Villainous Paladin

[Osrogue]

Some class archetypes make fairly good villains. Assassins, warlocks, necromancers, and evil clerics come to mind fairly easily, and so do barbarians. Other classes, well, don't. I don't think I've heard of a villainous monk, and villainous* bards are scarce. The least villainous class I could imagine would be the Paladin, but Miko managed to be while being lawful good(ish). Well, now paladins can be a whole slew of alignments outside of lawful good. How would you make a paladin a villain without the Paladin falling or becoming an oath breaker or blackguard? Oh, and the heroes are not an evil adventuring party.

*definition of villain I'm using is: individual that opposes the heroes

[Clone]

I could easily imagine a Paladin being so driven with their beliefs to do their God's will, they commit acts which could be horrible for the sake of a "cleanse" of sorts.

That normal village which has helped the party on multiple occasions? There is a chance that someone could be inside and too deep undercover, so a purge must take place by this paladin in order to keep the peace in the long term.

One of the PCs an uncommon race or even monstrous one, such as Tiefling or Yuan-Ti Pureblood? That Paladin sees those races akin to abominations and may even pursue the party rather than the normal dynamic of party pursuing the villain.

Think of an Inquisitor or Exorcist who takes their religion and views very seriously. The Oath of Vengeance Paladin Oath would be a good fit, with their "ends justify the means" thinking, or even a tweaked version of the Devotion Paladin where they truly believe themselves to be a holy warrior of righteousness. Evil is when you know what you are doing is technically bad. But if you believe what you are doing is perfectly fine, you would never consider yourself as evil.

Wow that went longer than expected. Hope this helps!

[Sans.]

I could easily imagine a Paladin being so driven with their beliefs to do their God's will, they commit acts which could be horrible for the sake of a "cleanse" of sorts.

That normal village which has helped the party on multiple occasions? There is a chance that someone could be inside and too deep undercover, so a purge must take place by this paladin in order to keep the peace in the long term.

One of the PCs an uncommon race or even monstrous one, such as Tiefling or Yuan-Ti Pureblood? That Paladin sees those races akin to abominations and may even pursue the party rather than the normal dynamic of party pursuing the villain.

Think of an Inquisitor or Exorcist who takes their religion and views very seriously. The Oath of Vengeance Paladin Oath would be a good fit, with their "ends justify the means" thinking, or even a tweaked version of the Devotion Paladin where they truly believe themselves to be a holy warrior of righteousness. Evil is when you know what you are doing is technically bad. But if you believe what you are doing is perfectly fine, you would never consider yourself as evil.

Wow that went longer than expected. Hope this helps!

Like the Batter! :D http://vignette3.wikia.nocookie.net/offgame/images/b/b3/Batter_04.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20130422231143 to http://vignette1.wikia.nocookie.net/off/images/4/44/BB.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20141113160220

[VariSami]

In 3.5, I had a Paladin villain in Eberron. Basically, he had been receiving funding from the Aurum (fantasy mundane Illuminate) to help bring down their opponents who also happened to be on his to-do list already because evil fights other evil as much as the rest of the world. Eventually, he had even started having more direct connections with the Aurum and started working as their enforcer who would gladly sacrifice his pawns because each loss on both sides would result in less evil in the world. As you can probably imagine, though, this utter disregard made him a chillingly evil mid-tier enforcer despite it all logically following from his idea that making use of the evil to fight other evils was a win-win scenario. The characters got simply caught up in this grander picture as a bit of dirt between the clockwork, to be cleansed for halting the 'progress of good'.

[JellyPooga]

The Villainous Paladin is actually really easy to imagine because the Paladin Class, perhaps moreso than any other, is beholden only to itself. No Patron or Deity, no Gaia figure/concept to appease, even Rogues or Fighters commonly have connections to guild leaders, officers or the like. Yes, a Paladin can have superiors, but the central concept of the Class is a character who gets their power from their perception of themselves, their towering faith in their own ego and their devotion to a self-imposed Code of Conduct, hence their Charisma focused mechanics. The "selfish" Paladin, who doesn't listen to or ignores outside advice or influence is a pretty common trope. The one that goes "over the edge" becomes a Blackguard or Fallen Paladin, but those ones that don't quite tip over that point? Yeah, they're out there and in many ways are far more terrifying because their high Charisma makes them influential; people want to believe a Paladin is incorruptable, so they do. Imagine a Paladin gone rogue who has set himself up as a Grand Vizier or High Inquisitor; manipulating laws and people in the name of "all that is pure and just", restricting freedoms, imprisoning (or worse) so-called "heretics" and so on and so forth.

