My party and I are currently playing Ascent into Avernus. I have only played a paladin once and that was over 10 years ago. I’m currently a hexblade warlock but I wanted to create a back up Paladin character.
I’m having trouble deciding what subclass to play and could use some advice on which to choose. I want to sword and board it so I can stand my ground, but also deal ok damage, and maybe help heal a little bit as well in emergencies. I’m interested in oath of ancients but I am open to other options.
There aren't really any bad paladin oaths, but there are a couple that work less well in this campaign due to the preponderance of enemy fiends. Oathbreaker is one, as enemy fiends will be able to benefit from your damage boosting aura. Conquest is another as nearly all fiends have spell resistance, giving them advantage on saves vs. your channel divinity and other frighten effects.
Any of the others is fine thanks to the favorable parent class features. Honestly, even Conquerors can manage well enough on Divine Smite and save frighten effects for the occasional non-fiendish enemies.
If I had to suggest one, it would probably be ancients to get your party some advantage on spell saves of your own.
Redemption has some great flavour for spoiler reasons, but mechanically likely isn't the best for the adventure in any particular fashion. Other good paladin oaths though would be Heroism (While UA material, can help give some nice temp health to allies on kills which can help out nicely), Devotion (Charm can actually come up in this campaign so the level 7 feature isn't worthless), and Ancients (Resistance to ALL SPELLS is bonkers).
In terms of role-play, there's really something to be said for a cursed warrior - someone like Guts from Berserk or Simon Belmont from Castlevania 2 - using the mechanics of the Oathbreaker. A hero tainted by dark magic that calls evil spirits to them and empowers those same spirits, as represented by the oathbreakers aura that buffs not only their own melee damage but also that of ALL nearby fiends and undead - including enemies.
Maybe make it an aasimar paladin whose celestial patron was corrupted and turned into a devil, and now they need to go to Avernus not only to [spoilers redacted] but also to find their patron and either redeem them (causing the character to change into a protector aasimar / redemption paladin) or, if that's not possible, then destroy them, ending their threat to the realms (causing the character to change into a scourge aasimar / vengeance paladin). Maybe the patron is Zariel herself, and the paladin is descended from an aasimar champion she uplifted before her fall, that power passed down through the generations, and now - as a side goal within her broader schemes in the campaign - Zariel is drawing the hero into Avernus in order to take back the portion of her power that she gave their ancestor, so that she might instead offer that power a mortal champion of her own evil choosing, perhaps a zariel-bloodline tiefling hell knight paladin of the oath of conquest who could be added to the campaign as a recurring rival & supporting antagonist. Or maybe zariel isn't consciously drawing the hero in, but rather some buried portion of her once celestial mind still railing against what she has become has done so in a last ditch effort to stop herself.
Lots of narrative possibilities there. And lots of compelling game play scenarios as the party has to balance the benefits of being within the paladin's aura of protection against the negatives of taking extra damage from the melee attacks of enemy fiends empowered by the subclass aura. Definitely something to run by a party before doing, even if the DM is into it, though. Buffing the enemies as the party approaches the end of an already challenging campaign is something of a troll maneuver.
But still, as a role playing concept it sounds pretty amazing to me.
Conquest Paladins are trash in Avernous. You are talking a sub class who's entire ability is built around fear. Remind me how many Devils and Demons are immune to fear?
Honestly the best Paladins in general will be Paladins that can boost their to hit dice and have more ways of making their weapon magical.
If you are not playing in adventure league there are very very few magic items in this game. My party is lvl 8 and we are still working with the items we got per AL rules at lvl 5. There is only 2 magical weapons. A +1Mace and a +1 dagger that you can find as far as magical weapons. There are a total of 5 magic items that my party has found so far.
With all this into account Devotions are probably the best choice here. I dont have a magic weapon yet at lvl 8. I've been using sacred weapon and the guantlets of flaming fury to make myvstandard ling sword magical.
Combine this with a high AC 23 and being having a spell that always prepared to put fiends and undead at disadvantage against you. You're very surviveable
Oath of ancients with sword and board, pump Cha to help with saves from your aura. Str as well to be able to wear plate and do decent damage but focus more on mitigating damage against the party.
