The Paladin-God Relationship in 5E

[DrIllidan]

I am pretty new to both 5E and DM'ing, and I am looking for some advice on how to handle a Paladin that is going against the tenets of the god he follows, but not breaking any of the tenets in his Oath.

In earlier editions, a Paladin changing alignment or rebelling against their god might lead to that Paladin falling. In 5E, though, the PHB makes it pretty clear that Paladins get all of their powers from their Sacred Oaths and their "commitment to justice itself." Paladins are not even required to choose or follow a god, as the discussion about it is always prefaced with a qualifier like "many who swear this oath are devoted to gods of law" instead of "all who swear this oath are devoted to gods of law." Nevertheless, it seems to be pretty strongly implied that Paladins should actively worship a god or pantheon of gods, especially as they can use a holy symbol as a spellcasting focus.

The player in my game has not broken his Oath (Vengeance, if you are wondering--which you could probably guess), but he has done things the god he follows would be unhappy about. How would you handle this? Messing with his class features seems out of the question, as it can really sour the Paladin experience and also seems straight-up wrong in this case.

Right now, I'm leaning towards having a priest giving him a warning (maybe coupled with the priest of another, more amenable god trying to recruit him?). If he doesn't leave the church or change his behavior afterward, I'd have him branded a heretic and incorporate that into the campaign a bit, but I'd like to see what more experienced players and DMs might have in mind.

[brainface]

You know that scene in cop dramas, where the hero has gone too far, and police captain says "You've gone too far McPaladin dude! You're a loose cannon! I'm taking your badge and your gun!"

This is your dude. He's not lost any personal power, but he can't call on his superiors for backup and his god is no longer a comforting voice in his head.

[Sigreid]

His power isn't his god's to give or take, this is true. If, and I repeat only if, you really want to drive a particular point home you could have his god visit him with some kind of a curse as punishment. If you do that, I wouldn't make it anything too major. Probably something along the lines of Cain's mark. A blemish that the followers of his god would recognize as him being ill-favored and react accordingly.

[Alegast]

Are the gods of your campaign an active force in the world? In this case, the god may send portents to him, warnings that he is crossing the line. The god can even began to hinder the "luck" of this paladin, or sending his minions (angels or other mortal servants) to deal with this black sheep. Or those mortal servants can do it on their own, because they don't want someone to stain the name of their god.

[Talamare]

Like what? What has he done?

[Kane0]

The player in my game has not broken his Oath (Vengeance, if you are wondering--which you could probably guess), but he has done things the god he follows would be unhappy about. How would you handle this? Messing with his class features seems out of the question, as it can really sour the Paladin experience and also seems straight-up wrong in this case.

Right now, I'm leaning towards having a priest giving him a warning (maybe coupled with the priest of another, more amenable god trying to recruit him?). If he doesn't leave the church or change his behavior afterward, I'd have him branded a heretic and incorporate that into the campaign a bit, but I'd like to see what more experienced players and DMs might have in mind.

I think you're dealing with it in the right way. He doesn't lose all his paladin mechanics nor become an oathbreaker paladin, but the world does respond to his choices and actions accordingly. His church will not be happy, another might try to make a move on him. If he continues to snub his faith he is cast out, or even hunted down if particularly nasty.

[djreynolds]

I think you're dealing with it in the right way. He doesn't lose all his paladin mechanics nor become an oathbreaker paladin, but the world does respond to his choices and actions accordingly. His church will not be happy, another might try to make a move on him. If he continues to snub his faith he is cast out, or even hunted down if particularly nasty.

Yes, awesome. In a game of resource management having to fight people hired out to hurt you as an extra occurrence will straighten him out, or his party will, or... he gets stronger.

[Arkhios]

Maybe you could, for a short period of time, cause the paladin's oath features (but not the general features) to fizzle when used; not only oath-granted spells but also channel divinity and such, as the god is punishing the paladin for his transgressions. Think of it as a reminder from the god to the paladin about who gave him those powers. I know it's not RAW to say that paladin oath powers would come from a god, but it's plausible enough considering what you said yourself: they can use holy symbols as spellcasting foci, which is a rather direct implication to a somewhat divine connection (as are many of their other class features).

Maybe for until he takes a long rest to willingly and by own volition repent his actions.

Or, perhaps you could sever the connection to use Holy Symbol for a while. Meaning he would have to use materials when needed instead of a focus.
After all, as PHB states: "Charisma is your spellcasting ability for your paladin spells, since their power derives from the strength of your convictions." If your convictions falter, your spellcasting weakens.

