Mechanically best paladin oath

[kenGarff]

Hello.
I know I recently made a topic regarding sorcadin and I don't intend to flood the forums with my questions but I'd really like your help on this. My question is as followed:

1. What paladin oath do you believe is mechanically best, overall?
2. What paladin oath do you believe is mechanically best, overall, at level 20?

Sorry if this offends anyone that doesn't like optimization and what not.

[MrStabby]

1) conquest
2) conquest or ancients

Some of this is campaign dependant of course

[MeeposFire]

Honestly I think this question is not very effective because it is too broad. Different oaths can do various things better. What do you wan to optimize? DO you want damage (probably vengeance maybe oath breaker though that cna be dangerous to you depending on the enemies involved), do you want control (conquest), defense (ancients), and while I would say it does not fit the typical idea of optimizing a single attribute over others devotion I find to be a good strong in general option though as I said not the best at any one thing.

What do you want to build towards?

[jaappleton]

Best overall? Devotion. The Channel Divinity adds +Cha Mod to attacks. Unfortunately it takes an Action, I think it should be a Bonus Action, but its strictly superior to Vengeance's Oath of Enmity. Why? Well, in scenarios where you're fighting multiple enemies, OoE fades after the first enemy is killed. Devotion's lasts 10 rounds.

Devotion also makes you immune to Charms, and eventually, all Undead and Fiends have Disadvantage on attacks against you thanks to you ALWAYS being under Protection From Evil & Good.

Its got some very vanilla spells, yes, but overall? You can't go wrong. It may be the boring, bland, vanilla Paladin, but vanilla is the baseline for a reason.

Best at level 20? Treachery.
But if we're restricted to official content? Likely Ancients, although Conquest is also great. Ancients is pretty defensive, but getting the ability to cast Action spells as a Bonus Action is pretty sweet, plus regenerating 10HP per round. Conquest gets to go more offensive, and they're both pretty boss abilities.

[AureusFulgens]

Hello.
I know I recently made a topic regarding sorcadin and I don't intend to flood the forums with my questions but I'd really like your help on this. My question is as followed:

1. What paladin oath do you believe is mechanically best, overall?
2. What paladin oath do you believe is mechanically best, overall, at level 20?

I don't really have great thoughts on this. I've only ever played a Vengeance Paladin, and I loved the spell list, but the class abilities were a little lackluster (though in the right fight, when you have a nice single BBEG target for your Vow of Enmity, they can be a little more fun).

I also know that there's a great guide for the Oath of Conquest that suggests it's one of the better-made Oaths, if you can milk the Fear mechanic for all it's worth. I don't have a link on hand right now, but look up "The Wall Of Fear" on this site.


Sorry if this offends anyone that doesn't like optimization and what not.

I mean, I'm not a big optimizer, but it doesn't really offend me when other people are. Which is good, because you and like 90% of the population of this forum are optimizers, and threads on this subject are at the very least a plurality of the 5E subforum. I think I've seen you make pre-emptive apologies like this a few times, and I'd like to be the one to tell you it's ok, you don't need to apologize for asking a reasonable question. If someone doesn't like you trying to optimize your character, then... frankly, that's their flipping problem. Go nuts.

[NecroDancer]

I'd say oath of redemption. It's not very strong on its own but in a supporting role it's amazing.

Your able to counter enemy spells, keep enemie's in place, and prevent huge amounts of damage to your party with your aura. Combine that with regular paladin abilities and you are a strong healer and fighter as well.

By itself the strongest paladins are either vengeance (lots of extra attacks) or conquest (fear is strong).

[Angelalex242]

I'd say Ancients is the best.

Because Defense will eventually trump offense in a class that has no lack of offense to begin with.

Also, I had a lot of fun taking a Meteor Swarm to the face as an ancients Paladin and doing the Luke Skywalker 'brush dust off my shoulder' move.