Conquest Paladins are trash in Avernous. You are talking a sub class who's entire ability is built around fear. Remind me how many Devils and Demons are immune to fear?
Not very many, actually. There are a few - a soldier type devil that's immune to frighten while in line of sight of allies comes to mind - but for the most part fiends are NOT immune to frighten in 5e, and a lot of fiends and fiend-adjacent enemies (tieflings, fiendish whatevers, hell hounds, nightmares, etc) are actually quite vulnerable to frighten. However, most proper demons and devils have spell resistance that gives them advantage on saves against 'spells and magical effects', which according to RAI includes channel divinity, and that advantage is enough that it's generally not worth trying to frighten them.
These highly-frighten-resistant enemies are common enough in avernus that conquest is not the strongest option in the campaign... but while it might be the worst paladin oath choice, it's still far from a bad character. Even after you get to Avernus, there are still cultists, undead (which like fiends used to be blanket immune to frighten in previous editions but in 5e mostly aren't), and non-resistant fiends aplenty. Just in the last session my conquest hexadin landed wrathful smite on skeletal minotaurs in a couple separate encounters, effectively taking those otherwise quite threatening enemies out of their respective fights. The session before there was a fight with a bunch of fiendish giant crabs that would have been perfect for my channel divinity. Unfortunately I didn't have it available at the time, but still, the point is the opportunities were there.
Even in fights against frighten-immune or highly-resistant enemies, you're still a paladin, and paladins are still amazing in Avernus on the parent class features alone. Again, it's arguably the weakest paladin oath in Avernus, at least the weakest that isn't actively detrimental to your team, so I'm not saying it's great in that campaign, but it's still plenty effective if you want to play a conqueror for thematic reasons. Say a Zariel legacy tiefling hell knight joining up with the heroes because you believe Zariel's actions have gone too far and risk breaking the truce with non-evil deities.
Conquest Paladins are trash in Avernous. You are talking a sub class who's entire ability is built around fear. Remind me how many Devils and Demons are immune to fear?
Not very many, actually. There are a few - a soldier type devil that's immune to frighten while in line of sight of allies comes to mind - but for the most part fiends are NOT immune to frighten in 5e, and a lot of fiends and fiend-adjacent enemies (tieflings, fiendish whatevers, hell hounds, nightmares, etc) are actually quite vulnerable to frighten. However, most proper demons and devils have spell resistance that gives them advantage on saves against 'spells and magical effects', which according to RAI includes channel divinity, and that advantage is enough that it's generally not worth trying to frighten them.
These highly-frighten-resistant enemies are common enough in avernus that conquest is not the strongest option in the campaign... but while it might be the worst paladin oath choice, it's still far from a bad character. Even after you get to Avernus, there are still cultists, undead (which like fiends used to be blanket immune to frighten in previous editions but in 5e mostly aren't), and non-resistant fiends aplenty. Just in the last session my conquest hexadin landed wrathful smite on skeletal minotaurs in a couple separate encounters, effectively taking those otherwise quite threatening enemies out of their respective fights. The session before there was a fight with a bunch of fiendish giant crabs that would have been perfect for my channel divinity. Unfortunately I didn't have it available at the time, but still, the point is the opportunities were there.
Even in fights against frighten-immune or highly-resistant enemies, you're still a paladin, and paladins are still amazing in Avernus on the parent class features alone. Again, it's arguably the weakest paladin oath in Avernus, at least the weakest that isn't actively detrimental to your team, so I'm not saying it's great in that campaign, but it's still plenty effective if you want to play a conqueror for thematic reasons. Say a Zariel legacy tiefling hell knight joining up with the heroes because you believe Zariel's actions have gone too far and risk breaking the truce with non-evil deities.
Dont get me wrong Paladins are always Paladins. Saying it was trash for Avernus was saying it was a weak choice. Yes its strong language but all the same it is the weakest choice among the Paladins.
In this setting Devotion is arguably the strongest. Immune from charm, fear, sacred , weapon, and protection from evil and good as a permanent prepared spell.
