let the object of the oath get away?

I'm looking for some mild chastisement that helps drive the story forward. Besides a little bit of divine anger, I'm thinking some of his paladin features (vow of enmity and Hunter's mark) will now be stuck on said BBEG. Is that too harsh?

[Gastronomie]

It's the DM's job to set up the next scenario so he gets a second chance - this time to sucessfully defeat the BBEG. I mean, I assume the player character wants to kill the BBEG (if he doesn't, oh well... but anyways), because in that case it's perfectly natural for the Vengeance Paladin to let him go.

Being a Paladin doesn't mean being Lawful Stupid. No matter how "good" you are, that wouldn't save you from death if you charge into a fight you can't hope to win. The point is in defeating the evil, not in fighting it. Retreating when necessary and preparing for the next time they meet is a perfectly fine act, especially for a Vengeance Paladin (it even says "by any means necessary" - this may include letting the BBEG go once).

[Gtdead]

As per phb, a paladin needs to seek absolution of a kind, either by asking for forgiveness from a cleric of a shared faith, or by performing a selfless act, or going through a vigil.

I think it should depend on how he roleplays this. If this makes him restless and angry, then you could give him disadvantage on mental ability checks.
If it leaves him beaten and unfocused, your idea is awesome.
If he doesn't care at all, you could be harsh on him and make him unable to use his oath features.
If he seeks redemption of some kind don't penalize at all. Just let him finish his quest.

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

Gastronomie is correct that his actions easily line up with a reasonable interpretation of the oath, with the caveat that he still has to pay restitution for any damage that the BBEG causes in the meantime. However, it still might be interesting to play up this seeming internal conflict. You could have a dream sequence, where you "play" a version of himself which seems to be a paragon of Lawful (stupid) Vengenace, who chastises the PC for preferring drink over duty. He then gets to defend his actions through the lens of a different interpretation of the oath, which can add a lot of flavor to the PC. And if it nudges the PC into a downward spiral of drinking and defensiveness, all the better for juicy drama.

[Cespenar]

Unless the paladin was being too cowardly (oh, I was missing a spell slot or two, I can't fight him), not taking on the BBEG because of being fairly bloodied isn't something to fault him in my opinion.

You can chastise him via a vision from his deity and whatnot, that 's cool, but unless he actually stops/slows his efforts, he should be okay in terms of an actual punishment.

[JakOfAllTirades]

A Paladin's Oath is not a suicide pact.

[Malifice]

In a recent game I'm DMing, our paladin violated his oath of vengeance. I'm trying to figure out an appropriate response.

Here's what happened: the party fought their way to the bottom of a treasure vault, where they encountered an NPC. The NPC offers the paladin a drink, and the paladin, an alcoholic, accepts. Over the course of the encounter, the party figures out that this npc is the BBEG, but they maintain a conversational tone. Believing themselves too bloodied and exhausted to take the BBEG down, the party lets him walk away, treasure in tow. The paladin doesn't resist this outcome.

I'm torn about the appropriate response. The paladin played up his flaw, and the party made a tactically sound decision to actually not kill someone for a change. On the other hand, what's the point of an oath of vengeance if you can just let the object of the oath get away?

I'm looking for some mild chastisement that helps drive the story forward. Besides a little bit of divine anger, I'm thinking some of his paladin features (vow of enmity and Hunter's mark) will now be stuck on said BBEG. Is that too harsh?

Was the BBEG the actual target of the PCs oath though?

Or just some random villian?

If the PC had sworn to enact vengance on this particular NPC (or the orginisation he works for) and then just let him walk off, then yeah, he's an oathbreaker.

[HoarsHalberd]

Was the BBEG the actual target of the PCs oath though?

Or just some random villian?

If the PC had sworn to enact vengance on this particular NPC (or the orginisation he works for) and then just let him walk off, then yeah, he's an oathbreaker.