[Finback]

I play Vengeance, and I'm having fun with it, but I've read up on Conquest (for another character in my mind) and when I learnt about the ability to lockdown opponents, I was amazed. (short version: prone them, then they can't get up again if they're in your fear aura, because frightened means they can't use their movement at all - which means they can't stand up (as it uses half their movement)).

[kenGarff]

Thank you very much!
I'm truly grateful for all the help!

[Foxhound438]

1) conquest
2) conquest or ancients

Some of this is campaign dependant of course

I'd agree with this. Personally more a fan of ancients because the spells are both good and likeable at every level, but there can be a lot of cases where the actual features fall flat for the most part- the channel is garbage, the aura only does anything in certain fights that might never come up, and the free death ward really looks bad against multiattacks. The capstone is far and away the best though.

[ciarannihill]

If you ignore Oathbreaker (Oathbreaker Paladin 15 / Hexblade Warlock 5 with Animate Dead on Short Rest is scary when combined with the Aura of Hate and double smites) IMO it's probably Conquest, but as others have said it depends on your objective as a character.

Are you trying to protect your allies, do as much damage as possible, be an "off-tank"/"off-healer", etc. These objectives might change which is "best".

[ProseBeforeHos]

1. Ancients, mostly due to the insane aura power (resistance to all spell damage!).

2. Meh... Vengeance probably (flying speed, haste). How many level 20 games you played in however? :smallsmile:

[Spiritchaser]

Obviously it’s role dependent but for low/mid level I’d go

Oathbreaker (if permitted/appropriate)

Or

Ancients

I’d particularly draw attention to the AoE spells in ancients which are... genuinely ok, but great compared with what others get. This combined with a fairly ridiculous level 7 aura and you’re good.

I have no useful insight to offer at level 20

[kenGarff]

Thanks everyone for the opinions!
I do have another questions, however.
For an ancient paladin, what weapon(s) do mechanically best? Is it Greatsword? S&B? Polearm?

[jaappleton]

Thanks everyone for the opinions!
I do have another questions, however.
For an ancient paladin, what weapon(s) do mechanically best? Is it Greatsword? S&B? Polearm?

This is an interesting question for any Oath.

I find sword and board works best on it. They don't really get anything that can increase their accuracy to take advantage of something like Greatweapon Master. You can't really go wrong with the combo of Glaive and the Polearm Master feat, though. I still lean Sword & Board only because most of the official magic items in the game that a Paladin would really be interested in are swords. So, that's my personal suggestion.

If your DM is a little more liberal and they're willing to work up a Holy Avenger Glaive? Ok, yes, do that.

[GlenSmash!]

Thanks everyone for the opinions!
I do have another questions, however.
For an ancient paladin, what weapon(s) do mechanically best? Is it Greatsword? S&B? Polearm?

With Smites, Paladins are less depended on weapon choice/feat choice for damage than Fighters or barbarians are. So you can choose whichever fits your flavor, or just wait to see what weapons are in your campaign.

[Contrast]

They don't really get anything that can increase their accuracy to take advantage of something like Greatweapon Master.

Bless? Maintaining concentration consistently may be a problem of course. :smallwink:


I used to like Shield Master on paladins but I'm pretty torn about if its even worth taking anymore :smallfrown:

[jaappleton]

Bless? Maintaining concentration consistently may be a problem of course. :smallwink:


I used to like Shield Master on paladins but I'm pretty torn about if its even worth taking anymore :smallfrown:

I meant besides vanilla options that every Paladin gets.

I like Shield Master but only on certain Oaths. Mostly, I find the smite spells (like Thunderous Smite) to be not worth it. Some are worth it, like Blinding and Banishing Smite. So as a Paladin, I typically don't waste a spell slot and bonus action on the Smite Spells.

Conquest gets Spiritual Weapon, which is a solid bonus action spell. Since you can move it and attack with it in the same bonus action, it's also a decent ranged option as well on a class that typically doesn't get many.

Other than that? If you're using a Shield, I think Shield Master is worth it just for the bonus acting prone effect to generate advantage. The Paladin in my party has it, and my Rogue loves him for it.

