I had a player go down the path of an oath breaker, so I took abunch of paladin pwrs away but the player complained that I couldn't take away his divine smite. Well a small argue session went on about this. I know the DM is "always right" but what would you all do in this situation?
So an Oathbreaker as written doesn't get rid of the core class abilities. It's a subclass that replaces what ever other subclass the Paladin had before they broke their oath.
Smite, Lay on Hands, Aura of protection, and other core abilities of the Paladin are not taken away. At least, as it's written. Your world could very well have its own rules making him into just a fighter.
Basically as I understand it. You are replacing the subclass with the oathbreaker subclass. Just build an oath breaker in the character builder and see what it gives you.
I'm working with these issues in a game where the DM isn't super in to saying no, I'm self regulating here... I am playing Keth Greycastle, a former paladin of Orcus who has forsaken his oath to Orcus as a result of a horrific act perpetrated by his priest/father against his slave mother. I'm now a "haunted one" (Strahd Background) living with what was done to my mother and living with that nightmare in which I've broken my oath to an evil god. I'm in the setting of Rappan Athuk where Orcus plays quite heavily and the storyline hooks are actually pretty great. I'm now a Lawful Neutral paladin with good tendencies who both hates undead and loathes Orcus worshipers, my goals are to bring balance and law where no one is a slave and no one is the unwilling tool of an evil or good power.
My DM has allowed that I can keep this setup as well as house ruled several things, I get to keep the core "non-oath specific" powers as described in the comments above as well as allowed me to modify Aura of Hate to only work on undead I chose as with the aura of protection. So turning the build in to a storyline thing and making it so that I've rebelled against evil allows me a great time and a viable build. I'm main tanking with a Paladin/Hex Blade/ Shadow Sorcerer build. All CON and CHA is epic.
I had a player go down the path of an oath breaker, so I took abunch of paladin pwrs away but the player complained that I couldn't take away his divine smite. Well a small argue session went on about this. I know the DM is "always right" but what would you all do in this situation?
I'm working with these issues in a game where the DM isn't super in to saying no, I'm self regulating here... I am playing Keth Greycastle, a former paladin of Orcus who has forsaken his oath to Orcus as a result of a horrific act perpetrated by his priest/father against his slave mother. I'm now a "haunted one" (Strahd Background) living with what was done to my mother and living with that nightmare in which I've broken my oath to an evil god. I'm in the setting of Rappan Athuk where Orcus plays quite heavily and the storyline hooks are actually pretty great. I'm now a Lawful Neutral paladin with good tendencies who both hates undead and loathes Orcus worshipers, my goals are to bring balance and law where no one is a slave and no one is the unwilling tool of an evil or good power.
My DM has allowed that I can keep this setup as well as house ruled several things, I get to keep the core "non-oath specific" powers as described in the comments above as well as allowed me to modify Aura of Hate to only work on undead I chose as with the aura of protection. So turning the build in to a storyline thing and making it so that I've rebelled against evil allows me a great time and a viable build. I'm main tanking with a Paladin/Hex Blade/ Shadow Sorcerer build. All CON and CHA is epic.
Since your priorities and belief system have changed, just use any subclass except Oathbreaker. No need to homebrew unless that is what you and your DM really want to do.
I'd highly suggest sitting down with that player outside the game and chatting with them about what they want to do. Divine players must have an idea that if they piss their God off that things could go wrong. But there may be many reasons your player is starting to break their oath, and knowing WHY can help the two of you come up with a plan together. And if your player clearly knows the boundaries and consequences of their actions, as well as feels like you as the DM will work WITH them to craft something cool, you should avoid future scrums at the table.
Does your Paladin just want to switch Gods? Or maybe they want to switch subclass (to Oathbreaker or to something else)? Or maybe they actually just want to stop being a Paladin and switch to another class? Is the player just fed up with everything and wants to switch right away? Or maybe they're willing to go on a little quest to seek out their new God/subclass/class. Knowing what your player wants for sure will help a lot.
It sounds like whatever happens, loosing abilities on their character sheet will make this person unhappy. The CHARACTER can be unhappy, but if the PLAYER is unhappy that's not fun. So chat with them about possible consequences for forsaking their God. Often I'll just ask the player directly, "What do YOU think will be the consequences?". And you can come up with some possibilities together, so that when the time comes in game your player isn't totally blindsided by the consequences and can work with you on some cool RP. A Good or Neutral aligned deity might be more understanding and forgiving and let them leave with just some sadness, or maybe asking for one last task or quest before helping them move onto their new life.
Finally, don't let this advice sound like I'm saying to just do WHATEVER the player wants. You are a partner in this story, and as the DM deserve to have some authority in how the world works. But most players are happy to compromise on a lot of things when they know that you're primary goal is to have fun!
This reminds me of a Paladin who's kinda (in his words) "thick." (The running gag is "Wisdom -1.") His order set him on a quest for atonement, but he doesn't know why. He's a Gold Dragonborn follower of Bahamut (no surprise), but he's having worries that Bahamut doesn't exist since the Tiefling's patron has an unusually active interest in the party's success (and in 5e, Bahamut is rather hands-off by comparison). His player plays him decidedly Chaotic Neutral, but he convincingly plays it as the Paladin being rather dumb than deliberately CN. (His heart is in the right place as LG. His brain is another matter entirely.) It's just fun.
