I know "subject to your DM" and all that but just wanted to get opinions on this.
It just seems Oathbreaker is themed around a Paladin abandoning their oath out of a selfish desire for power or their own ambition but what if the Paladin just becomes disillusioned with their oath and abandons the path? For instance an Oath of the crown Paladin seeing the law used to justify oppressing the people to satisfy the greed of a tyrant or perhaps even a Nameless One type figure who has risen from the dead with little recollection of the oaths they swore in a previous life? Would they switch oaths? Would they be Oathbreakers? Or would they merely be common fighters?
The Paladin Oathbreaker Subclass is for "a paladin who breaks their sacred oaths to pursue some dark ambition or serve an evil power. Whatever light burned in the paladin's heart been extinguished. Only darkness remains." , while a lot of the subclass can be adjusted by flavour text for example dreadful aspect can be flavoured that creatures are frightened by to rightious indignation features like being able ot control undead and giving fiiends and undead a bonus to their attacks is clearly based on their being evil. Rather than changing the oathbreaker to fit a non-evil character I think it best to look elsewhere.
If a paladin becomes disillusioned with their oath the best past forward needs to be discussed with the DM. A few options are:
Tasha's provides a way to change your subclass your Path of the crown Paladin could become an Oath of Devotion
The change means that while they keep their current powers their oath provides no more, when they level up they do so in a different class
They leave the powers of their oath entirely resulting in a change of class (fighter would probably be most appropriate) so they swap all their paladin features t oone of a fighter of the same level
Their loss of committemnt to the oath results in their loss of all their Paladin powers and are now unable to deal with threats of the same level that the rest of the party will deal with they cease adventuring (or take on less dangerous enemies out of the game) and are retired from the campaign, the player creates a ew character.
I think a lot of people are misled by the sub-class being called "Oathbreaker"; this is not the sub-class you change to simply by breaking, completing or failing an oath, it is a paladin on a path towards becoming a death knight, it is an entirely evil path to go down.
If you have a paladin who breaks their oath they can simply change to another, or change class if it makes sense, whatever your DM is happy with.
On the other hand, at the end of the day the class/sub-class doesn't need to inform your character (just pick whatever fits your character concept best, and reflavour parts as required). However I think it would be difficult with the oathbreaker as it's mechanically very much all about indiscriminately bolstering/controlling the undead and fiends, which won't fit most parties/campaigns well at all.
It'd be very hard to reflavour as anything good, unless you maybe go with the angle of being cursed maybe? But you will be actively making certain enemies harder, so I'd discuss that with your DM (you need to anyway since it's not actually a regularly available sub-class, it's an optional one the DM must allow).
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
It doesn't say anywhere in the subclass description you have to have an evil alignment to choose oath breaker as a subclass. "Dark ambition" does not have to be evil. Seeking vengeance for some terrible wrong isn't necessarily evil. It may be "dark" to slay the townsfolk who earlier sacrificed their children to appease some dark God but who's to say its evil? Maybe you seek to punish fiends and undead by controlling and making them do possibly "good" acts? Still a little dark but not evil. Just my opinion
It doesn't say anywhere in the subclass description you have to have an evil alignment to choose oath breaker as a subclass.
It literally says "A paladin must be evil and at least 3rd level to become an Oathbreaker" in the second paragraph. 😝
Now what evil actually means for a character is debatable; "evil" in D&D broadly means "selfish", as a thief who doens't care who they steal from might be neutral evil, so it doesn't have to be a cackling maniac who kills everything in sight. But the oathbreaker is a paladin on a path towards becoming a death knight so no matter how pragmatic they're trying to be they're probably going to be responsible for an atrocity or two along the way.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
I believe that they don't have to be evil, but they shouldn't be anything better than neutral good,considering their powers cannot be used for much good. also if the had a good reason, like the paladin of the crown seeing tyranny, they would repent and try to "unbreak" their oath
Ok hear me out, paladins are warriors who take an oath, not necessarily a GOOD oath. You could say that you had actually taken an evil oath and were serving some devil or other evil creature, but then left, broke your "oath" to atone. All of the oficial paladin oaths are good (though some are kind of a bit morally gray) but that's because DND intends for PCs to be good, you could homebrew an evil oath, and then have your character break it, and becoming good.
Ok hear me out, paladins are warriors who take an oath, not necessarily a GOOD oath. You could say that you had actually taken an evil oath and were serving some devil or other evil creature, but then left, broke your "oath" to atone. All of the oficial paladin oaths are good (though some are kind of a bit morally gray) but that's because DND intends for PCs to be good, you could homebrew an evil oath, and then have your character break it, and becoming good.