[Foxhound438]

With Smites, Paladins are less depended on weapon choice/feat choice for damage than Fighters or barbarians are. So you can choose whichever fits your flavor, or just wait to see what weapons are in your campaign.

if you like to smite things -a lot-, a polearm gives you an extra swing to apply that to. It does come at a cost if you like to use the "smite spells" like wrathful or ensnaring strike, since those use a bonus action and then you're using just the front end of a polearm at a lower damage die than a greatsword would give.

[GlenSmash!]

if you like to smite things -a lot-, a polearm gives you an extra swing to apply that to. It does come at a cost if you like to use the "smite spells" like wrathful or ensnaring strike, since those use a bonus action and then you're using just the front end of a polearm at a lower damage die than a greatsword would give.

yup, using the Polearm Master Feat does provide more attacks to smite on. And since more attacks mean more chances at crits it's a good way to make sure you smites are crits.

Downside is it's not a Holy Avenger.

[kenGarff]

Is it more beneficial to take PAM with a polearm than GWM with a greatsword?

[Ganymede]

Also, is a wheel of cheese mechanically better than four quarters of a cheese wheel?

[kenGarff]

Thanks everyone for the help!
I really appreciated all the answers.


Also, is a wheel of cheese mechanically better than four quarters of a cheese wheel?

Ok...

[kenGarff]

For ancients, which weapon and/or feats go well?
I was thinking polearm or sword and shield with PAM/sentinel and Shield Master/sentinel, respectively.
Thanks everyone.

[LudicSavant]

Probably mostly going to be determined by the following:
- Best aura (good ones are things like "half damage from magic" and "immunity to charms," which actually covers an awful lot of nasty effects in 5e, not just Charm X spells).
- Best ability to minimize weaknesses (namely, being stuck out of range and anything that lets enemies ignore you or remove you from your allies).

Thing it's not gonna be:
- Doing like 10% extra DPR against a training dummy.

[djreynolds]

Best overall? Devotion. The Channel Divinity adds +Cha Mod to attacks. Unfortunately it takes an Action, I think it should be a Bonus Action, but its strictly superior to Vengeance's Oath of Enmity. Why? Well, in scenarios where you're fighting multiple enemies, OoE fades after the first enemy is killed. Devotion's lasts 10 rounds.

Devotion also makes you immune to Charms, and eventually, all Undead and Fiends have Disadvantage on attacks against you thanks to you ALWAYS being under Protection From Evil & Good.

Its got some very vanilla spells, yes, but overall? You can't go wrong. It may be the boring, bland, vanilla Paladin, but vanilla is the baseline for a reason.

Best at level 20? Treachery.
But if we're restricted to official content? Likely Ancients, although Conquest is also great. Ancients is pretty defensive, but getting the ability to cast Action spells as a Bonus Action is pretty sweet, plus regenerating 10HP per round. Conquest gets to go more offensive, and they're both pretty boss abilities.

I agree the devotion is best overall, see how your DM treats sacred weapon. Can you "cast" or use sacred weapon and then cast a smite spell still as a BA? AFB, if channel divinity is treated as a spell.

[mgshamster]

Oath of the Crown.

It's the only oath that ties you to a full society and often an actual king, which gives you the possibility of having entire armies at your beck and call as you wage war as a full on military general.

All the rest tie you to only yourself.

[jaappleton]

I agree the devotion is best overall, see how your DM treats sacred weapon. Can you "cast" or use sacred weapon and then cast a smite spell still as a BA? AFB, if channel divinity is treated as a spell.

Oath’s CD is an ability, not a spell, and doesn’t require Concentration. Therefore, totally possible.

[Theodoxus]

I think you need to get more granular in the question. Each Oath is fairly balanced with each other. Strong spells means weaker channel and aura; strong channel means weaker spells and aura; strong aura means weaker spells and channel... So, depending on what you want, look to each of those aspects.