So, there's "Oathbreaker" and there's "Oathbreaker" and there's also "Oathbreaker." It can be a playstyle, technicality, ruleset, homebrew, houserule...
As mentioned, communication is the key. (D&D is all about communication.) DMs do get the final say, but DMs have to be flexible when appropriate. (Is there any DM that hasn't had to improvise for players with foolish ingenuity?) Whether appropriate depends on the results of the conversations.
How would I handle the situation? I would need to talk with the player OOC to find out what the intent is. Is it just for bonuses? Is it for a story purpose? Is it going to break the game? Is there a middle ground? So many questions.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Human. Male. Possibly. Don't be a divider. My characters' backgrounds are written like instruction manuals rather than stories. My opinion and preferences don't mean you're wrong. I am 99.7603% convinced that the digital dice are messing with me. I roll high when nobody's looking and low when anyone else can see.🎲 “It's a bit early to be thinking about an epitaph. No?” will be my epitaph.
RAW, there is no way to strip any character of their special abilities (as it should be). If this was a possibility in your game, via your houserules, you should have informed the player beforehand, as that would very likely to have affected their character choices.
Going Oathbreaker, if you do that, is simply subbing one subclass for another. The core PHB Paladin abilities remain intact.
Here's a curve for you guys, I'm an Oathbreaker in a game right now. I broke my oath to Orcus, I was an evil paladin. I'm now a good paladin with powers Orcus hasn't take away, I still have healing, auras... the RP background is awesome. You're missing out if you're ruling against this class.
although I totally come down on the side of pally core abilities persist through the breaking of the oath, I also would like to submit that it may be a wonderful opportunity to homebrew some mechanics to reconnect those powers after the oath is broken. perhaps; 1. the oath is broken 2. immediately after no ability can be used 3. a long or short rest returns features as expected 4. abilities for the next x sessions/hours can be used but require a DC y skill check (perhaps religion) 5. after suitable time goes by all abilities work normally and the pally's journey to the dark side is complete.
Maybe change radiant for necrotic damage, healing would probally stay the same unless you have a different idea that seems the same, and aura of protection might be replaced with aura of destruction or accuracy that boosts attack rolls or damage rolls.
RAW, the write up only says, "An Oathbreaker paladin loses previously gained oath spells and instead gains the following Oathbreaker spells at the paladin levels listed."
There is a very specific reason for this. They're never not a Paladin. All they did was betray the Oath they took at level 3.
So first we'll want to distinguish between subclass features and class features. The paladin's subclass features are those tied to their oath - oath spell lists, channel divinities, and the level 7, 15, and 20 features. These features come from the universe itself or the raw divine magic within it responding to the paladin's faithful commitment to the principles of that oath. If a paladin betrays or abandons their oath, then they should lose access to those features. If this happens the paladin will need Atonement and to re-commit themselves to their oath to regain those features, or to another oath to gain the features of that oath.
Alternatively, a Paladin can refuse to seek Atonement and embrace evil instead to take on the features of the Oath Breaker.
Note that a paladin's oath being broken shouldn't be a surprise for the player. By default, there is no cosmic judge weighing a paladin's each and every action, they should have considerable leeway in the interpretation of their oath, as well is in how they prioritize the tenets of their oath should they ever seem to be in conflict. If you don't think the character is acting in accordance with their oath as the DM, you should talk with the player first to see what they think about it. A paladin failing their oath should be a cooperative story telling decision on the part of both the DM and the Player, even if it's something the character in universe doesn't see coming.
So that's how subclass features are handled, but what about the parent class features? Lay on Hands, Divine Smite, Spellcasting, and so on. The default lore for 5e is pretty nebulous about where exactly these features come from, leaving that mostly up to the DM and Players to work out. There are several options you could go with on this:
1) Training. The paladins main class features come from their training, much like the abilities of an Eldritch Knight fighter. Before beginning their adventuring career, a paladin received martial and magical training from a mentor, knightly order, or religious institution. Their class features are the result of this training, and their higher level class features are the result of practice and experience on top of that training. Since these features come from knowledge and experience rather than commitment to their oath, none of these features are lost.
2) Divine Patron. In a setting where the gods are real and active (ie this makes sense in the Forgotten Realms but not so much in Eberron), divine classes might get their powers directly from divine favor. In such a game paladins will have a divine patron in addition to an oath, and martial gods will sponsor paladins of oaths that align with their ethos. A paladin who breaks with their oath will likely also have broken the favor of their deity, and may lose their class features as well until they atone and re-commit themselves to their oath and their deity, or to another oath and another deity, or to an evil deity if they become an Oath Breaker instead. Note that in this scenario it is theoretically possible for a paladin to break their oath while retaining their deity's favor, or lose their deity's favor while remaining true to their oath, so there are potentially layers of commitment involved.