[Millstone85]

For me, Vengeance paladins are people who heard "He who fights with monsters should look to it that he himself does not become a monster" and thought "Then let me be what scares the boogeyman". That oath could make for an interesting villain.


Oh, and the heroes are not an evil adventuring party.

*definition of villain I'm using is: individual that opposes the heroesI like to distinguish heroes and villains from protagonists and antagonists.

A party of evil PCs is a bunch of villainous protagonists, likely to encounter heroic antagonists.

But even heroic protagonists can have heroic antagonists, for example if there is a misunderstanding or if the story is about a conflict where both sides have a point.


The Villainous Paladin is actually really easy to imagine because the Paladin Class, perhaps moreso than any other, is beholden only to itself. No Patron or Deity, no Gaia figure/concept to appeaseI still see the paladin as sworn to an external power, be it the spiritual essence of justice that flows in the Upper Planes or the collective power of people's faith in better days.
A philosophy that only one person believes in isn't strong enough to bestow magical power on that person. And of course, a paladin of the Ancients would be close to the Gaia concept.

[Corsair14]

Someone did a Planescape 5.0 conversion and listed with the Doomguard, a faction devoted to entropy and eventual decay, their motto is "Everything dies or is destroyed in the end, we are just here to help it along," and had listed Paladins of Entropy as heroes of their faction. I really liked this aspect of things. They were not evil paladins for the most part, they just weren't the hoity toity good guys we are used to either, they simply believe what they are doing is right(and belief is the primary motivator of Planescape and the reason to do anything.) Now they mentioned Oath of Destruction in the guide which I haven't found anywhere else but I suppose oath of vengeance would work in its place.

[Millstone85]

What do you think of the Oath of Conquest from this Unearthed Arcana (http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/unearthed-arcana/paladin-sacred-oaths)? Paladins of that oath are called knight tyrants, iron mongers and sometimes hell knights, but not blackguards (that's the other oath in that article: Treachery).

I could see such a paladin being mistaken as lawful good, including by themself, when they really are lawful neutral at best.

[Sigreid]

This isn't really hard, there's a reason they say the road to Hell is paved with good intentions. Consider watching one of the DC animated shows where Superman decides peace and justice is more important than happiness or freedom.

[Malifice]

I could easily imagine a Paladin being so driven with their beliefs to do their God's will, they commit acts which could be horrible for the sake of a "cleanse" of sorts.

Evil is when you know what you are doing is technically bad. But if you believe what you are doing is perfectly fine, you would never consider yourself as evil

Of course you still are evil in this case regardless of what your character thinks.

There is plenty of room for evil paladins in the PHB. Vengance in particular would struggle to remain Good and keep to the tenents of their code (Which condones torture, murder and genocide via its 'by any means necessary' and 'no mercy for the wicked' tenents). Even remaining LN would be difficult for a Paladin following those tenents to the letter (most of the more zealous vengance paladins would be LE).

Then you have the 2 new unearthed arcana tenents that are fluffed as clearly evil in nature.

There is the other issue that there is nothing stopping you from being a LE follower of a NG deity in 5E.

Personally I love it. Plenty of real-world evil has been done in the name of religions that otherwise preach compassion and kindness by fanatical zealots and fundamentalists

Playing an evil follower of even a good God appeals to me for this reason. You might be convinced in the righteousness of your cause, but the reality is you're an absolute misguided monster.

[Pex]

Create a scenario where two factions need the McGuffin to do some Honest True Good Thing. The McGuffin can only be used once. Both Honest True Good Things are equally valuable. It's sad that one of them won't happen, but the world is not DOOMED because of it. Which ever side the party is on, the Honest True Lawful Good Sir Goody McTwoShoes Paladin "Villain" is on the other.

[Corran]

Paladins with the oah of the crown could do the trick for you too. Just make sure they serve a king or lord who has reason to send these guys after the party. Granted, it would be more of a puppet antagonist, but this doesn't mean that the party needs to know from the first place, nor that this guy will be an easy obstacle to overcome. Once they finally beat him, they realize that this guy was just a tool of their main antagonist who was all this time in the shadows.

[gfishfunk]

Paladin of law - Amy oath. The path is to the country or to the ideal of law. Corruption is inconsequential, Tyranny is a myth of the rebels and lawless. Only in order can true freedom be found. Confucianism to the extreme.

"Great leaders and bad leaders come and go, but my oath is to country which will endure. Enemies of the state shall be dealt with harshly."