This being said Paladins are always strong. A Conquest next to a Devotion will definitely know the difference though.
I agree there, but it is a matter of perspective. Conquest is arguably the weakest oath (if we're not counting oathbreaker, which, again, is actively detrimental to the party once it hits level 7), but even then not by that much, and crown only pulls ahead of it towards the end of the campaign when it gains access to spirit guardians.
But if you stack not just paladins next to each other but all the classes & subclasses, conquest is still going to be towards the top of that overall pile. If you just want to play a paladin and dont care which then devotion or ancients is going to be the strongest choice, but if you want to play a conqueror specifically you'll do just fine, especially if you opt for the common hexblade dip.
Although it's worth pointing out that the moral independance of conquerors gives them a lot more freedom to operate in avernus, making beneficial infernal bargains and alliances that other more traditional paladins might have a hard time squaring with their oaths.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
My party and I are currently playing Ascent into Avernus. I have only played a paladin once and that was over 10 years ago. I’m currently a hexblade warlock but I wanted to create a back up Paladin character.
I’m having trouble deciding what subclass to play and could use some advice on which to choose. I want to sword and board it so I can stand my ground, but also deal ok damage, and maybe help heal a little bit as well in emergencies. I’m interested in oath of ancients but I am open to other options.
Feat and build advice is also welcome.
We are currently level 6.
Be oath of redemption. It will be super useful in this campaign.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
There aren't really any bad paladin oaths, but there are a couple that work less well in this campaign due to the preponderance of enemy fiends. Oathbreaker is one, as enemy fiends will be able to benefit from your damage boosting aura. Conquest is another as nearly all fiends have spell resistance, giving them advantage on saves vs. your channel divinity and other frighten effects.
Any of the others is fine thanks to the favorable parent class features. Honestly, even Conquerors can manage well enough on Divine Smite and save frighten effects for the occasional non-fiendish enemies.
If I had to suggest one, it would probably be ancients to get your party some advantage on spell saves of your own.
Conquest is good, even with the magic resistance, but I think Redemption is better, especially for this campaign.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
Redemption has some great flavour for spoiler reasons, but mechanically likely isn't the best for the adventure in any particular fashion. Other good paladin oaths though would be Heroism (While UA material, can help give some nice temp health to allies on kills which can help out nicely), Devotion (Charm can actually come up in this campaign so the level 7 feature isn't worthless), and Ancients (Resistance to ALL SPELLS is bonkers).
In terms of role-play, there's really something to be said for a cursed warrior - someone like Guts from Berserk or Simon Belmont from Castlevania 2 - using the mechanics of the Oathbreaker. A hero tainted by dark magic that calls evil spirits to them and empowers those same spirits, as represented by the oathbreakers aura that buffs not only their own melee damage but also that of ALL nearby fiends and undead - including enemies.
Maybe make it an aasimar paladin whose celestial patron was corrupted and turned into a devil, and now they need to go to Avernus not only to [spoilers redacted] but also to find their patron and either redeem them (causing the character to change into a protector aasimar / redemption paladin) or, if that's not possible, then destroy them, ending their threat to the realms (causing the character to change into a scourge aasimar / vengeance paladin). Maybe the patron is Zariel herself, and the paladin is descended from an aasimar champion she uplifted before her fall, that power passed down through the generations, and now - as a side goal within her broader schemes in the campaign - Zariel is drawing the hero into Avernus in order to take back the portion of her power that she gave their ancestor, so that she might instead offer that power a mortal champion of her own evil choosing, perhaps a zariel-bloodline tiefling hell knight paladin of the oath of conquest who could be added to the campaign as a recurring rival & supporting antagonist. Or maybe zariel isn't consciously drawing the hero in, but rather some buried portion of her once celestial mind still railing against what she has become has done so in a last ditch effort to stop herself.
Lots of narrative possibilities there. And lots of compelling game play scenarios as the party has to balance the benefits of being within the paladin's aura of protection against the negatives of taking extra damage from the melee attacks of enemy fiends empowered by the subclass aura. Definitely something to run by a party before doing, even if the DM is into it, though. Buffing the enemies as the party approaches the end of an already challenging campaign is something of a troll maneuver.