3) Holy Investiture. The paladin's supernatural powers might come not from the direct and ongoing favor of a deity, but rather some sort of special investiture ritual they underwent upon becoming a paladin which granted them ongoing access to divine powers. That access, once granted, is granted, and likely either can't be taken away, or doing so would require an entire separate ritual. In this kind of scenario, a paladin who betrays their oath would not lose parent class powers, but the paladin mentor, knightly order, or religious institution that granted them that power in the first place might start to hunt them down if they ever hear of it, to stop their gift from being abused, and might continue to do so even if the paladin atones, especially if they then commit to another oath, order, or deity.
4) The Oath itself. The paladins class features /also/ come from commitment to their oath, and are lost and regained exactly as their oath veatures are.
Those are just examples. Again, this is all left up to the DM, you could go with something else in your game. You could also say different paladin abilities are derived from different sources. For instance, you might say that combat style is a matter of training, lay on hands, divine smite, and spell slots from holy investiture, and actual spells from divine favor. Then a paladin who breaks their oath and is abandoned by their deity would lose subclass features and would no longer be able to prepare and cast spells, but would still be able to lay on hands and use spell slots for divine smite... at least until their original order captures them and performs an excommunication ritual to break their investiture, at which point all they'd be left with are hit points, proficiencies, and combat style, at least until they're able to find some other order to take them in, perform a new investiture, and allow them to swear a new oath under a new divine patron.
...
All that said - the period where the Paladin is weakened and missing features should be temporary. A paladin who isn't going to regain those features should probably also retire as an adventurer and PC so that the player can create a new character. Once the paladin has atoned and re-committed to an oath (whether the original oath or another one), or has fully embraced the path of the Oath Breaker, all of their features should be restored, albeit with possibly different subclass features if they didn't return to their original oath. Oath Breakers still have lay on hands, divine sense, divine smite, paladin spells, aura of protection, and all that other paladin stuff, they just use these features for selfish and evil ends. That's what makes them so dangerous, and such powerful champions of the forces of darkness, and why paladins of any oath or order consider it a high priority to stop any Oath Breakers they learn of.
So yeah, as a DM your Oath Breaker should still have divine smite (though you might talk with the player about possibly changing it's damage type if 'radiant' energy is characterized as inherently good in your game), and lay on hands, and all that other stuff, and your player is kind of right to complain about that. Being an Oath Breaker isn't supposed to be a mechanical punishment.
An Oath Breaker isn't just a paladin who has fallen from grace and lost their powers. An Oath Breaker is a paladin who did that, and then looked at what they would have to do to get their powers back 'the right way' - particularly the bit about admitting they were wrong and undergoing a laborious Atonement to demonstrate how sorry they are - and said "Forget that, I was right all along! if that's how the the powers of righteousness are going to treat me, then this entire world can just go to hell for all I care, and if I could I'd send it there myself!" and the powers of the nine hells (or the abyss, or the far realm, or some other place of cosmic evil within your game) heard them and said "I'll give you all your stuff back for free* if you follow through on all those cool things you just said".
*terms and conditions may apply
The punishment for becoming an Oath Breaker isn't losing your powers. Quite the contrary, the reward for becoming an Oath Breaker is getting those powers back, and without having to humble yourself in the process. No, the punishment for becoming an Oath Breaker is that every paladin who hears about you is going to consider it their personal responsibility to take you down, especially your original mentor/knightly order/religious institution. The other drawback is that if you stray from your new, evil path you'll find that the patrons of darkness are a lot less forgiving than those of light and will generally do a lot worse to you than just take your toys and put you in a metaphorical time out. If that happens, your own dark powers become a curse, in particularly the level 7 aura that empowers the melee attacks of fiends and undead. The aura doesn't care if those monsters are fighting for or against you, so if you try to turn on your new evil allies your own powers will help them destroy you.
I would like to offer up my interpretation of an Oathbreaker, especially as I've had one of my own who is CG. As a paladin, you gain your powers through a plethora of different ways, but one of the most universal is conviction, whether it be to a cause, to an ideal, to the law or to a lord, but the unifying factor here is that it manifests itself into an oath. Well, if this is the method in which your paladin gained their powers, what happens when you're forced to confront the fact that your oath, and the oaths of others, could ultimately stand in the way of your vision of good, and you decide to abandon them to pursue that vision itself?
An example of this can be shown in the story of how my Paladin became an Oathbreaker, as she used to be a LG Oath of the Ancients paladin. After the end of her training, she and her master were sent to a city in order to save it from an occupying evil cult, but then came a dilemma: They were keeping the civilians as hostages, but were carrying out a corruptive ritual in the powerful magical grove near the city. As an OotA paladin like her master, it was her duty to protect the grove above all else, but it was a greater good to save those trapped civilians than to leave them for dead. As her master rode on towards the grove, she had to grapple with her conflicting goals, and when she finally decided to save the civilians, she was already too late for most of them, and without her assistance her master couldn't stop the ritual. To keep her oath would have meant letting a greater evil happen, and as such she ultimately did break it, leaving her master behind as she tried to sort out her crisis of values.