[Wymmerdann]

Oath of Vengeance Paladins are inherently radical, and like many religious limbs, might not be readily identified as springing from the same roots as the rest of the branches. They tend toward consequentialism and pragmatism in a way that would be uncomfortable, if not apostatic, to idealistic and deontological [duty based] deities and creeds. Such deities include the standard Paladin deities like Hieroneus and Bahamut. An Oath of Vengeance Paladin is a great opportunity to explore how far ideals can be pursued through methods that have friction or jar with those ideals. Perhaps you and the Paladin player can practice the climactic Dialogue from A Few Good Men so that the Paladin can explain to some limp-wristed armchair-philosopher cleric why the Gods have put up walls around civilisation, and clerics NEED men like OOV Paladins to man those walls:


"And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saves lives! You don't want the truth, because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that wall. You need me on that wall. We use words like "honor", "code", "loyalty". We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punchline. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom that I provide, and then questions the manner in which I provide it! I would rather you just said "thank you", and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a weapon, and stand a post. Either way, I don't give a damn what you think you are entitled to!"

To avoid IRL examples, consider Batman. He breaks heaps of laws, but is a force for law and order in Gotham, because crime had begun to threaten the fabric of society and civil institutions. The Nolan films emphasise the extreme nature of the situation which justifies the rise of such a figure.

[Arkhios]

Oath of Vengeance Paladins are inherently radical, and like many religious limbs, might not be readily identified as springing from the same roots as the rest of the branches. They tend toward consequentialism and pragmatism in a way that would be uncomfortable, if not apostatic, to idealistic and deontological [duty based] deities and creeds. Such deities include the standard Paladin deities like Hieroneus and Bahamut. An Oath of Vengeance Paladin is a great opportunity to explore how far ideals can be pursued through methods that have friction or jar with those ideals. Perhaps you and the Paladin player can practice the climactic Dialogue from A Few Good Men so that the Paladin can explain to some limp-wristed armchair-philosopher cleric why the Gods have put up walls around civilisation, and clerics NEED men like OOV Paladins to man those walls:


"And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saves lives! You don't want the truth, because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that wall. You need me on that wall. We use words like "honor", "code", "loyalty". We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punchline. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom that I provide, and then questions the manner in which I provide it! I would rather you just said "thank you", and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a weapon, and stand a post. Either way, I don't give a damn what you think you are entitled to!"

To avoid IRL examples, consider Batman. He breaks heaps of laws, but is a force for law and order in Gotham, because crime had begun to threaten the fabric of society and civil institutions. The Nolan films emphasise the extreme nature of the situation which justifies the rise of such a figure.

That is perhaps the best justification for an OoV Paladin's actions I've ever seen, hands down!

[Clistenes]

In 3.5 ed I liked to say that it were Archons, and not Gods, who gave Paladins their powers. That explains why they had to be LG and uphold the same a strict code of conduct regardless of who their patron deity was.

[djreynolds]

Bane has Paladins of Vengeance, honestly, I wish the DMG came out and said this god has these paladins, or clerics. I like the free for all attitude of 5E, but a little structure isn't bad

[manny2510]

Next time he casts a spell his holy symbol shatters for 1d4 slashing giving an ominous scar. He cannot use that focus anymore and must find a God that does approve of him.

[mgshamster]

Next time he casts a spell his holy symbol shatters for 1d4 slashing giving an ominous scar. He cannot use that focus anymore and must find a God that does approve of him.

Depending on how extreme and consistent the violation is, this could be a good alternative.

Paladin's gain their spells through prayer and meditation and have the option to use a holy symbol as a spell focus. You could make it so prayers to that God no long work (although meditation still works) and that the holy symbol to that God doesn't work (need to find a different God who accepts the paladin or use a spell component pouch).

However, that's only an extreme case or for consistent violations. If this is a minor to medium case or a one time violation, simply have the God send a priest or cleric on a mission to find the paladin and explain to the errors of his/her ways.

Even with all that, though, it should be recognized that a paladin (especially one of vengeance) should be allowed to cross over the line a bit further and more often than a cleric.

My favorite way of handling this, though, is "real world" repercussions. If the paladin refuses to see the error in his/her actions and continues to flaunt the God, or does something extremely grievous, simply have the God tell the church that he is no longer a part of the flock and they are not to give him special aid anymore. They are to treat him as they treat all non-believers (be it kindness or healing-for-gold for good/neutral religions or even hunting him down if it's an evil religion). Since he hasn't actively harmed anyone of the church, he shouldn't be hunted down, but he can be excommunicated.

If the paladin wants back in the church, s/he needs to go on a mission for redemption.

[gfishfunk]

I am pretty new to both 5E and DM'ing, and I am looking for some advice on how to handle a Paladin that is going against the tenets of the god he follows, but not breaking any of the tenets in his Oath.


You know that scene in cop dramas, where the hero has gone too far, and police captain says "You've gone too far McPaladin dude! You're a loose cannon! I'm taking your badge and your gun!"

This is your dude. He's not lost any personal power, but he can't call on his superiors for backup and his god is no longer a comforting voice in his head.