But still, as a role playing concept it sounds pretty amazing to me.
Conquest Paladins are trash in Avernous. You are talking a sub class who's entire ability is built around fear. Remind me how many Devils and Demons are immune to fear?
Honestly the best Paladins in general will be Paladins that can boost their to hit dice and have more ways of making their weapon magical.
If you are not playing in adventure league there are very very few magic items in this game. My party is lvl 8 and we are still working with the items we got per AL rules at lvl 5. There is only 2 magical weapons. A +1Mace and a +1 dagger that you can find as far as magical weapons. There are a total of 5 magic items that my party has found so far.
With all this into account Devotions are probably the best choice here. I dont have a magic weapon yet at lvl 8. I've been using sacred weapon and the guantlets of flaming fury to make myvstandard ling sword magical.
Combine this with a high AC 23 and being having a spell that always prepared to put fiends and undead at disadvantage against you. You're very surviveable
Oath of ancients with sword and board, pump Cha to help with saves from your aura. Str as well to be able to wear plate and do decent damage but focus more on mitigating damage against the party.
Not very many, actually. There are a few - a soldier type devil that's immune to frighten while in line of sight of allies comes to mind - but for the most part fiends are NOT immune to frighten in 5e, and a lot of fiends and fiend-adjacent enemies (tieflings, fiendish whatevers, hell hounds, nightmares, etc) are actually quite vulnerable to frighten. However, most proper demons and devils have spell resistance that gives them advantage on saves against 'spells and magical effects', which according to RAI includes channel divinity, and that advantage is enough that it's generally not worth trying to frighten them.
These highly-frighten-resistant enemies are common enough in avernus that conquest is not the strongest option in the campaign... but while it might be the worst paladin oath choice, it's still far from a bad character. Even after you get to Avernus, there are still cultists, undead (which like fiends used to be blanket immune to frighten in previous editions but in 5e mostly aren't), and non-resistant fiends aplenty. Just in the last session my conquest hexadin landed wrathful smite on skeletal minotaurs in a couple separate encounters, effectively taking those otherwise quite threatening enemies out of their respective fights. The session before there was a fight with a bunch of fiendish giant crabs that would have been perfect for my channel divinity. Unfortunately I didn't have it available at the time, but still, the point is the opportunities were there.
Even in fights against frighten-immune or highly-resistant enemies, you're still a paladin, and paladins are still amazing in Avernus on the parent class features alone. Again, it's arguably the weakest paladin oath in Avernus, at least the weakest that isn't actively detrimental to your team, so I'm not saying it's great in that campaign, but it's still plenty effective if you want to play a conqueror for thematic reasons. Say a Zariel legacy tiefling hell knight joining up with the heroes because you believe Zariel's actions have gone too far and risk breaking the truce with non-evil deities.
Dont get me wrong Paladins are always Paladins. Saying it was trash for Avernus was saying it was a weak choice. Yes its strong language but all the same it is the weakest choice among the Paladins.
In this setting Devotion is arguably the strongest. Immune from charm, fear, sacred , weapon, and protection from evil and good as a permanent prepared spell.
This being said Paladins are always strong. A Conquest next to a Devotion will definitely know the difference though.
I agree there, but it is a matter of perspective. Conquest is arguably the weakest oath (if we're not counting oathbreaker, which, again, is actively detrimental to the party once it hits level 7), but even then not by that much, and crown only pulls ahead of it towards the end of the campaign when it gains access to spirit guardians.
But if you stack not just paladins next to each other but all the classes & subclasses, conquest is still going to be towards the top of that overall pile. If you just want to play a paladin and dont care which then devotion or ancients is going to be the strongest choice, but if you want to play a conqueror specifically you'll do just fine, especially if you opt for the common hexblade dip.
Although it's worth pointing out that the moral independance of conquerors gives them a lot more freedom to operate in avernus, making beneficial infernal bargains and alliances that other more traditional paladins might have a hard time squaring with their oaths.