Now, if that were all, she'd merely be a fallen paladin, but that's not the whole of the story. She considered dedicating herself to destroying the cult, but to make that her driving goal would have meant she'd have just mindlessly killed members of the cult, neither saving the grove nor the civilians. She considered dedicating herself to saving all lives, dedicating herself to turning evil into good, but realized that doing so wouldn't have let her even save those few civilians she did get to in time. She could embrace the law, striving to uphold it in every action she makes, but to do so would mean serving more men like her master, who have goals that differ from what causes the most good. She could dedicate herself to the knightly virtues, but to do so would mean that she'd ultimately just be limiting her ability to do good, once again setting a rule above what is truly right. She could dedicate herself to gaining power, so that she'd never be weak enough to be forced to choose between these two choices, but what about when trying to increase your own power would end up causing just as much damage, if not more? She could strive to become a legendary warrior, sung about by bards, but what of those who do what is distasteful, what is considered dishonorable, all to make the world a better place? They don't get songs written about them, and yet they can do far greater and longer lasting good than a mere song could. And to be frank, the order of watchers fail to understand the reality that a gift from an outsider may be used to make the world a better place, not to mention the tales of the redeemed succubus (yes, WOTC officially endorsed a LG Oath of Redemption Succubus, which really solidifies their statement that any being can defy their "natural" alignments).
To bind herself to another oath would be to ultimately bind her from doing the greatest amount of good, no matter how nice or otherwise beneficial it might be. And so, she decided not to bind herself to any oath, to not limit her options in improving the world, and instead turned her conviction to doing so directly, rather than through some situational aspect of it. She would not allow any self-imposed rules stop her, nor would she let any unjust laws slow her down. Upon coming to this decision, she understood that there was one way, if she nurtured it, controlled it, and utilized it, to give those civilians another chance, even if it stood in the face of natural and man-made laws. She went back to the grove, filled to the brim with demonic and negative energy, and harvested some of the negative energy so that she could break the natural cycle of life and death, and reanimate those civilians as soon as her mastery over it was sufficient. And that's how she became a level 3 CG oathbreaker.
Now, obviously if you're running, or are part of, a campaign in which paladins need a patron, like a cleric or warlock, doing such a thing would be impossible in the current state of the game. But when it's conviction for a cause or ideal, an oathbreaker represents going straight towards that ideal, rather than an aspect of it that can get in the way. It should also be noted that in spite of the flavor text of the intro, nothing about the actual abilities are inherently evil, and they instead paint a picture of unrestricted power and usage of powers towards achieving your goal, much like a theoretical Black-Red aligned hero from MTG.
Your channel divinities represent either turning an opponent into a tool to reach your goal, or pushing them out of the way such that they can't impede you. Aura of hate makes it so you and those fighting under your control can destroy obstacles towards your goal, much like how a light-side Sith Warrior from SWTOR is still a destructive powerhouse that can't be stopped. Supernatural Resistance takes this a step further, making it so, much like in V for Vendetta, your achievement of your goals becomes bulletproof, though more literal this time. And finally, Dread Lord makes it so you and your allies become nearly untouchable, while giving you the ability to completely and utterly annihilate those who try to stop you, like some evil cultists.
And the spell list only furthers this idea, with you increasing your killing ability, punishing those who try to stop you, once again turning your enemies into tools to achieve your goals, protecting you and your allies while simultaneously denying your opposition opportunities, giving yourself even more allies(and more importantly for my character: being potentially modifiable to reanimate people as sentient undead), and finally debilitating your opponents so they can't even try to stop you.
The only things that really hold you back from an oathbreaker at all are A: the stigma against necromancy, and B: the line of "to pursue some dark ambition or serve an evil power." from the flavor description, despite the fact that D&D has consistently been becoming less alignment-reliant over time. Then again, I guess that first part of the OR statement could be rebranded as more of a necromancy-supporting statement rather than an outright selfish and/or evil goals statement.
It's an inherent conflict in 5e design that Paladins no longer derive their power from allegiance to a deity, rather their Oath for some reason gives them power. It does raise some questions -- if the ability doesn't come from a divine power, why is it a DIVINE smite? Trying to infer logic from that design could be difficult, and of course, we can all take the opportunity to role-play that consideration and house-rule it. House-ruling it does mean returning closer to TSR's AD&D design, whereby yeah, you lose almost all your powers when you break your allegiance to a deity (unless you swear a new one presumably? Though in one of the early Dragon Issue, they did come up with an Anti-Paladin). Or if you're running it by 5e design, then the paladin simply switches sub-class abilities. As was pointed out earlier as well, the smite is a basic ability rather than sub-class.
Page 86 of the Player's Handbook clearly states what happens to a Paladin if the break their Oath.
A paladin who has broken a vow typically seeks absolution from a cleric who shares his or her faith or from another paladin of the same order. ... If a paladin willfully violates his or her oath and shows no sign of repentance, the consequences can be more serious. At the DM's discretion, an impenitent paladin might be forced to abandon this class and adopt another, or perhaps to take the Oathbreaker paladin option that appears in the Dungeon Master's Guide.