I like this approach: he keeps his stuff, but gets called out for it by followers. Don't provide any mechanical detriment, because he is playing his subclass accurately.

How about the god send a priest to mark the paladin as a heretic? He follows a god that disdains him and his methods.

[manny2510]

Depending on how extreme and consistent the violation is, this could be a good alternative.

Paladin's gain their spells through prayer and meditation and have the option to use a holy symbol as a spell focus. You could make it so prayers to that God no long work (although meditation still works) and that the holy symbol to that God doesn't work (need to find a different God who accepts the paladin or use a spell component pouch).

However, that's only an extreme case or for consistent violations. If this is a minor to medium case or a one time violation, simply have the God send a priest or cleric on a mission to find the paladin and explain to the errors of his/her ways.

Even with all that, though, it should be recognized that a paladin (especially one of vengeance) should be allowed to cross over the line a bit further and more often than a cleric.

My favorite way of handling this, though, is "real world" repercussions. If the paladin refuses to see the error in his/her actions and continues to flaunt the God, or does something extremely grievous, simply have the God tell the church that he is no longer a part of the flock and they are not to give him special aid anymore. They are to treat him as they treat all non-believers (be it kindness or healing-for-gold for good/neutral religions or even hunting him down if it's an evil religion). Since he hasn't actively harmed anyone of the church, he shouldn't be hunted down, but he can be excommunicated.

If the paladin wants back in the church, s/he needs to go on a mission for redemption.

He can cross the line all he wants and keep powers that never refer to a deity, I'm just saying that if I were an all powerful being that requires atonement I'm destroying holy symbols he uses dedicated to me for the amount of gold equivalent to the deed he has wrought. Also isn't it hypocritical to kill sentient beings with god given powers when you don't follow their tenets? Also I'd never take spells away because even if you worship Pelor Bane will still happily give you spells to spit in his eye, and that can be said for numerous petty gods.

[Addaran]

I aggree with most. I wouldn't give any mechanical disadvantage. Subtle messages from the God or his followers at first. Then roleplay implications like how they act with him or even excommuniation. If he does break important tenets of the God, maybe have the holy symbole fracture and he hears: "Do not use my name anymore, mortal." So now he have to share the spell component pouch of the wizard.

[Oramac]

Oath of Vengeance Paladins are inherently radical, and like many religious limbs, might not be readily identified as springing from the same roots as the rest of the branches. They tend toward consequentialism and pragmatism in a way that would be uncomfortable, if not apostatic, to idealistic and deontological [duty based] deities and creeds. Such deities include the standard Paladin deities like Hieroneus and Bahamut. An Oath of Vengeance Paladin is a great opportunity to explore how far ideals can be pursued through methods that have friction or jar with those ideals. Perhaps you and the Paladin player can practice the climactic Dialogue from A Few Good Men so that the Paladin can explain to some limp-wristed armchair-philosopher cleric why the Gods have put up walls around civilisation, and clerics NEED men like OOV Paladins to man those walls:


"And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saves lives! You don't want the truth, because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that wall. You need me on that wall. We use words like "honor", "code", "loyalty". We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punchline. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom that I provide, and then questions the manner in which I provide it! I would rather you just said "thank you", and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a weapon, and stand a post. Either way, I don't give a damn what you think you are entitled to!"

To avoid IRL examples, consider Batman. He breaks heaps of laws, but is a force for law and order in Gotham, because crime had begun to threaten the fabric of society and civil institutions. The Nolan films emphasise the extreme nature of the situation which justifies the rise of such a figure.

I'm currently playing an Oath of Vengeance Paladin. I'm totally using this!

[Slipperychicken]

Right now, I'm leaning towards having a priest giving him a warning (maybe coupled with the priest of another, more amenable god trying to recruit him?). If he doesn't leave the church or change his behavior afterward, I'd have him branded a heretic and incorporate that into the campaign a bit, but I'd like to see what more experienced players and DMs might have in mind.

You could make that a whole thing. Someone from the clergy could have a conversation with him about why he's doing these things, try to learn what his concerns are, set him up for an appropriate penance, and generally try to bring him back to the right path. That would be a lot more interesting than simply declaring him a heretic. It also makes sense for the church, because they'd rather keep a warrior like him on their side, rather than adding him to the ranks of the heretics.

[raspin]

What is he actually doing?

[eastmabl]

Bane has Paladins of Vengeance, honestly, I wish the DMG came out and said this god has these paladins, or clerics. I like the free for all attitude of 5E, but a little structure isn't bad

PHB doesn't set a default pantheon. It's pretty well implied that the default pantheon is Forgotten Realms because of the human entry, but most of the PHB is written to be system-neutral. The DMG is written in a similar fashion. Thus, the PHB wouldn't make mention of this.

SCAG, as a setting book, would be where you get this kind of direction. It has an entry on different paladins in the Realms, but I don't recall what is listed there.

