Devotion Paladin Help: DM Too Strict?

[Chet_Wrongman]

Hi, this is my first time posting, I'm hoping for some helpful responses. My DM is usually great, but he's a bit strict when it comes to paladin oaths. Instead of taking devotion paladin tenants for what they are, kind of vague, he almost forces RP on me. He thinks that my paladin shouldn't be able to do anything remotely not within his interpretation of the tenants, even though these actions may cause more good later. My question to you guys is, should devotion paladin tenants be set in stone, or are they vague enough to be stretched for the greater good?

[Alkerite]

Hi, this is my first time posting, I'm hoping for some helpful responses. My DM is usually great, but he's a bit strict when it comes to paladin oaths. Instead of taking devotion paladin tenants for what they are, kind of vague, he almost forces RP on me. He thinks that my paladin shouldn't be able to do anything remotely not within his interpretation of the tenants, even though these actions may cause more good later. My question to you guys is, should devotion paladin tenants be set in stone, or are they vague enough to be stretched for the greater good?

Well friend, everything within the books are guidelines. So technically speaking, both of you are right. However, what the DM says, goes, but if you dislike how things are going, you can always talk about the concern with the DM (DnD should be fun for everyone, after all)
And if he continues to be adamant, then just bring up how Paladins were changed to be a bit less restrictive, and that forcing them to play like paladins of yore is not to your tastes.

[Kane0]

Freedom is encouraged, but historically speaking D&D has been rather strict when it comes to a paladin's behavior (see 3.5s Code of Conduct). 5e has made a bit of a break from that pattern but the tenets remain, so your DM might be used to previous incarnations or drawing on that for his frame of reference.

Perhaps sit down with your DM and discuss exactly what is expected of you, what can be changed and why it is so.

[Tetrasodium]

Hi, this is my first time posting, I'm hoping for some helpful responses. My DM is usually great, but he's a bit strict when it comes to paladin oaths. Instead of taking devotion paladin tenants for what they are, kind of vague, he almost forces RP on me. He thinks that my paladin shouldn't be able to do anything remotely not within his interpretation of the tenants, even though these actions may cause more good later. My question to you guys is, should devotion paladin tenants be set in stone, or are they vague enough to be stretched for the greater good?


Can you give some examples? Till then, someone else already covered the you are probably both right & should talk because we can't give any more advice without it

[JNAProductions]

Talk with your DM. I'm inclined to side with you, but you could be biased. But, if this is impacting your fun, talk to DM and see what you can do to restore fun to the game.

[NecroDancer]

Is the DM not letting your character do anything outside the oath even if you want to (IC) break it for roleplaying reason (and understand the consequences of breaking the oath)?

[Sabeta]

D&D works based on the explicit contract between DM and Player that everyone is here to have fun. That said, Paladins by nature are held to a higher moral code than normal people, and are expected to act in a specific way that reflects well on their order. You don't *have* to play that way, but it's entirely up to your DM whether or not lying or cheating "for the greater good" is considered enough to fall.

I've had a DM make me fall because I didn't want to cast the Light Spell in a cave, which would have revealed us to our enemies. "You're an Ancients Paladin. You have to light up the darkness. You've fallen for not lighting this place." I left that table shortly after.

As others have said, talk it over with your DM. If the DMs idea of a Paladin is to be bound by their oath then that's that. You can either try to compromise, learn to play by his rules, or walk. When I'm a player, I typically have no problems deferring to the DMs rulings, but I try to always establish what those rulings are before playing a game with them. If my DM is the type to go super restrictive with Paladins or Warlocks, I might not be willing to play those (My favorite Warlock Pack is a tiny creature who trades magical secrets; which is different from 'power', in exchange for letting them see the world. Or finding a magical book that grants me power, but rather than a dark patron whispering in my ear they quietly sit back and are content to claim my soul after I pass away).

TLDR: Just talk to your DM. If he's not willing to budge, you can either accept it or walk. We can't really help you more than that.

[Malifice]

Hi, this is my first time posting, I'm hoping for some helpful responses. My DM is usually great, but he's a bit strict when it comes to paladin oaths. Instead of taking devotion paladin tenants for what they are, kind of vague, he almost forces RP on me. He thinks that my paladin shouldn't be able to do anything remotely not within his interpretation of the tenants, even though these actions may cause more good later. My question to you guys is, should devotion paladin tenants be set in stone, or are they vague enough to be stretched for the greater good?

Provide an example.

[BillyBobShorton]

Rule #1: (DM's are not exempt) Make the game fun, but challenging.

Your DM... eh. I had 2 of them. They suck. Sorry.

Letting players explore their characters, try different things, providing rich concepts and stories that work is part of DMing. Too many let the "my rules; deal or bail" guideline BS go to their head, and they take it as a license to go all control freak, basically build and ability nerfers, which is NOT what "your world, your rules" is trying to convey.

A good DM works with players, and understands that nobody is gonna give a **** about their PC if the build they had in mind is just stepped on by the dude that's supposed to make the game cool and fun.