A Paladin can no longer be a Paladin by breaking their Oath as stated by the PHB. In this thread I see no mention that the aforementioned player has actually taken the Oath Breaker Class but the OP states the Player is going down the Path of the Oath Breaker. So abilities he has or doesnt have depend on the severity of him breaking his Oath and how repentant he is that he did so.
Paladin Oathbreaker subclass in the DMG is designed for an NPC, not a true character subclass. A DM can decide to allow this subclass to be played, but it was not originally intended as such. The section that has the Oathbreaker is titled "Villainous Class Options," which is for the DM to create an NPC for the party to contest. I don't believe Oathbreaker appears anywhere else, as a subclass, other than the DMG as an NPC option for the DM.
I had a player go down the path of an oath breaker, so I took abunch of paladin pwrs away but the player complained that I couldn't take away his divine smite. Well a small argue session went on about this. I know the DM is "always right" but what would you all do in this situation?
So an Oathbreaker as written doesn't get rid of the core class abilities. It's a subclass that replaces what ever other subclass the Paladin had before they broke their oath.
Smite, Lay on Hands, Aura of protection, and other core abilities of the Paladin are not taken away. At least, as it's written. Your world could very well have its own rules making him into just a fighter.
Basically as I understand it. You are replacing the subclass with the oathbreaker subclass. Just build an oath breaker in the character builder and see what it gives you.
I'm working with these issues in a game where the DM isn't super in to saying no, I'm self regulating here... I am playing Keth Greycastle, a former paladin of Orcus who has forsaken his oath to Orcus as a result of a horrific act perpetrated by his priest/father against his slave mother. I'm now a "haunted one" (Strahd Background) living with what was done to my mother and living with that nightmare in which I've broken my oath to an evil god. I'm in the setting of Rappan Athuk where Orcus plays quite heavily and the storyline hooks are actually pretty great. I'm now a Lawful Neutral paladin with good tendencies who both hates undead and loathes Orcus worshipers, my goals are to bring balance and law where no one is a slave and no one is the unwilling tool of an evil or good power.
My DM has allowed that I can keep this setup as well as house ruled several things, I get to keep the core "non-oath specific" powers as described in the comments above as well as allowed me to modify Aura of Hate to only work on undead I chose as with the aura of protection. So turning the build in to a storyline thing and making it so that I've rebelled against evil allows me a great time and a viable build. I'm main tanking with a Paladin/Hex Blade/ Shadow Sorcerer build. All CON and CHA is epic.
As was said, use Oathbreaker subclass.
Since your priorities and belief system have changed, just use any subclass except Oathbreaker. No need to homebrew unless that is what you and your DM really want to do.
I'd highly suggest sitting down with that player outside the game and chatting with them about what they want to do. Divine players must have an idea that if they piss their God off that things could go wrong. But there may be many reasons your player is starting to break their oath, and knowing WHY can help the two of you come up with a plan together. And if your player clearly knows the boundaries and consequences of their actions, as well as feels like you as the DM will work WITH them to craft something cool, you should avoid future scrums at the table.
Does your Paladin just want to switch Gods? Or maybe they want to switch subclass (to Oathbreaker or to something else)? Or maybe they actually just want to stop being a Paladin and switch to another class? Is the player just fed up with everything and wants to switch right away? Or maybe they're willing to go on a little quest to seek out their new God/subclass/class. Knowing what your player wants for sure will help a lot.
It sounds like whatever happens, loosing abilities on their character sheet will make this person unhappy. The CHARACTER can be unhappy, but if the PLAYER is unhappy that's not fun. So chat with them about possible consequences for forsaking their God. Often I'll just ask the player directly, "What do YOU think will be the consequences?". And you can come up with some possibilities together, so that when the time comes in game your player isn't totally blindsided by the consequences and can work with you on some cool RP. A Good or Neutral aligned deity might be more understanding and forgiving and let them leave with just some sadness, or maybe asking for one last task or quest before helping them move onto their new life.
Finally, don't let this advice sound like I'm saying to just do WHATEVER the player wants. You are a partner in this story, and as the DM deserve to have some authority in how the world works. But most players are happy to compromise on a lot of things when they know that you're primary goal is to have fun!
Find me on Twitter: @OboeLauren
This reminds me of a Paladin who's kinda (in his words) "thick." (The running gag is "Wisdom -1.") His order set him on a quest for atonement, but he doesn't know why. He's a Gold Dragonborn follower of Bahamut (no surprise), but he's having worries that Bahamut doesn't exist since the Tiefling's patron has an unusually active interest in the party's success (and in 5e, Bahamut is rather hands-off by comparison). His player plays him decidedly Chaotic Neutral, but he convincingly plays it as the Paladin being rather dumb than deliberately CN. (His heart is in the right place as LG. His brain is another matter entirely.) It's just fun.
So, there's "Oathbreaker" and there's "Oathbreaker" and there's also "Oathbreaker." It can be a playstyle, technicality, ruleset, homebrew, houserule...
As mentioned, communication is the key. (D&D is all about communication.) DMs do get the final say, but DMs have to be flexible when appropriate. (Is there any DM that hasn't had to improvise for players with foolish ingenuity?) Whether appropriate depends on the results of the conversations.