[Talamare]

Come on, I'm dying to know what he is doing that is causing you to want to declare him an Oathbreaker
Especially since we are having a discussion on what it means to be a Vengeance Paladin on a different thread

[Oramac]

Especially since we are having a discussion on what it means to be a Vengeance Paladin on a different thread

What thread is this? I don't recall seeing one, and would love to read it!

[Vogonjeltz]

I am pretty new to both 5E and DM'ing, and I am looking for some advice on how to handle a Paladin that is going against the tenets of the god he follows, but not breaking any of the tenets in his Oath.

In earlier editions, a Paladin changing alignment or rebelling against their god might lead to that Paladin falling. In 5E, though, the PHB makes it pretty clear that Paladins get all of their powers from their Sacred Oaths and their "commitment to justice itself." Paladins are not even required to choose or follow a god, as the discussion about it is always prefaced with a qualifier like "many who swear this oath are devoted to gods of law" instead of "all who swear this oath are devoted to gods of law." Nevertheless, it seems to be pretty strongly implied that Paladins should actively worship a god or pantheon of gods, especially as they can use a holy symbol as a spellcasting focus.

The player in my game has not broken his Oath (Vengeance, if you are wondering--which you could probably guess), but he has done things the god he follows would be unhappy about. How would you handle this? Messing with his class features seems out of the question, as it can really sour the Paladin experience and also seems straight-up wrong in this case.

Right now, I'm leaning towards having a priest giving him a warning (maybe coupled with the priest of another, more amenable god trying to recruit him?). If he doesn't leave the church or change his behavior afterward, I'd have him branded a heretic and incorporate that into the campaign a bit, but I'd like to see what more experienced players and DMs might have in mind.

3rd edition Paladins didn't get their power from a deity either. They often worshipped them, but the power was intrinsically internal then too, related to their dedication to always be good.

Other than that, who is the deity that this Paladin has been associating with, and what did the Paladin do that goes against the ethos of the deity? How often did they do it?

If it's routine, maybe that deity just isn't the right one for the Paladin, and they'd be better suited to worshipping another, worthier deity. i.e. Paladin worshipped a god of mercy, and has repeatedly been unmerciful towards his enemies (as they demand vengeance!), so he stops worshipping that deity because their values no longer align. Now he worships a deity of vengeance or justice (assuming the paladin still believes the proper way to seek vengeance is by properly prosecuting the enemy to the fullest extent the law allows).

Only if the Paladin was intent on associating with the deity (despite going against what the ethos is) would I start to visit repercussions on them. Start with other believers casting judgment on the Paladins actions (i.e. How can you, a follower of X, even think of doing such a thing?!) then if the character persists, maybe they more forcefully disagree, etc...

This should apply equally to all other classes really, only the Cleric is likely to see a serious problem. But that should be readily solved by them just following a deity whose ethos is in alignment with the way they play the character. Deities are a dime a dozen in D&D really.

[Talamare]

What thread is this? I don't recall seeing one, and would love to read it!

Bottom half and 2nd page of http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?477871-6-Levels-of-Paladin-Multiclass-into-gt

[DrIllidan]

Sorry--I've been at work, and can't respond to everyone. Lots of great comments here, and I appreciate the advice and the time it took everyone to chime in.

The "out of control cop" analogy brainface makes is pretty accurate--he's been torturing people, using violence as the first solution, working with questionable groups, and overall behaving like a vigilante. Most of the enemies I've had so far are a bit ambiguous as to how evil they are (hence why working with questionable groups would be excusable in a vacuum), so it's not like he can assume everyone they are fighting is always the bad guy. The overall aggression has been a recurring behavior too, its not like he tortured one orc for information and then reverted to goody two-shoes Paladinbro.

I'll have to look at the Vengeance Paladin thread, but I'm not itching to call this guy an Oathbreaker and take his powers. I do not think he has violated his oath. But his god (a homebrew LG deity, heavier on the G than the L) is probably not OK with the speed and intensity with which he resorts to violence, especially when it means disobeying the law of the land and hurting parties that are not clearly evil. Torturing some marauding orcs or slaver hobgoblins is arguably fine, but doing the same to petty criminals introduces a sense of the punishment not fitting the crime, which would bother his god.

EDIT: Made last sentence a bit clearer.

[Talamare]

Sorry--I've been at work, and can't respond to everyone. Lots of great comments here, and I appreciate the advice and the time it took everyone to chime in.

The "out of control cop" analogy brainface makes is pretty accurate--he's been torturing people, using violence as the first solution, working with questionable groups, and overall behaving like a vigilante. Most of the enemies I've had so far are a bit ambiguous as to how evil they are (hence why working with questionable groups would be excusable in a vacuum), so it's not like he can assume everyone they are fighting is always the bad guy. The overall aggression has been a recurring behavior too, its not like he tortured one orc for information and then reverted to goody two-shoes Paladinbro.