But then you would probably also need to homebrew the "Oathbreaker, but Good" subclass as well.
FWIW, I'm currently playing an Oath of Vengeance Paladin that started life as an Oath of Glory Paladin that became disillusioned with war when his tribe was slaughtered during a battle. It's a tad ironic, I'll admit, that he is hunting down those that would go to war for war's sake (including those that are directly responsible for his disillusionment)...
Ok hear me out, paladins are warriors who take an oath, not necessarily a GOOD oath. You could say that you had actually taken an evil oath and were serving some devil or other evil creature, but then left, broke your "oath" to atone. All of the oficial paladin oaths are good (though some are kind of a bit morally gray) but that's because DND intends for PCs to be good, you could homebrew an evil oath, and then have your character break it, and becoming good.
But then you would probably also need to homebrew the "Oathbreaker, but Good" subclass as well.
FWIW, I'm currently playing an Oath of Vengeance Paladin that started life as an Oath of Glory Paladin that became disillusioned with war when his tribe was slaughtered during a battle. It's a tad ironic, I'll admit, that he is hunting down those that would go to war for war's sake (including those that are directly responsible for his disillusionment)...
True that, but hear me out again. The Oathbreaker has a bunch of stuff associated with evil. So you could play it as you were evil, but then wanted to atone. Essentially, an Oathbreaker-breaker, if that makes sense (it probably doesn't). I'm just saying that if you wanted the features of the subclass, you could say that you were evil, but now want to atone. Maybe the gods don't accept your apology and thus you still get evil (oathbreaker) spells and features. Maybe you're hunted by your former allies or haunted with disturbing visions as well, and your character arc would be proving to the gods or whoever that you are truly a good person. That all probably doesn't make a lot of sense, but it was just an idea I had.
Ok hear me out, paladins are warriors who take an oath, not necessarily a GOOD oath. You could say that you had actually taken an evil oath and were serving some devil or other evil creature, but then left, broke your "oath" to atone. All of the oficial paladin oaths are good (though some are kind of a bit morally gray) but that's because DND intends for PCs to be good, you could homebrew an evil oath, and then have your character break it, and becoming good.
But then you would probably also need to homebrew the "Oathbreaker, but Good" subclass as well.
FWIW, I'm currently playing an Oath of Vengeance Paladin that started life as an Oath of Glory Paladin that became disillusioned with war when his tribe was slaughtered during a battle. It's a tad ironic, I'll admit, that he is hunting down those that would go to war for war's sake (including those that are directly responsible for his disillusionment)...
True that, but hear me out again. The Oathbreaker has a bunch of stuff associated with evil. So you could play it as you were evil, but then wanted to atone. Essentially, an Oathbreaker-breaker, if that makes sense (it probably doesn't). I'm just saying that if you wanted the features of the subclass, you could say that you were evil, but now want to atone. Maybe the gods don't accept your apology and thus you still get evil (oathbreaker) spells and features. Maybe you're hunted by your former allies or haunted with disturbing visions as well, and your character arc would be proving to the gods or whoever that you are truly a good person. That all probably doesn't make a lot of sense, but it was just an idea I had.
I mean, it does make sense (because I'm playing on those kinds of themes in something I'm writing myself), but it sounds like you just want to flip it so that you start with Oathbreaker stuff and then choose a "normal" subclass once you've completed your atonement? At that point it's basically like any other fairly unorthodox class/subclass system you want to try: talk to your DM and hash it out ;).
I know "subject to your DM" and all that but just wanted to get opinions on this.
It just seems Oathbreaker is themed around a Paladin abandoning their oath out of a selfish desire for power or their own ambition but what if the Paladin just becomes disillusioned with their oath and abandons the path? For instance an Oath of the crown Paladin seeing the law used to justify oppressing the people to satisfy the greed of a tyrant or perhaps even a Nameless One type figure who has risen from the dead with little recollection of the oaths they swore in a previous life? Would they switch oaths? Would they be Oathbreakers? Or would they merely be common fighters?
The Paladin Oathbreaker Subclass is for "a paladin who breaks their sacred oaths to pursue some dark ambition or serve an evil power. Whatever light burned in the paladin's heart been extinguished. Only darkness remains." , while a lot of the subclass can be adjusted by flavour text for example dreadful aspect can be flavoured that creatures are frightened by to rightious indignation features like being able ot control undead and giving fiiends and undead a bonus to their attacks is clearly based on their being evil. Rather than changing the oathbreaker to fit a non-evil character I think it best to look elsewhere.