[Honest Tiefling]

Depending on your setting, I'd go with the paladin willing to do whatever is necessary to achieve goodness. Dispose of many kings, bringing instability? A short term loss for long term gain. Pillage uncooperative villages? The army needs to eat, time will show it was a virtuous cause. Kill goodly leaders or wisemen? They were making conflict, it'll all be worth it.

And then have any evidence they are NOT backed by a goodly power either impossible or hard to find. In the former, there is no way to tell that this person isn't blessed by the gods to do what is needed. In the latter, the party will have to wade through many, many, many people convinced of the paladin's goodness. Violence may have to occur against people of goodly intent in order to secure the evidence needed, which might make it less convincing. Would you believe the spy that supposedly found documents of a magical ritual that isn't entirely savory, knowing that several goodly clerics died to their blades?

Perhaps you could even show why the gods or similar powers backed such a being. When an elder evil looms on the horizon, isn't death a preferable fate than having the entire world, including the underworld be corrupted? Yes, it does sorta suck for this generation and a few more after that, but isn't anything worth it to stop a foe that threatens to unmake the world?

And if the party is successful in convincing the paladin that their path isn't the best one, they are no longer helping to stop this horror despite their godly charge.

[Saeviomage]

I think it would be possible to have a lawful evil paladin of devotion:
Honesty: Don’t lie or cheat. Let your word be your promise.
Stick to any bargain you make with absolute rigidity to it's word, including this oath.

Courage: Never fear to act, though caution is wise.
Easy.

Compassion: Aid others, protect the weak, and punish those who threaten them. Show mercy to your foes, but temper it with wisdom.
Sounds hard, but isn't really. You could easily do all this as a tyrannical despot.

Honor: Treat others with fairness, and let your honorable deeds be an example to them. Do as much good as possible while causing the least amount of harm.
As much good as possible and least amount of harm have a lot of wiggle room. If you decrease taxes across your kingdom by 2% by severely limiting freedoms, doesn't that count?

Duty: Be responsible for your actions and their consequences, protect those entrusted to your care, and obey those who have just authority over you.
Again: if you're a tyrannical despot who logically accepts the consequences of his decisions for the good of his kingdom, this is done. You're responsible, you're protecting those under your care, and you are beholden to nobody.

[djreynolds]

Some class archetypes make fairly good villains. Assassins, warlocks, necromancers, and evil clerics come to mind fairly easily, and so do barbarians. Other classes, well, don't. I don't think I've heard of a villainous monk, and villainous* bards are scarce. The least villainous class I could imagine would be the Paladin, but Miko managed to be while being lawful good(ish). Well, now paladins can be a whole slew of alignments outside of lawful good. How would you make a paladin a villain without the Paladin falling or becoming an oath breaker or blackguard? Oh, and the heroes are not an evil adventuring party.

*definition of villain I'm using is: individual that opposes the heroes

I thought they have 2 new oaths, conquest and treachery.... they seem evil to me.

[Biggstick]

An Oath of the Crown Paladin could be a worshipper of Helm and easily view the party as something detrimental to society. Everywhere the party goes, They seem to attract trouble for regular members of society.

[Kane0]

Captain Qwark

[Deleted]

Some class archetypes make fairly good villains. Assassins, warlocks, necromancers, and evil clerics come to mind fairly easily, and so do barbarians. Other classes, well, don't. I don't think I've heard of a villainous monk, and villainous* bards are scarce. The least villainous class I could imagine would be the Paladin, but Miko managed to be while being lawful good(ish). Well, now paladins can be a whole slew of alignments outside of lawful good. How would you make a paladin a villain without the Paladin falling or becoming an oath breaker or blackguard? Oh, and the heroes are not an evil adventuring party.

*definition of villain I'm using is: individual that opposes the heroes

I think you mean antagonist.

Villain Bard is the Joker. Just throwing that out there.

Stop thinking in terms of good and evil. There are so many reasons for people to go against each other.

The players could be after someone who killed someone but the Paladin protects a town. The players aren't allowed to disturb the peace because no one there is evil. If they push it, the Paladin will respond in force.

The Paladin can be of a deity that doesn't like the player's deity. Thr Paladin has been charged with taking out the heretics. The Paladin could be LG and the player's deity could be CN. Sowing chaos results in the growth of evil!

Did the players kill a sentient creatures within the walls of a city? If so... There could be a warrant for the arrest. Even if it was self defense... The Paladin could be LG and the players could be LG but the Paladin will still bring them in.