I'll have to look at the Vengeance Paladin thread, but I'm not itching to call this guy an Oathbreaker and take his powers. I do not think he has violated his oath. But his god (a homebrew LG deity, heavier on the G than the L) is probably not OK with the speed and intensity with which he resorts to violence, especially when it means disobeying the law of the land and hurting parties that are not clearly evil. Torturing some marauding orcs or slaver hobgoblins is arguably fine, but doing the same to petty criminals introduces a sense of the punishment not fitting the crime, which would bother his god.

EDIT: Made last sentence a bit clearer.
Vengeance Paladins are basically the Christian Inquisitors
Christianity might say don't do harm, and don't kill and all that good stuff
Yet, they still had Inquisitors working in the name and approval of God doing some violent and nasty stuff

So honestly, your player is doing a great job walking the line. HOWEVER, if he does become out of control. Like, wasting time torturing people who aren't involved, then you can step in.

Most important thing to remember, Vengeance Paladins are NOT Devotion Paladins. Which is what 95% of "Paladin" lore is based off. They are based off the Avenger class in 4e, which basically said they are something along the lines of Holy Rogues. Think of him as less of a Shining Beacon of Hope, and more of a Dark Assassin sent by the Church.

Some descriptions for Avengers in 4e
"deadly weapons in the hands of their gods"
"avengers swear to execute divine vengeance"
"sworn to hunt and exterminate"
"bringing death to those who would defy your god"
"bringing ruin to tyrants"
Not so much on the love and peace, protection and saving.

[DrIllidan]

I appreciate your thoughts Talamare, but I still think there is a problem here. One I could very well let the player resolve without suffering negative consequences (the Church and character agree to disagree, and he leaves for another house of worship without a hitch), but something still needs to be done from my perspective.


Vengeance Paladins are basically the Christian Inquisitors
Christianity might say don't do harm, and don't kill and all that good stuff
Yet, they still had Inquisitors working in the name and approval of God doing some violent and nasty stuff

In my campaign world (and probably most others), gods definitively exist and affect the world, albeit often in indirect ways. If a D&D god disapproved of all the violent stuff inquisitors did (and a lot of it was real nasty), wouldn't he or she be upset at the way they represented his or her name? Wouldn't warning them and then disowning them make a lot of sense if he or she was offended by their actions, even if the inquisitors believed they were doing the god's will?


So honestly, your player is doing a great job walking the line. HOWEVER, if he does become out of control. Like, wasting time torturing people who aren't involved, then you can step in.

Most important thing to remember, Vengeance Paladins are NOT Devotion Paladins. Which is what 95% of "Paladin" lore is based off. They are based off the Avenger class in 4e, which basically said they are something along the lines of Holy Rogues. Think of him as less of a Shining Beacon of Hope, and more of a Dark Assassin sent by the Church.


Totally aware at what a Vengeance Paladin is, and have explicitly said I think his RP there is 100% fine. If his god was someone that was a "justice at all costs" type, that would be OK. The Paladin is definitively attempting to "balance the cosmic ledger" of justice. But his god is more of a type that puts a greater emphasis on good than order (and the player and character knew this), and there is a serious question as to whether the Paladin is contributing greater good to the world than pain. You can pursue justice/vengeance/retribution without turning into an inquisitorial Rambo. I will also confess to some blame here--I probably should have had a bigger discussion with the player about this tension at the beginning of the game, but I'm still learning. Also, I'm surprised at the level of violence--ahem, retribution--he's perpetrated, but PC's turning into a bunch of murder hobos isn't exactly unprecedented.

In short, his Church thought they were sending out a Daredevil or Batman but what they got was The Punisher. And they want their money back.

[Talamare]

The real conundrum is tho, the whole "God works in mysterious ways"
A few more bits about Avengers in 4e state that they work closer to the direct orders of their God, than even the Church does.

So, a Church of Peace and Love of the God PeaceLoveticus. Then the Church hires this Batman, who turns out to be a Punisher. However the orders he is receiving isn't from the Church, but directly from PeaceLoveticus. To the point that he might even become a Heretic to the Church as the Church claims he is going against the will of PeaceLoveticus. However, PeaceLoveticus is as you said exists and is directly willing the Avenger.

So, as I said if he starts going against his Tenets. Go ahead and make him an Oathbreaker.
If you feel he is going against the will of PeaceLoveticus, make it that the Church declares him a Heretic.
However, as long as his Tenets are strong. He is doing the will of PeaceLoveticus. Even if he has to walk a lonely road, the only road that he will ever know, and he may not know where it will go, but it's his path to walk.

Who knows the tapestry of butterfly effects that the God's wield.