How would I handle the situation? I would need to talk with the player OOC to find out what the intent is. Is it just for bonuses? Is it for a story purpose? Is it going to break the game? Is there a middle ground? So many questions.
Human. Male. Possibly. Don't be a divider.
My characters' backgrounds are written like instruction manuals rather than stories. My opinion and preferences don't mean you're wrong.
I am 99.7603% convinced that the digital dice are messing with me. I roll high when nobody's looking and low when anyone else can see.🎲
“It's a bit early to be thinking about an epitaph. No?” will be my epitaph.
RAW, there is no way to strip any character of their special abilities (as it should be). If this was a possibility in your game, via your houserules, you should have informed the player beforehand, as that would very likely to have affected their character choices.
Going Oathbreaker, if you do that, is simply subbing one subclass for another. The core PHB Paladin abilities remain intact.
Here's a curve for you guys, I'm an Oathbreaker in a game right now. I broke my oath to Orcus, I was an evil paladin. I'm now a good paladin with powers Orcus hasn't take away, I still have healing, auras... the RP background is awesome. You're missing out if you're ruling against this class.
although I totally come down on the side of pally core abilities persist through the breaking of the oath, I also would like to submit that it may be a wonderful opportunity to homebrew some mechanics to reconnect those powers after the oath is broken. perhaps; 1. the oath is broken 2. immediately after no ability can be used 3. a long or short rest returns features as expected 4. abilities for the next x sessions/hours can be used but require a DC y skill check (perhaps religion) 5. after suitable time goes by all abilities work normally and the pally's journey to the dark side is complete.
just a thought.
Jesus Saves!... Everyone else takes damage.
Maybe change radiant for necrotic damage, healing would probally stay the same unless you have a different idea that seems the same, and aura of protection might be replaced with aura of destruction or accuracy that boosts attack rolls or damage rolls.
RAW, the write up only says, "An Oathbreaker paladin loses previously gained oath spells and instead gains the following Oathbreaker spells at the paladin levels listed."
There is a very specific reason for this. They're never not a Paladin. All they did was betray the Oath they took at level 3.
So first we'll want to distinguish between subclass features and class features. The paladin's subclass features are those tied to their oath - oath spell lists, channel divinities, and the level 7, 15, and 20 features. These features come from the universe itself or the raw divine magic within it responding to the paladin's faithful commitment to the principles of that oath. If a paladin betrays or abandons their oath, then they should lose access to those features. If this happens the paladin will need Atonement and to re-commit themselves to their oath to regain those features, or to another oath to gain the features of that oath.
Alternatively, a Paladin can refuse to seek Atonement and embrace evil instead to take on the features of the Oath Breaker.
Note that a paladin's oath being broken shouldn't be a surprise for the player. By default, there is no cosmic judge weighing a paladin's each and every action, they should have considerable leeway in the interpretation of their oath, as well is in how they prioritize the tenets of their oath should they ever seem to be in conflict. If you don't think the character is acting in accordance with their oath as the DM, you should talk with the player first to see what they think about it. A paladin failing their oath should be a cooperative story telling decision on the part of both the DM and the Player, even if it's something the character in universe doesn't see coming.
So that's how subclass features are handled, but what about the parent class features? Lay on Hands, Divine Smite, Spellcasting, and so on. The default lore for 5e is pretty nebulous about where exactly these features come from, leaving that mostly up to the DM and Players to work out. There are several options you could go with on this:
1) Training. The paladins main class features come from their training, much like the abilities of an Eldritch Knight fighter. Before beginning their adventuring career, a paladin received martial and magical training from a mentor, knightly order, or religious institution. Their class features are the result of this training, and their higher level class features are the result of practice and experience on top of that training. Since these features come from knowledge and experience rather than commitment to their oath, none of these features are lost.
2) Divine Patron. In a setting where the gods are real and active (ie this makes sense in the Forgotten Realms but not so much in Eberron), divine classes might get their powers directly from divine favor. In such a game paladins will have a divine patron in addition to an oath, and martial gods will sponsor paladins of oaths that align with their ethos. A paladin who breaks with their oath will likely also have broken the favor of their deity, and may lose their class features as well until they atone and re-commit themselves to their oath and their deity, or to another oath and another deity, or to an evil deity if they become an Oath Breaker instead. Note that in this scenario it is theoretically possible for a paladin to break their oath while retaining their deity's favor, or lose their deity's favor while remaining true to their oath, so there are potentially layers of commitment involved.
3) Holy Investiture. The paladin's supernatural powers might come not from the direct and ongoing favor of a deity, but rather some sort of special investiture ritual they underwent upon becoming a paladin which granted them ongoing access to divine powers. That access, once granted, is granted, and likely either can't be taken away, or doing so would require an entire separate ritual. In this kind of scenario, a paladin who betrays their oath would not lose parent class powers, but the paladin mentor, knightly order, or religious institution that granted them that power in the first place might start to hunt them down if they ever hear of it, to stop their gift from being abused, and might continue to do so even if the paladin atones, especially if they then commit to another oath, order, or deity.
4) The Oath itself. The paladins class features /also/ come from commitment to their oath, and are lost and regained exactly as their oath veatures are.