I'd just straight shoot it. "Hey man, you're making me feel trapped and shortchanged. This isn't 2E. Paladins don't have to be goody-2-shoes anymore. I playnto have fun and build a cool character, and you're denying it, for whatever reason. Is it helping the story, or do you just get off on saying "no" to players who rely on you to propel the fun factor? Because if so, you're forgetting your role more than I am with my paladin. So, can we knock off the bs and just let me try/ do what the phb intends? Otherwise-peace!"

He ain't the only DM out there.

Too many forget that DM's are not the only ones at the table entitled to be creative.

[Malifice]

He thinks that my paladin shouldn't be able to do anything remotely not within his interpretation of the tenants, even though these actions may cause more good later.

Massive red flag here.What actions is he unhappy with?

Torture? Murder? Genocide? Infanticide? Slavery?

If your LG devotion paladin isnt allowed to slaughter a villiage full of Orc children, torture the adults and toss them on the pyre, and sell the women into slavery for the 'greater good' then he obviously doesnt read this forum.

Thats clearly lawful and good.

[War_lord]

Doing sketchy things in the name of the Greater Good is what a Vengeance Paladin does. Devotion Paladins are generally expected to be more straightforward Lawful Good types. Some DM's are really strict about Paladin Oaths, some DM's really don't care so long as you aren't going on full murder sprees. It's pretty much at the DM's discretion how much they want to hold you to the Oath.

Without an actual specific example of what you mean by "too strict" it's impossible for us to judge if your DM is being unfair. Really you should have discussed this with them before play even started. A Paladin swears an oath to a Deity, that Deity is played by your DM. Only your DM can interpret your oath.

[Puh Laden]

Doing sketchy things in the name of the Greater Good is what a Vengeance Paladin does. Devotion Paladins are generally expected to be more straightforward Lawful Good types. Some DM's are really strict about Paladin Oaths, some DM's really don't care so long as you aren't going on full murder sprees. It's pretty much at the DM's discretion how much they want to hold you to the Oath.

Without an actual specific example of what you mean by "too strict" it's impossible for us to judge if your DM is being unfair. Really you should have discussed this with them before play even started. A Paladin swears an oath to a Deity, that Deity is played by your DM. Only your DM can interpret your oath.

Technically the Paladin need not swear an oath to a deity, they only need swear the oath, whether it's to a deity, nature spirits, an order, the world, or themselves it doesn't matter. You aren't even instructed at anytime within the class description to choose a deity, though you are directed to a list of ones commonly worshiped by paladins for the ones that do.

[War_lord]

Technically the Paladin need not swear an oath to a deity, they only need swear the oath, whether it's to a deity, nature spirits, an order, the world, or themselves it doesn't matter. You aren't even instructed at anytime within the class description to choose a deity, though you are directed to a list of ones commonly worshiped by paladins for the ones that do.

...Not sure what that has to do with the point that the DM cannot be "too strict" in enforcing an Oath as they're literally the one in charge of the entity granting power, unless they're being absurd about it.

Anyway, if you go to page 97 of your DMG, under Oathbreaker Atonement it says:


Having done so, the Paladin loses all Oathbreaker features and must choose a deity and a sacred oath. (With your permission, the player can select a different deity or sacred oath then the character had previously)

So at the very least there's an assumption in the rules that the Paladin has sworn an Oath to a specific deity even if it would be news to anyone reading only the PHB with no prior knowledge of D&D's tropes. Nature spirits and religious orders are arguably intermediaries through which deities of the settings act, so I'd see those as technically deities. Swearing an oath to yourself and thus gaining divine power is absurd.

You know, if people feel that constrained by Paladin Oaths that are already watered down to be so vague that they essentially come down to "don't be a total git". I have to wonder why they're playing a Paladin in the first place. Maybe consider that if you want to play a character that's so amoral that something like "Aid others, protect the weak, and punish those who threaten them" is a restriction to be chafed at, perhaps there's a more suitable class for that concept?

[Tetrasodium]

You know, if people feel that constrained by Paladin Oaths that are already watered down to be so vague that they essentially come down to "don't be a total git". I have to wonder why they're playing a Paladin in the first place. Maybe consider that if you want to play a character that's so amoral that something like "Aid others, protect the weak, and punish those who threaten them" is a restriction to be chafed at, perhaps there's a more suitable class for that concept?

While I agree, it's not outside the realm of possibility that the gm is actually wanting something far more. Sometimes people get weird with what they think d&d's sacred cows should be. Just the other day there was a thread where someone was adamantly stating that the dmg explicitly puts background customization in the hands of the gm despite multiple people pointing out the reality, complete with quotes from dmg & phb to show that the creation & customization are wildly different; but they continued claiming that everyone was wrong without even attempting to address the fact that the rules say otherwise in no uncertain terns.

Without examples though, we can't even guess

[KorvinStarmast]

The never ending stream of wonder that is GiTP, or other internet, pontifications on the Paladin. All that you can do is talk to your DM face to face about letting your Paladin stretch the old muscles. You two need to do that Not During The Game but before the next game session.

Use phone, email, text, or face to face but seriously, you need to have a conversation so that you two are on the same page about what a Paladin of this Oath IS in this game world the DM is running.

Coming to the conversation with "these strangers on the internet say you're wrong" is a bad way to begin the conversation.