[Addaran]

The real conundrum is tho, the whole "God works in mysterious ways"
A few more bits about Avengers in 4e state that they work closer to the direct orders of their God, than even the Church does.

So, a Church of Peace and Love of the God PeaceLoveticus. Then the Church hires this Batman, who turns out to be a Punisher. However the orders he is receiving isn't from the Church, but directly from PeaceLoveticus. To the point that he might even become a Heretic to the Church as the Church claims he is going against the will of PeaceLoveticus. However, PeaceLoveticus is as you said exists and is directly willing the Avenger.

So, as I said if he starts going against his Tenets. Go ahead and make him an Oathbreaker.
If you feel he is going against the will of PeaceLoveticus, make it that the Church declares him a Heretic.
However, as long as his Tenets are strong. He is doing the will of PeaceLoveticus. Even if he has to walk a lonely road, the only road that he will ever know, and he may not know where it will go, but it's his path to walk.

Who knows the tapestry of butterfly effects that the God's wield.

First, i really love the idea of OoV and the paladin that is willing to sacrifice his soul by doing evil so the others are safe and don't have to resort to evil. I actually agree with you on most of the points.

Except in this case, the DM specifically said that the paladin isn't doing PeaceLoveticus' will. The God isn't the one giving the orders and isn't happy about the paladin's action. Some Gods are okay with having inquisitions that do questionable things or a few punishers to do the dark missions they don't want their cleric to do, but PeaceLoveticus isn't one of them.

[KorvinStarmast]

The player in my game has not broken his Oath (Vengeance, if you are wondering--which you could probably guess), but he has done things the god he follows would be unhappy about. How would you handle this? Messing with his class features seems out of the question, as it can really sour the Paladin experience and also seems straight-up wrong in this case.
Quite frankly, from your description it appears that this player made paladin for the mechanics, not the role. You state quite clearly that there is a deity that he follows. Messing with his class features is NOT out of the question: You Are The DM.

Respond to him in terms that will get his attention.

A few ways to do this:

1. Send him dreams and visions from his God during a long rest. Describe in detail to him the deity's position and disapproval with his actions. The dreams are so troubling that the first time such a vision comes to him e does not get the benefit of the long rest. That's a very simple way to get a message across.

Follow on dreams/visions need not happen every long rest. Either set up triggers based on subsequent actions that bring the dreams, or maybe a 1 on a die (1d8?) a chance that he gets visions and messages this way.

A modest mechanical obstacle now and again, but something concrete that influences the Divine subset of Paladin skills. (No reason to make a difference on the generic Paladin melee/fighting skills ... it's the relationship with the divine that matters here).

If, the symbol of a god is being used for spell focus, then look at it either being shattered (per the previous suggestion) or that a stain or other defect appear on it (particularly if it's his shield!). This sends a blatant signal. Couple that to a mechanical outcome: as the stain grows. the Divine Smite or other Divine inspired power either rfizzles or losses punch. Let's say the Paladin lays down a Divine Smite in combat: when doing damage (let's suppose 3d8 in this case) rather than 3d8, either subtract 1 or 2 from each die, or have him roll 3d6 so he "feels" that it isn't as strong as he used to it being.

If you don't have in game consequences, then you are not supporting role playing "consequences" mentioned in some of the posts up there.

The interactions between the deity and the paladin are going to be unique to each DM's world. There isn't some easy digital on / off switch for this. The way 5e set up the Vengeance Paladin, and for that matter alignment and oaths for all three, leaves plenty to be filled in by the DM so that it Fits The DM's Campaign Setting and makes for a rich role playing experience.

On the other hand, if the god's are chosen "so that everyone has one" and the adherence to a god's tenets is not important in your campaign -- How Do You Handle God/Character relationship with the rest of the party? -- then it could be utterly irrelevant by the way you set up that in game relationship in your game world. It isn't a matter of "not messing with Paladin mechanics because it is somehow taboo" it is a matter of your setting making that irrelevant.

How do you address deity/character relationships with your other players?

[Ivellius]

Korvin just said a lot of the stuff I wanted to. Oh well...

DrIllidan, I do really want to commend you on how you're trying to handle this situation. You're not eager to mess with the mechanics and interfere with the player's mechanical enjoyment but still want to get advice on making a theologically consistent world. That's a difficult thing to balance.

I want to second the reminder that you are the DM, and if you decide paladins need deities empowering them that's entirely correct even if it's at odds with the PHB. Perhaps talk to the player about his need to find another divine source for giving him abilities, which really shouldn't be too difficult. He can always be approached by a cutist-in-disguise or someone like that. If you don't want to go down that route, however, I also think it would be a good idea to openly mark this division (holy symbol shattering sounds good) and have the church brand him a heretic with whatever consequences that might entail.

Has he been receiving instruction or communication with his deity? Any interaction with divine servants? If so I think you need to take action along those lines.

