What happen when a paladin multiclass

[Belier]

Does it mean he kind of broke his oath and allegeance? From a class perspective, it looks to me that once somebody has the paladin class(from start or from multiclassing) he will stay stuck to this class unless he break the oath and they say the oathbreaker needs to be evil.

[Snowbluff]

Broke his allegiance to what? And how would he be breaking his oath?

[Belier]

Does it mean he kind of broke his oath and allegeance? From a class perspective, it looks to me that once somebody has the paladin class(from start or from multiclassing) he will stay stuck to this class unless he break the oath and they say the oathbreaker needs to be evil.

Well as an example, let's say a paladin suddenly multiclass into druid. He now has to pledge allowance to nature deities.

To me it feels like taking paladin is kind of a dead end class. The class you end up with unless you go breaking your oath or go cleric. I'd like to know if I am wrong about it.

[ShadowSandbag]

I'd say it would be fine in most cases. An Oath of The Ancients Paladin deciding to learn some more natural magid amd multiclassing seems perfectly fine. Same with a Paladin learning some magic or fighting techniques or something on the side.

[Belier]

QUOTE=ShadowSandbag;22933848]I'd say it would be fine in most cases. An Oath of The Ancients Paladin deciding to learn some more natural magid amd multiclassing seems perfectly fine. Same with a Paladin learning some magic or fighting techniques or something on the side.[/QUOTE]



So you think there would not be a problem for example if when I reach druid lvl 5 i take some paladin level with ancient archetype, for example, with the idea of not just be worshipping nature but litteraly being a guardian of nature and after a while I take some level back into my main druid class? That is some idea I had but to me paladin felt like I was in a forced dead end.

[Mellack]

Paladins take an oath, but how they choose to fulfill that oath is up to them. There is no reason they cannot decide that picking up some other skills or magic is useful. Even in the real world, many priests have devoted their time to many outside efforts, such as Mendel learning about genetics.

[Phoenix042]

Does it mean he kind of broke his oath and allegeance? From a class perspective, it looks to me that once somebody has the paladin class(from start or from multiclassing) he will stay stuck to this class unless he break the oath and they say the oathbreaker needs to be evil.

You're confusing a character with a class.

Derrick is a Knight of the Silver Temple, and believes that his dedication to Heironeous can only be fulfilled by walking the straight-and-narrow path laid out in the Book Of Just Might, the holy text of his faith. The book lays out everything he does, filling every minute of his days with ritual prayer, training at arms, and service to the will of the gods. When he quests, it is because his Book, God, and Church have ordained his quest, and he does so with their tenets and methods always on his mind. To deviate from his path and learn other tricks would be a great failure in his mind, a weakness to temptation that must be avoided at all costs.


Derhasha is a fire dancer who learned her trade at the Acadamy of the Four Flames. When her former master is slain by a fellow graduate whom she once counted as a close friend and lover, she swears furious vengeance and embarks upon a quest to burn his heart from his chest. As she quests, her powers expand and sharpen, transforming her from a beautiful performer into a mighty champion of fire and vengeance. Once her quest is fullfilled, she may go back to dancing for a living, but another great threat might call her back into service later, and then her former vengeance-fueled skills may come in quite handy.

Derrick is a single classed Devotion Paladin. Derhasha is a bard-sorcerer multiclass, who begins to take levels of vengeance paladin when she embarks on her quest for revenge.

I'm not sure why returning to her life as a dancer after slaying her enemy would suddenly give her powers over undead.

Meanwhile, Derrick could conceivably fall by succumbing to the temptations of magic or whatever.


That's a matter of what type of story the player wants to tell with his character. The players handbook makes no such decisions.

[Unoriginal]

Well as an example, let's say a paladin suddenly multiclass into druid. He now has to pledge allowance to nature deities.

To me it feels like taking paladin is kind of a dead end class. The class you end up with unless you go breaking your oath or go cleric. I'd like to know if I am wrong about it.

You are wrong about it.

Paladins are not breaking any Oath if they multiclass. First because multiclassing is not something that happen in-universe, just the mechanical representation of the PC's capacities, and second because there is nothing in any of the classes that inherently clashes with any of the Paladin's Oath.

A Vengeance Paladin who wants to avenge a destroyed forest sanctuary might learn druidic magic. A Devotion Paladin who spends a lot of time in the wild might acquire the skills of a Ranger. A Redemption Paladin who lives in the middle of courtly intrigues might develop the capacities of a Mastermind Rogue.

Nothing about it goes against any of the parts of the Paladin's Oath

[Belier]

Ok thank you for all these answers and scenarios.

[Joe the Rat]

Also, Monks are allowed to be non-lawful.
Paladins dead-ending was something that happened in earlier editions. The rules do not say paladins cannot change classes, which is the sort of notable exception that would need to be called out.

But let's take this by fluff. When you look at the oaths, they do not say anything about only learning to master paladin stuff... or anything about learning and advancement. Your Oath - to justice or goodness or conquest or whatnot is what you must strive to do. You do not pledge to be a paladin, you pledge to uphold ideals, and doing so gives you your power. Taking other class levels is furthering your growth, only not in your oathbound power. You still hold the oath (and can skill fall from grace and lose it), but you don't gain more oath-related power without more Paladin.

Oathbreakers aren't Paladins Who Fall, or even Paladins who screw up royally. They are Paladins who deliberately forsake their oaths - "Screw you and your Be the light crap, I am going to steal it it all away for myself!" Or perhaps "It's all lies, everything the order does is wrong, and I'm going to fix it, starting with killing all the children." A wilful betrayal of ideals.

[Luccan]

I don't believe Paladins have ever been punished for multiclassing and even if they have, there is no reason for them to be in this edition. So long as they hold to their oath (which doesn't even relate to deities in 5e), then it isn't a problem. Now, certain multiclasses might seem odd (Oath of Ancients/Necromancer, for instance), but if it can be justified, I see no reason it shouldn't work. So long as a Paladin keeps their oath, then they don't lose their Paladinness.

[MeeposFire]

I don't believe Paladins have ever been punished for multiclassing and even if they have, there is no reason for them to be in this edition. So long as they hold to their oath (which doesn't even relate to deities in 5e), then it isn't a problem. Now, certain multiclasses might seem odd (Oath of Ancients/Necromancer, for instance), but if it can be justified, I see no reason it shouldn't work. So long as a Paladin keeps their oath, then they don't lose their Paladinness.

They were in 3e where along with the monk if they multiclassed into another class they could no loner get more levels in paladin (there were prestige classes and feats that avoided this but generally this was true). Other than that there were no explicit rules against paladins specifically though sometimes they were either really rare or did not have an official one in the original book (such as AD&D).

[Sigreid]

As long as he stayed true to his oath of behavior and duty, he hasn't broken his oath just by multi-classing. There could even be orders of paladins that require multi-class, particularly into cleric of a certain god, to climb its leadership ranks.

[Luccan]

They were in 3e where along with the monk if they multiclassed into another class they could no loner get more levels in paladin (there were prestige classes and feats that avoided this but generally this was true). Other than that there were no explicit rules against paladins specifically though sometimes they were either really rare or did not have an official one in the original book (such as AD&D).

Oh yeah. I hardly played either class in 3e because of their limitations, so I completely forgot.