Those are just examples. Again, this is all left up to the DM, you could go with something else in your game. You could also say different paladin abilities are derived from different sources. For instance, you might say that combat style is a matter of training, lay on hands, divine smite, and spell slots from holy investiture, and actual spells from divine favor. Then a paladin who breaks their oath and is abandoned by their deity would lose subclass features and would no longer be able to prepare and cast spells, but would still be able to lay on hands and use spell slots for divine smite... at least until their original order captures them and performs an excommunication ritual to break their investiture, at which point all they'd be left with are hit points, proficiencies, and combat style, at least until they're able to find some other order to take them in, perform a new investiture, and allow them to swear a new oath under a new divine patron.
...
All that said - the period where the Paladin is weakened and missing features should be temporary. A paladin who isn't going to regain those features should probably also retire as an adventurer and PC so that the player can create a new character. Once the paladin has atoned and re-committed to an oath (whether the original oath or another one), or has fully embraced the path of the Oath Breaker, all of their features should be restored, albeit with possibly different subclass features if they didn't return to their original oath. Oath Breakers still have lay on hands, divine sense, divine smite, paladin spells, aura of protection, and all that other paladin stuff, they just use these features for selfish and evil ends. That's what makes them so dangerous, and such powerful champions of the forces of darkness, and why paladins of any oath or order consider it a high priority to stop any Oath Breakers they learn of.
So yeah, as a DM your Oath Breaker should still have divine smite (though you might talk with the player about possibly changing it's damage type if 'radiant' energy is characterized as inherently good in your game), and lay on hands, and all that other stuff, and your player is kind of right to complain about that. Being an Oath Breaker isn't supposed to be a mechanical punishment.
An Oath Breaker isn't just a paladin who has fallen from grace and lost their powers. An Oath Breaker is a paladin who did that, and then looked at what they would have to do to get their powers back 'the right way' - particularly the bit about admitting they were wrong and undergoing a laborious Atonement to demonstrate how sorry they are - and said "Forget that, I was right all along! if that's how the the powers of righteousness are going to treat me, then this entire world can just go to hell for all I care, and if I could I'd send it there myself!" and the powers of the nine hells (or the abyss, or the far realm, or some other place of cosmic evil within your game) heard them and said "I'll give you all your stuff back for free* if you follow through on all those cool things you just said".
*terms and conditions may apply
The punishment for becoming an Oath Breaker isn't losing your powers. Quite the contrary, the reward for becoming an Oath Breaker is getting those powers back, and without having to humble yourself in the process. No, the punishment for becoming an Oath Breaker is that every paladin who hears about you is going to consider it their personal responsibility to take you down, especially your original mentor/knightly order/religious institution. The other drawback is that if you stray from your new, evil path you'll find that the patrons of darkness are a lot less forgiving than those of light and will generally do a lot worse to you than just take your toys and put you in a metaphorical time out. If that happens, your own dark powers become a curse, in particularly the level 7 aura that empowers the melee attacks of fiends and undead. The aura doesn't care if those monsters are fighting for or against you, so if you try to turn on your new evil allies your own powers will help them destroy you.
I would like to offer up my interpretation of an Oathbreaker, especially as I've had one of my own who is CG. As a paladin, you gain your powers through a plethora of different ways, but one of the most universal is conviction, whether it be to a cause, to an ideal, to the law or to a lord, but the unifying factor here is that it manifests itself into an oath. Well, if this is the method in which your paladin gained their powers, what happens when you're forced to confront the fact that your oath, and the oaths of others, could ultimately stand in the way of your vision of good, and you decide to abandon them to pursue that vision itself?
An example of this can be shown in the story of how my Paladin became an Oathbreaker, as she used to be a LG Oath of the Ancients paladin. After the end of her training, she and her master were sent to a city in order to save it from an occupying evil cult, but then came a dilemma: They were keeping the civilians as hostages, but were carrying out a corruptive ritual in the powerful magical grove near the city. As an OotA paladin like her master, it was her duty to protect the grove above all else, but it was a greater good to save those trapped civilians than to leave them for dead. As her master rode on towards the grove, she had to grapple with her conflicting goals, and when she finally decided to save the civilians, she was already too late for most of them, and without her assistance her master couldn't stop the ritual. To keep her oath would have meant letting a greater evil happen, and as such she ultimately did break it, leaving her master behind as she tried to sort out her crisis of values.
Now, if that were all, she'd merely be a fallen paladin, but that's not the whole of the story. She considered dedicating herself to destroying the cult, but to make that her driving goal would have meant she'd have just mindlessly killed members of the cult, neither saving the grove nor the civilians. She considered dedicating herself to saving all lives, dedicating herself to turning evil into good, but realized that doing so wouldn't have let her even save those few civilians she did get to in time. She could embrace the law, striving to uphold it in every action she makes, but to do so would mean serving more men like her master, who have goals that differ from what causes the most good. She could dedicate herself to the knightly virtues, but to do so would mean that she'd ultimately just be limiting her ability to do good, once again setting a rule above what is truly right. She could dedicate herself to gaining power, so that she'd never be weak enough to be forced to choose between these two choices, but what about when trying to increase your own power would end up causing just as much damage, if not more? She could strive to become a legendary warrior, sung about by bards, but what of those who do what is distasteful, what is considered dishonorable, all to make the world a better place? They don't get songs written about them, and yet they can do far greater and longer lasting good than a mere song could. And to be frank, the order of watchers fail to understand the reality that a gift from an outsider may be used to make the world a better place, not to mention the tales of the redeemed succubus (yes, WOTC officially endorsed a LG Oath of Redemption Succubus, which really solidifies their statement that any being can defy their "natural" alignments).