If a paladin becomes disillusioned with their oath the best past forward needs to be discussed with the DM. A few options are:
I think a lot of people are misled by the sub-class being called "Oathbreaker"; this is not the sub-class you change to simply by breaking, completing or failing an oath, it is a paladin on a path towards becoming a death knight, it is an entirely evil path to go down.
If you have a paladin who breaks their oath they can simply change to another, or change class if it makes sense, whatever your DM is happy with.
On the other hand, at the end of the day the class/sub-class doesn't need to inform your character (just pick whatever fits your character concept best, and reflavour parts as required). However I think it would be difficult with the oathbreaker as it's mechanically very much all about indiscriminately bolstering/controlling the undead and fiends, which won't fit most parties/campaigns well at all.
It'd be very hard to reflavour as anything good, unless you maybe go with the angle of being cursed maybe? But you will be actively making certain enemies harder, so I'd discuss that with your DM (you need to anyway since it's not actually a regularly available sub-class, it's an optional one the DM must allow).
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
It doesn't say anywhere in the subclass description you have to have an evil alignment to choose oath breaker as a subclass. "Dark ambition" does not have to be evil. Seeking vengeance for some terrible wrong isn't necessarily evil. It may be "dark" to slay the townsfolk who earlier sacrificed their children to appease some dark God but who's to say its evil? Maybe you seek to punish fiends and undead by controlling and making them do possibly "good" acts? Still a little dark but not evil. Just my opinion
It literally says "A paladin must be evil and at least 3rd level to become an Oathbreaker" in the second paragraph. 😝
Now what evil actually means for a character is debatable; "evil" in D&D broadly means "selfish", as a thief who doens't care who they steal from might be neutral evil, so it doesn't have to be a cackling maniac who kills everything in sight. But the oathbreaker is a paladin on a path towards becoming a death knight so no matter how pragmatic they're trying to be they're probably going to be responsible for an atrocity or two along the way.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
You got me, didn't actually reread the dmg, just referring to the paragraph Jegpeg quoted. My bad 😅
That said I agree with what you're saying but what dnd party isn't responsible for an atrocity or two during a campaign? Lol
I believe that they don't have to be evil, but they shouldn't be anything better than neutral good,considering their powers cannot be used for much good. also if the had a good reason, like the paladin of the crown seeing tyranny, they would repent and try to "unbreak" their oath
seeking vengeance would be, "the oath of vengeance", but i still agree with you
Ok hear me out, paladins are warriors who take an oath, not necessarily a GOOD oath. You could say that you had actually taken an evil oath and were serving some devil or other evil creature, but then left, broke your "oath" to atone. All of the oficial paladin oaths are good (though some are kind of a bit morally gray) but that's because DND intends for PCs to be good, you could homebrew an evil oath, and then have your character break it, and becoming good.
Hi Chat
But then you would probably also need to homebrew the "Oathbreaker, but Good" subclass as well.
FWIW, I'm currently playing an Oath of Vengeance Paladin that started life as an Oath of Glory Paladin that became disillusioned with war when his tribe was slaughtered during a battle. It's a tad ironic, I'll admit, that he is hunting down those that would go to war for war's sake (including those that are directly responsible for his disillusionment)...
True that, but hear me out again. The Oathbreaker has a bunch of stuff associated with evil. So you could play it as you were evil, but then wanted to atone. Essentially, an Oathbreaker-breaker, if that makes sense (it probably doesn't). I'm just saying that if you wanted the features of the subclass, you could say that you were evil, but now want to atone. Maybe the gods don't accept your apology and thus you still get evil (oathbreaker) spells and features. Maybe you're hunted by your former allies or haunted with disturbing visions as well, and your character arc would be proving to the gods or whoever that you are truly a good person. That all probably doesn't make a lot of sense, but it was just an idea I had.
Hi Chat
I mean, it does make sense (because I'm playing on those kinds of themes in something I'm writing myself), but it sounds like you just want to flip it so that you start with Oathbreaker stuff and then choose a "normal" subclass once you've completed your atonement? At that point it's basically like any other fairly unorthodox class/subclass system you want to try: talk to your DM and hash it out ;).
We'll see in the upcoming 2024 Dungeon Master Guide if Paladin: Oathbreaker must be evil or not.