[Talamare]

First, i really love the idea of OoV and the paladin that is willing to sacrifice his soul by doing evil so the others are safe and don't have to resort to evil. I actually agree with you on most of the points.

Except in this case, the DM specifically said that the paladin isn't doing PeaceLoveticus' will. The God isn't the one giving the orders and isn't happy about the paladin's action. Some Gods are okay with having inquisitions that do questionable things or a few punishers to do the dark missions they don't want their cleric to do, but PeaceLoveticus isn't one of them.

The DM feels he isn't doing PeaceLoveticus will because of how he acts, because of how the book told us how the usual PeaceLoveticus worshipper acts / should act
I think you missed the point of that entire reply, I was trying to say that the DM is perceiving it wrong. The book is written by the followers of PeaceLoveticus, not by PeaceLoveticus himself.
Meaning, the Paladin could be doing PeaveLoveticus will because he is communicating directly with PeaceLoveticus. Even if that goes against the scripture of PeaceLoveticus.

So have the Church declare him a Heretic, because he is going against the perceived will of PeaceLoveticus
As long as his Oath's stay strong, keep him in the clear with the God. However, if his Oath falters THEN you should do all those bad dreams/symbol breaking/etc that other people suggested

Don't let the next line ruin my point of view in your heads... please...
All else fails an interesting plot line might be that there is an Evil Trickery god posing as PeaceLoveticus, and it's this Trickery god that is giving him his powers as a Paladin

[Addaran]

The DM feels he isn't doing PeaceLoveticus will because of how he acts, because of how the book told us how the usual PeaceLoveticus worshipper acts / should act
I think you missed the point of that entire reply, I was trying to say that the DM is perceiving it wrong. The book is written by the followers of PeaceLoveticus, not by PeaceLoveticus himself.
Meaning, the Paladin could be doing PeaveLoveticus will because he is communicating directly with PeaceLoveticus. Even if that goes against the scripture of PeaceLoveticus.

So have the Church declare him a Heretic, because he is going against the perceived will of PeaceLoveticus
As long as his Oath's stay strong, keep him in the clear with the God. However, if his Oath falters THEN you should do all those bad dreams/symbol breaking/etc that other people suggested



That reasonning would work if he was worshipping Heironus or Tyr. But in this case, he said it was an homebrew God. So there's no book telling us how the worshippers usually act, the OP seems to imply that the God isn't talking directly with that paladin and the OP can't perceive PeaceLoveticus wrong because he created it.

[DrIllidan]

Has he been receiving instruction or communication with his deity? Any interaction with divine servants? If so I think you need to take action along those lines.

Not yet, wanted some feedback first on how to handle his possible responses and what should be in play in terms of consequences. This is definitely the first order of business though.



The DM feels he isn't doing PeaceLoveticus will because of how he acts, because of how the book told us how the usual PeaceLoveticus worshipper acts / should act
I think you missed the point of that entire reply, I was trying to say that the DM is perceiving it wrong. The book is written by the followers of PeaceLoveticus, not by PeaceLoveticus himself.
Meaning, the Paladin could be doing PeaveLoveticus will because he is communicating directly with PeaceLoveticus. Even if that goes against the scripture of PeaceLoveticus.


I really like your perspective here, within the context of the game: how trustworthy is the Church, its holy books, and the clerics that have spoken to the Paladin? Him ignoring them in the future could be justified if he thinks they are not valid representations of the god's will.


That reasonning would work if he was worshipping Heironus or Tyr. But in this case, he said it was an homebrew God. So there's no book telling us how the worshippers usually act, the OP seems to imply that the God isn't talking directly with that paladin and the OP can't perceive PeaceLoveticus wrong because he created it.


That said, there is this meta-aspect too, in that I as the DM know exactly what the God wants. I don't think I want to start a plotline about discovering the will of PeaceLoveticus, but that could actually be pretty fun.

Thanks for the comments guys and girls, and to everyone else I haven't responded to (I promise I've read everything). Everything here has been useful.

[Addaran]

I really like your perspective here, within the context of the game: how trustworthy is the Church, its holy books, and the clerics that have spoken to the Paladin? Him ignoring them in the future could be justified if he thinks they are not valid representations of the god's will.


That could be a possible twist. If in your setting, the Gods aren't directly active, the Paladin could think he's still following the god's will. He might even think the Church as become corrupted (because they don't agree with him and are trying to stop his holy mission via excommuniation). Would be funy if he start fighting his old Church, sure he's the real follower and at the same time, his God is saddened by his actions but can't act more directly then giving the clerics their spells in the hope they defeat the paladin.

[Talyn]

A quick reminder to people who are going to rely on the quote from A Few Good Men - the Colonel, who is saying that quote, is the villain. He is the one who ordered that one of his own marines be murdered by the others, and then covered it up. You are not supposed to be convinced by that argument, or think that he is a righteous person doing a difficult job.