In my opinion, Ancients aura is so strong, it outshines the other oaths (despite a weak channel and meh spells). But then, my characters have mostly died to magical attacks, and I've yet to play or run a game with an ancient paladin though... so my white paper perception could easily be wrong.

[MaxWilson]

I agree the devotion is best overall, see how your DM treats sacred weapon. Can you "cast" or use sacred weapon and then cast a smite spell still as a BA? AFB, if channel divinity is treated as a spell.

Sacred Weapon + Wrathful Smite is pretty decent if you can move into position to threaten opportunity attacks. Even though you haven't made any attacks, you're still sort of pinning an enemy in place.

Another good option is to couple Sacred Weapon with Compelled Duel on an enemy.


I think you need to get more granular in the question. Each Oath is fairly balanced with each other. Strong spells means weaker channel and aura; strong channel means weaker spells and aura; strong aura means weaker spells and channel... So, depending on what you want, look to each of those aspects.

In my opinion, Ancients aura is so strong, it outshines the other oaths (despite a weak channel and meh spells). But then, my characters have mostly died to magical attacks, and I've yet to play or run a game with an ancient paladin though... so my white paper perception could easily be wrong.

It depends very much on the composition of the monsters in the campaign. Ancients is very weak against almost everything in the MM; but in a campaign with lots of spellcasting NPCs (and Flameskulls, Neogi wizards, etc.) it could be reasonably strong. Even there however it is arguably better to be immune to the enemy's Dominate Person/Hypnotic Pattern/other charm effects (Devotion 7) than to be merely resistant to an enemy's Fireballs and Cones of Cold (Ancients 7).

I can't help but wonder though how much of Oath of Ancients' overblown reputation is due to people misreading the ability and letting it give resistance to other magical effects besides spells, like breath weapons and mind flayer blasts.

[MrStabby]

I think you need to get more granular in the question. Each Oath is fairly balanced with each other. Strong spells means weaker channel and aura; strong channel means weaker spells and aura; strong aura means weaker spells and channel... So, depending on what you want, look to each of those aspects.

In my opinion, Ancients aura is so strong, it outshines the other oaths (despite a weak channel and meh spells). But then, my characters have mostly died to magical attacks, and I've yet to play or run a game with an ancient paladin though... so my white paper perception could easily be wrong.

Huh. I was rating Ancients spells pretty highly. Misty step and ensnaring strike are both worthy of a mention. Buy yeah, the aura is awesome in many campaigns.

I rated conquest so highly in part because all three of it's components are strong. The CD is obscenely powerful - a no concentration effect for mass crowd control? Non of those limitations like for fey, fiends or undead. Just awesome. And the aura? It would be great on any paladin contemplating wrathful smite. Combined with the fear spell, channel divinity AND wrathful smite the aura is over-the-top. For most of the game the limited radius is about it's only weakness. And the spells - well fear is a great spell, command is a great spell, armour of agathys, spiritual weapon, hold person At high levels dominate person is solid. The reason I rate the conquest spells so highly is that they do things that would otherwise be tough from the straight Paladin list.

A conquest paladin is one of the best controllers in the game with a battery of fear effects including non-concentration ones, domination and command effects and can turn fear into total immobilisation. At the same time it has one of the highest single target damage outputs of any class, simply by virtue of being a paladin but with tools like spiritual weapon on the domain list you do get an extra bit of punch. If this wasn't enough you are no glass cannon as all of this comes on a package with an above average hit die size, access to heavy armour and armour of agathys is a great tool vs hordes of less individually dangerous enemies. Whist other classes may be specialists in one are or a Jack of All trades, a Conquest Paladin is master of several trades and with very little need to trade one off against another. The class has two real weaknesses: ranged attackers that fly or are otherwise unreachable and creatures with great wisdom saves, and the latter isn't really a weakness as the whole Plan B of smite them till they are dead still holds.

[MaxWilson]

The class has two real weaknesses: ranged attackers that fly or are otherwise unreachable and creatures with great wisdom saves, and the latter isn't really a weakness as the whole Plan B of smite them till they are dead still holds.