To bind herself to another oath would be to ultimately bind her from doing the greatest amount of good, no matter how nice or otherwise beneficial it might be. And so, she decided not to bind herself to any oath, to not limit her options in improving the world, and instead turned her conviction to doing so directly, rather than through some situational aspect of it. She would not allow any self-imposed rules stop her, nor would she let any unjust laws slow her down. Upon coming to this decision, she understood that there was one way, if she nurtured it, controlled it, and utilized it, to give those civilians another chance, even if it stood in the face of natural and man-made laws. She went back to the grove, filled to the brim with demonic and negative energy, and harvested some of the negative energy so that she could break the natural cycle of life and death, and reanimate those civilians as soon as her mastery over it was sufficient. And that's how she became a level 3 CG oathbreaker.
Now, obviously if you're running, or are part of, a campaign in which paladins need a patron, like a cleric or warlock, doing such a thing would be impossible in the current state of the game. But when it's conviction for a cause or ideal, an oathbreaker represents going straight towards that ideal, rather than an aspect of it that can get in the way. It should also be noted that in spite of the flavor text of the intro, nothing about the actual abilities are inherently evil, and they instead paint a picture of unrestricted power and usage of powers towards achieving your goal, much like a theoretical Black-Red aligned hero from MTG.
Your channel divinities represent either turning an opponent into a tool to reach your goal, or pushing them out of the way such that they can't impede you. Aura of hate makes it so you and those fighting under your control can destroy obstacles towards your goal, much like how a light-side Sith Warrior from SWTOR is still a destructive powerhouse that can't be stopped. Supernatural Resistance takes this a step further, making it so, much like in V for Vendetta, your achievement of your goals becomes bulletproof, though more literal this time. And finally, Dread Lord makes it so you and your allies become nearly untouchable, while giving you the ability to completely and utterly annihilate those who try to stop you, like some evil cultists.
And the spell list only furthers this idea, with you increasing your killing ability, punishing those who try to stop you, once again turning your enemies into tools to achieve your goals, protecting you and your allies while simultaneously denying your opposition opportunities, giving yourself even more allies(and more importantly for my character: being potentially modifiable to reanimate people as sentient undead), and finally debilitating your opponents so they can't even try to stop you.
The only things that really hold you back from an oathbreaker at all are A: the stigma against necromancy, and B: the line of "to pursue some dark ambition or serve an evil power." from the flavor description, despite the fact that D&D has consistently been becoming less alignment-reliant over time. Then again, I guess that first part of the OR statement could be rebranded as more of a necromancy-supporting statement rather than an outright selfish and/or evil goals statement.
It's an inherent conflict in 5e design that Paladins no longer derive their power from allegiance to a deity, rather their Oath for some reason gives them power. It does raise some questions -- if the ability doesn't come from a divine power, why is it a DIVINE smite? Trying to infer logic from that design could be difficult, and of course, we can all take the opportunity to role-play that consideration and house-rule it.
House-ruling it does mean returning closer to TSR's AD&D design, whereby yeah, you lose almost all your powers when you break your allegiance to a deity (unless you swear a new one presumably? Though in one of the early Dragon Issue, they did come up with an Anti-Paladin). Or if you're running it by 5e design, then the paladin simply switches sub-class abilities. As was pointed out earlier as well, the smite is a basic ability rather than sub-class.
Actually you're dead wrong.
Page 86 of the Player's Handbook clearly states what happens to a Paladin if the break their Oath.
A paladin who has broken a vow typically seeks absolution from a cleric who shares his or her faith or from another paladin of the same order. ... If a paladin willfully violates his or her oath and shows no sign of repentance, the consequences can be more serious. At the DM's discretion, an impenitent paladin might be forced to abandon this class and adopt another, or perhaps to take the Oathbreaker paladin option that appears in the Dungeon Master's Guide.
A Paladin can no longer be a Paladin by breaking their Oath as stated by the PHB. In this thread I see no mention that the aforementioned player has actually taken the Oath Breaker Class but the OP states the Player is going down the Path of the Oath Breaker. So abilities he has or doesnt have depend on the severity of him breaking his Oath and how repentant he is that he did so.
Paladin Oathbreaker subclass in the DMG is designed for an NPC, not a true character subclass. A DM can decide to allow this subclass to be played, but it was not originally intended as such. The section that has the Oathbreaker is titled "Villainous Class Options," which is for the DM to create an NPC for the party to contest. I don't believe Oathbreaker appears anywhere else, as a subclass, other than the DMG as an NPC option for the DM.