He is, in fact, grotesque, and abuses those same men he claims to lead - and he doesn't need to. He's not in a war zone, keeping people safe. He is not espousing the only philosophy that could possibly keep his country safe. He's just a bully with a gun and a uniform who wants to use both to tell people can shouldn't be held accountable for his actions. No Good or Lawful person should agree with that statement.

A vengeance paladin who relies on that creed is, at best, a menace to the society he claims to protect, and at worst is a serial killer who cloaks his sadism in religion.

I wouldn't allow a character like that in my game, unless we agreed beforehand that we were running an evil campaign. If he is a supposed follower of a good religion, then his religion should cast him out and hunt him down as a heretic if they find out about his deeds - and since the god knows what he did, a few visions or divine revelations to the larger church's equivalent to Internal Affairs should be enough to spread the word of his misdeeds.

[Sigreid]

A quick reminder to people who are going to rely on the quote from A Few Good Men - the Colonel, who is saying that quote, is the villain. He is the one who ordered that one of his own marines be murdered by the others, and then covered it up. You are not supposed to be convinced by that argument, or think that he is a righteous person doing a difficult job.

He is, in fact, grotesque, and abuses those same men he claims to lead - and he doesn't need to. He's not in a war zone, keeping people safe. He is not espousing the only philosophy that could possibly keep his country safe. He's just a bully with a gun and a uniform who wants to use both to tell people can shouldn't be held accountable for his actions. No Good or Lawful person should agree with that statement.

A vengeance paladin who relies on that creed is, at best, a menace to the society he claims to protect, and at worst is a serial killer who cloaks his sadism in religion.

I wouldn't allow a character like that in my game, unless we agreed beforehand that we were running an evil campaign. If he is a supposed follower of a good religion, then his religion should cast him out and hunt him down as a heretic if they find out about his deeds - and since the god knows what he did, a few visions or divine revelations to the larger church's equivalent to Internal Affairs should be enough to spread the word of his misdeeds.

A better quote would be "We can sleep safe in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night to visit terrible violence on those who would do us harm." Not sure who first said that, I've seen it attributed to a few different people.

[Wymmerdann]

The purpose of the Jessup quote was to demonstrate [from the same post]:

"An Oath of Vengeance Paladin is a great opportunity to explore how far ideals can be pursued through methods that have friction or jar with those ideals."

That is not the same as saying that the character of Jessup, in the context of his case and actions, is neither a villain nor grotesque. The point is that it is an epic rant, and very worthy of imitation by an "ends justify the means" crusader.

I think the opportunity is absolutely worth pursuing because it's a question that sits at the beating heart of politics. It's the theme of every state of emergency, every declaration of martial law, and every constitutional suspension: the idea that sometimes principles must be suspended to face an existential threat. As you rightly point out, Jessup wasn't in a warzone, but that's rather beside the point when we're engaging with a quote and not that plot. We're talking about characters who *will* be facing world-eating threats that one might reasonably justify a great deal to delay or destroy [especially when no other options are available]. There's been a great deal of legal theory on this topic, including some discussion of the fact that without this kind of exceptional power, to suspend laws and constitutional principles, modern states wouldn't be able to function. It is, in effect, the beating heart of lawlessness that has sat at the heart of every society since the stone age. Rule by absolute discretion. Never mind succubus's and helms of opposite alignment, throw *that* at your paladin and see how he swallows it.

In regards to OoV Paladins in particular, they seem to be a clear spiritual successor to the 4e Avenger, a class that was written around the idea that these were the guys who did the dirty work that their spiritual leaders probably didn't want to publicise. Alternatively, they were often under the direction of rogue elements, heretical or radical groups etc. If any divine character was going to fit the mode discussed above, it was these guys.

As for allowing at your table? That's your call, but I think this character would fit more firmly within the lawful-neutral framework, with a fatalistic worldview.

[Renzlir]

I would look to the Paladins Tenets. Their Faith may guide them but their Tenets Define them.

1. Fight the Greater Evil.
2. No Mercy for the Wicked.
3. By Any Means Necessary.
4. Restitution.

One could argue that the second and third tenets give them leeway to challenge their faith to get their job done, whatever the cost. Once the they suceed or fail, they can deal with their fourth tenet. Undoing the harm they did to others in their pursuit of vengeance through restitution.

[Unoriginal]

I would look to the Paladins Tenets. Their Faith may guide them but their Tenets Define them.

1. Fight the Greater Evil.
2. No Mercy for the Wicked.
3. By Any Means Necessary.
4. Restitution.

One could argue that the second and third tenets give them leeway to challenge their faith to get their job done, whatever the cost. Once the they suceed or fail, they can deal with their fourth tenet. Undoing the harm they did to others in their pursuit of vengeance through restitution.

Please don't necro a 2-years-old thread