Plus anything that is immune to the Frightened condition: anything from Animated Armor to Manes and Lemures to Flameskulls and Banshees to Death Knights and Demiliches to anything with an Empyrean on its side. Golems, Galeb Duhr boulders, Lizardfolk royalty, Mummies, Black Puddings, Myconid Servants, Shadows, Scarecrows, Androsphinxes, Shield Guardians, etc., etc. are all immune to Frightened. (And trying to Smite your way through a swarm of creatures like Shadows or Animated Armors is a sucker's game because Smite is extremely inefficient.)

Fundamentally, the Oath of Conquest's problem is that it's redundant: Fear is a very strong spell against anything that can be frightened, and it's widely available. A Conquest Paladin uses fear more often than almost anybody except maybe a Long Death monk, and he gets a free 1/short rest fear effect without spending a spell slot or concentration (although unlike Fear, the Channel Divinity fear doesn't deprive the enemy of action economy, and it allows a fresh save every round), but he isn't necessarily any better at fear than a lore bard or wizard is, and against enemies who ignore fear he's nothing special at all. He's kind of a one-trick pony.

So yes, reliance on fear is a real weakness.

[MrStabby]

Plus anything that is immune to the Frightened condition: anything from Animated Armor to Manes and Lemures to Flameskulls and Banshees to Death Knights and Demiliches to anything with an Empyrean on its side. Golems, Galeb Duhr boulders, Lizardfolk royalty, Mummies, Black Puddings, Myconid Servants, Shadows, Scarecrows, Androsphinxes, Shield Guardians, etc., etc. are all immune to Frightened. (And trying to Smite your way through a swarm of creatures like Shadows or Animated Armors is a sucker's game because Smite is extremely inefficient.)

Fundamentally, the Oath of Conquest's problem is that it's redundant: Fear is a very strong spell against anything that can be frightened, and it's widely available. A Conquest Paladin uses fear more often than almost anybody except maybe a Long Death monk, and he gets a free 1/short rest fear effect without spending a spell slot or concentration (although unlike Fear, the Channel Divinity fear doesn't deprive the enemy of action economy, and it allows a fresh save every round), but he isn't necessarily any better at fear than a lore bard or wizard is, and against enemies who ignore fear he's nothing special at all. He's kind of a one-trick pony.

So yes, reliance on fear is a real weakness.

Not so much. The point is that fear is a great tool but not their only one. As for smite being inefficient? Look at your list - it if full of undead or fiends. The point about fear is not that it is not resisted, but that very often the things that resist it are specifically vulnerable to the paladin's other tools. It isn't enough to evaluate it in a vacuum you have to see how it compliments the paladin's other abilities. Sure you might have a campaign revolving round androsphinxes or animated armour but I am guessing those are not common. Even things like a Shield Guardian I would expect to find guarding someone else - so there is still a solid target for your wrathful smite.

I would say that the lack of concentration does make the paladin better at fear than say a lore bard. Well so many things together make it better at fear. If the lore bard makes half the enemies run away how easy is it for the others to break that concentration? There are some spells like Tasha's Hideous Laughter that will do it for you but commonly you look for damage. The lore bard isn't exactly packing heavy armour proficiency, constitution save proficiency or much to help here. The paladin needn't worry about incapacitation or damage ending her effect. The paladin can also make the effect stick around - if a lore bard casts fear then an enemy can run behind a wall or similar and just recover. With aura of conquest they are fixed in place and taking damage over time also. The lack of concentration also lets the Paladin run multiple fear effects - use the Chanel Divinity then hit whoever passed their save with a wrathful smite next turn. This isn't to say you are just doing fear either - you can have a fear effect and bless up at the same time, fear and aura of vitality or whatever you fancy.

The spell list also makes the Paladin best at fear. Sure a lore bard could use a magical secret to grab wrathful smite but they are not going to get the same chance to land it reliably with only one attack and using their action to do this doesn't do anything like as much damage on the side.

