neutral oathbreaker paladin - your thoughts?

[Waazraath]

RAW, the oathbreaker paladin variant from the DMG is evil. I know. But I was wondering what the folks here would think of the following:

Most of the normal paladin oaths are pretty obvious good. Devotion is the traditional white knight, wi9ht honor, courage, compassion, etc. The oath of the ancients is about mercy, good, beauty, love, etc. Vengeance is a bit trickier, but it's about vengeance against evil, and even this one is about helping those harmed by evil.

But then there is, in SCAG, the oath of the crown. It's about law. Also about loyalty, but that's to the law, and courage, but to defend the law, and responsibility, to duties and obligations. It's quite easy to imagine a situation where 'the law' might be the law, but is inherently unjust and evil.

Would you accept the following background / narrative in one of your games? A good or neutral paladin has sworn the oath of the crown; finds out that the law he is sworn to, is the law of the evil empire. Flies in a rage, does some evil stuff against representatives of the evil empire, breaks his oath and becomes an oath breaker. Not being evil thouroughly, he regrets his evil acts, and (as a neutral aligned person) uses his oath to fight the evil empire?

Would this fly? Why, or why not? Should the character at some point renounce his oathbreaker features, and go for an oath of vengeance (against said evil empire)?

[Specter]

I'd allow it, if it's a msn that is using evil means to fight evil. But that's just me.

[JackPhoenix]

The character shouldn't be an Oathbreaker in the first place. Yes, he broke his original oath...but he seeks redemption and regrets his evil acts. Read the "Breaking your oath" sidebar at PHB page 86 and the Oathbreaker in DMG: not every fallen paladin ends up as Oathbreaker. The subclass is badly named, it's not just about breaking your oath, but about fully embracing evil afterwards and not looking for redempion.

"An Oathbreaker is a paladin who breaks his or her sacred oath to pursue some dark ambition or serve an evil power"

Oath of the Crown only cares about law and loyalty, not good or evil. I find weird that someone could swear an oath to serve the law, but be unaware what the law actually is. If the character was originally LG and was decieved, he may take OoV against the decievers, but also OoD to be better than the enemy he fights.

Also, alignment change isn't really a thing in 5e. Alignment is a description of character's general attitude, not a straightjacket or determined by a single action. It should be possible to change character's alignment, but only if that general attitude changes, not just because he's killed someone in a fit of rage, especially if he feels bad about it and seeks to atone for his deeds.

[Addaran]

The subclass is badly named, it's not just about breaking your oath, but about fully embracing evil afterwards and not looking for redempion.


I agree that the subclass is very badly named. A better name would have been Blackguard, Black Knight or Death Knight. Because the class is about using necromancy, undead and evil. It makes no sense that breaking your oath(especially the non-goody ones) would turn you into a undead using guy. Being un-lawful doesn't equate necromancy.

But if a player want to play the subclass for mechanical reasons, i'd probably just refluff it as a necromantic eldritch knight and let him play it. Or as a paladin for a deity of the dead/undead, even if it's not an evil one. (wee jas)

[Gastronomie]

I don't care for alignments so I would allow it. Hell, I've actually used a non-Evil Oathbreaker more than once as a player.

[Biggstick]

He wouldn't be an OotC Paladin anymore, but an OoV. Since you still feel bad about what you're doing (avenging those put down by the laws of man that you swore to uphold, but for the greater good) and regret the evil you're required to commit (By any means necessary), you fit nice and firmly within the tenets of the Oath of Vengeance tenets.

Oathbreakers are indeed mislabeled, and what another poster has said about it being focused on necromantic energies isn't what you've described your PC as doing.

[JackPhoenix]

Oathbreaker with Oath of the Crown tenets slaped on top works great as Karrnathi Bone Knights in Eberron, and I've used tham as such. I'm also planning to play good Oathbreaker in an upcoming game (if it ever gets off the ground, which isn't that certain, given the GM's record so far)... but both use different fluff from the default one present in PHB and DMG.

[NecroDancer]

What race is your character? If the race is long lived you could make them evil but very bored so they fight for good to add "excitement" to their life.

[NecroDancer]

They act like its a game, can they stop the evil empire? How many people will they kill in the process?

Losing to the empire isn't bad, it's just the end of their "game" and they will go back to acting evil to "redeem" themselves or leave to spread more tyranny.

[Sabeta]

In-Universe fluff is super easy to discard in my opinion. I'd let someone play a Lawful Good Oathbreaker if they had a valid reason for doing so.

[djreynolds]

You could homebrew a sort Oath of ancients feel, you could instead of acquiring undead servants get maybe conjure animals. More druidic in a sense, that would feel more neutral to me.

It might take some work on your end with your DM, just a thought.

Like you were Oath of Ancients, then became an oathbreaker, then became neutral and just pick from each oath so it feels right.

[Waazraath]

Thanks for replies! The fluff of Oathbreaker is indeed a bit weird. Also the part of finding a deity; I might be off, but iirc, the PHB pally doesn't longer need a deity to get his powers, at least the rules aren't explicit about it.

Indeed, if I'm going with this concept in the future, I'll definitely check with my DM first on his/her thoughts on alignment, fallen pally's and what it means to be an oathbreaker.

[Plaguescarred]

I would be fine by me.

In my current GREYHAWK campaign i allowed the paladin to take it even though the characters are all non-evil.