Well not an oathbreaker. He broke his oath. If he has a deity, said deity may ask him to atone, by vowing to definitely fight him to the death next time or something, and if he fails then he's stripped of powers. (Though still not an oathbreaker, which is a defined thing as a paladin that rejects the justice and good inherent in his prior oath.)

[djreynolds]

As per phb, a paladin needs to seek absolution of a kind, either by asking for forgiveness from a cleric of a shared faith, or by performing a selfless act, or going through a vigil.

I think it should depend on how he roleplays this. If this makes him restless and angry, then you could give him disadvantage on mental ability checks.
If it leaves him beaten and unfocused, your idea is awesome.
If he doesn't care at all, you could be harsh on him and make him unable to use his oath features.
If he seeks redemption of some kind don't penalize at all. Just let him finish his quest.

This is perfect.

[Firechanter]

What's this supposed to be, the return of "screw all Paladins" Kobayashi Marus? oÔ
"So you are weakened and bloodied when you encounter the BBEG. You have the choice between fighting and dying, or running and getting punished."
AWESOME! *slow clap*

[Anonymouswizard]

First off, I'm of the general opinion that a pragmatic paladin should not be faulted. 'I'm out of spells, the wizard has nothing over 2nd level, and it would take all the cleric's slots to heal us' would be acceptable to me to trigger the idea that 'it is better to survive to fulfil my oath later than to die now'. However, just being out of the wizards big spells and being missing your Channel Divinity doesn't cut it, you have to actually be low on resources and hp.

Now, an important question is who/what did he make the subject of his oath? I have a drow Vengeance Paladin with a sworn enemy of fiends, but I can imagine a Paladin swearing his oath targeting one specific evildoer. I'd only cause him to temporarily lose acess to his oath powers if this is the specific person he swore the oath against, if the BBEG is just part of a group he swore the oath against then go with the 'warning from a higher power'.

[Democratus]

There's no need to punish anyone for playing out their Flaw.

The DM should encourage role playing. An alcoholic paladin who sometimes fails to meet his duty due to his addiction is something I'd love to see at my table.

[KorvinStarmast]

There's no need to punish anyone for playing out their Flaw.

The DM should encourage role playing. An alcoholic paladin who sometimes fails to meet his duty due to his addiction is something I'd love to see at my table. This is a most excellent approach.

The other point about being a Paladin NOT being a suicide pact is also true; so is the redemption approach.

Quite frankly, you don't have a problem unless his oath is explicitly tied to THAT BBEG as opposed to evil in general. Even then, all you need to have happen is for the BBEG, now at large again, to start causing more trouble. This is the old trope of the constantly recurring villain. The party has to go and find him and this time ... be in a position to take him down.

Play smarter, not harder, and all that.

[Firechanter]

Also, even _if_ the Paladin has broken their vow -- which is not necessarily the case here -- the PHB guidelines talk about minor acts of penitence, such as praying or fasting or something like that. Only if the paladin keeps consequently ignoring or wilfully violating their oath and shows no sign of repentance, which I would say would have to go on for a longer time, _then_ something like "loss of powers" becomes an option.

In general -- not this particular situation imo because it doesn't qualify -- a "rite of cleansing" as outlined in the PHB, like praying all night, fasting for a full day or somesuch, might result in a single Exhaustion level for a day. After the next good night's sleep / hearty meal, the matter should be settled.

[vostyg]

Little Known Paladin Tenet #42: If I throw away my life in what amounts to a meaningless gesture, then that is a victory for all who would prey on the weak and the innocent.

[D.U.P.A.]

Patient hunter gets the prey. Maybe the Paladin has read Sun Tzu's Art of war, so he knows when to strike and especially when not to strike.

[Oramac]

There's no need to punish anyone for playing out their Flaw.

The DM should encourage role playing. An alcoholic paladin who sometimes fails to meet his duty due to his addiction is something I'd love to see at my table.


This is a most excellent approach.

The other point about being a Paladin NOT being a suicide pact is also true; so is the redemption approach.

Quite frankly, you don't have a problem unless his oath is explicitly tied to THAT BBEG as opposed to evil in general. Even then, all you need to have happen is for the BBEG, now at large again, to start causing more trouble. This is the old trope of the constantly recurring villain. The party has to go and find him and this time ... be in a position to take him down.

Play smarter, not harder, and all that.


Both of these. It sounds to me like the player actually played their flaw quite well. They shouldn't be punished for that.

At most, I'd say to use the "vision from his deity" thing.

[Corran]

It's the DM's job to set up the next scenario so he gets a second chance - this time to sucessfully defeat the BBEG. I mean, I assume the player character wants to kill the BBEG (if he doesn't, oh well... but anyways), because in that case it's perfectly natural for the Vengeance Paladin to let him go.

Being a Paladin doesn't mean being Lawful Stupid. No matter how "good" you are, that wouldn't save you from death if you charge into a fight you can't hope to win. The point is in defeating the evil, not in fighting it. Retreating when necessary and preparing for the next time they meet is a perfectly fine act, especially for a Vengeance Paladin (it even says "by any means necessary" - this may include letting the BBEG go once).
After going through the discussion so far, I have to say I agree with Gastonomie, and frankly, I couldnt have said it better myself.

[Lagueppe]

Was the BBEG the actual target of the PCs oath though?

Or just some random villian?

If the PC had sworn to enact vengance on this particular NPC (or the orginisation he works for) and then just let him walk off, then yeah, he's an oathbreaker.

A little more background here. The paladin here had his clan massacred, and vowed vengeance on those responible. The bad guy is the highest ranking member (known to the PCs) of the organization that: assisted the invasion, then enslaved, worked to death, and zombified his people. The villain was directly responsible for assisting the invasion, and encouraged the enslavement. He's probably as valid a target as anyone could be.

[Lagueppe]

It's the DM's job to set up the next scenario so he gets a second chance - this time to sucessfully defeat the BBEG. I mean, I assume the player character wants to kill the BBEG (if he doesn't, oh well... but anyways), because in that case it's perfectly natural for the Vengeance Paladin to let him go.

Being a Paladin doesn't mean being Lawful Stupid. No matter how "good" you are, that wouldn't save you from death if you charge into a fight you can't hope to win. The point is in defeating the evil, not in fighting it. Retreating when necessary and preparing for the next time they meet is a perfectly fine act, especially for a Vengeance Paladin (it even says "by any means necessary" - this may include letting the BBEG go once).

Ironically, this character is normally all about Lawful Stupid. He's got an Int of 8, and he usually plays it up, usually being the most aggressive member of the party.

That actually gives him an out, though. Between the strong drink and his low Int, I think we can probably spin it that he has unable to put 2+2 together and actually realize who this guy was in the moment. I think his deity spelling this out in a dream for him should be sufficient chastisement.

[KorvinStarmast]

Ironically, this character is normally all about Lawful Stupid. He's got an Int of 8, and he usually plays it up, usually being the most aggressive member of the party.

That actually gives him an out, though. Between the strong drink and his low Int, I think we can probably spin it that he has unable to put 2+2 together and actually realize who this guy was in the moment. I think his deity spelling this out in a dream for him should be sufficient chastisement. Let's hear it for RP!
Let us know how it works out, could be a great follow up.

[D.U.P.A.]

Dumping Int means more of lack formal education, not a lack of common sense. Wisdom is more set to that. And after all meaning that he has an 8, does not mean he is impaired, just like someone with 8 Charisma is not something who shunned by everyone. Vengeance Paladin is not a reckless Barbarian, which have some common sense too.

[LordFluffy]

Were I GM'ing this and depending on how correct the party was about not being ready to take on the big bad, I'd only fault the Paladin if he just walked away this point, rather than continuing to pursue his quarry. A Vengence Oath Paladin should be able to go undercover as a mercenary or ally with a slightly less evil guy if he has to. Waiting to have the advantage doesn't sound like breaking an Oath.