Conquest paladin is so powerful because it has so much stuff other than fear - AS WELL as the fear effects. If you do come up against a significant opponent immune to fear you can get +10 to hit instead. I think that the Oath of Conquest is a lot less specific than Oath of the Ancients in many ways - compare CDs, I would guess in most campaigns you are less likely to come across something that is not vulnerable to fear than you are to come across something that isn't a Fey or Fiend. If we compare auras are we more likely to encounter something immune to fear or something that doesn't cast spells? Don't get me wrong the Ancients Aura is fantastic, but it is hardly universal and the resistance it gives is somewhat devalued as you are pretty likely to be passing your saves anyway due to your aura of protection.

I will say Ancients probably has the better capstone but extra attack, expanded critical, resistance to all damage is not by any measure poor.

[MaxWilson]

Not so much. The point is that fear is a great tool but not their only one. As for smite being inefficient? Look at your list - it if full of undead or fiends. The point about fear is not that it is not resisted, but that very often the things that resist it are specifically vulnerable to the paladin's other tools.

Constructs, undeads, and fiends, yes. But that's not enough to make Smite good. Trying to Divine Smite your way through even a Medium encounter with Shadows is a horrible use of resources and will leave you drained of spell slots for the day (and could very well lead to death anyway). Paladin of Devotion would be able to turn most or maybe all of them with a single Channel Divinity; and of course a Paladorc or Padlock could do something like Expeditious Retreat away from them.


It isn't enough to evaluate it in a vacuum you have to see how it compliments the paladin's other abilities. Sure you might have a campaign revolving round androsphinxes or animated armour but I am guessing those are not common. Even things like a Shield Guardian I would expect to find guarding someone else - so there is still a solid target for your wrathful smite.

If you Wrathful Smite the Necromancer whom the Shield Guardian is guarding, what have you gained really? Not like he was going to physically attack you anyway. He might Dominate Person you, and unlike a Devotion paladin you have no defense against that except your saving throw. I don't mean to boost the Devotion paladin specifically here, and I'm not saying the Conquest paladin is terrible (it's not--against a wide range of targets it's quite good). I'm just saying that a Conquest Paladin genuinely does need to pay attention to and be wary of situations where his fear shtick isn't going to work. A Conquest Paladin/Fiendlock is going to be much, much stronger than a pure Conquest Paladin for that reason: he has a broader palette of options to paint with.


I would say that the lack of concentration does make the paladin better at fear than say a lore bard. Well so many things together make it better at fear. If the lore bard makes half the enemies run away how easy is it for the others to break that concentration?

Maybe easy, maybe not. Depends on what the Bard is doing after he casts the spell (move back behind tanks?) and what the geometry of the engagement is. Even if they break it after just one round, he's still taken those enemies out of the fight for one round even if they have missile weapons or spells, or two rounds if they don't. (Dash away, Dash back when the spell ends.) The Conquest Paladin Channel Divinity won't take missile-armed enemies out of the fight for a single round: that Necromancer can keep Fireballing/Slowing/Dominating Person despite the fear, but he couldn't do that through Fear.

There are pros and cons to each and I can respect it if you think Channel Divinity is stronger overall. I most just want people to be aware of the differences between them.

[/quote]The lore bard isn't exactly packing heavy armour proficiency, constitution save proficiency or much to help here.[/quote]

Agreed, for single-class Lore Bards specifically. That's not a strike against Fear though: remember that Fear is available to Bards, Sorcerers, Warlocks, and Wizards, including multiclass variations on same, many of which are quite tanky. It is a point in favor of Conquest Paladin (built-in heavy armor proficiency), just not an unusually strong one (heavy armor proficiency is easy to acquire via multiclassing, and is often part of Sorcerers/Warlocks/Wizards IME).


The paladin needn't worry about incapacitation or damage ending her effect.

Yup. But she does have to worry about the enemy getting free saves every round to end it. Different worry, not absence of worry.


The paladin can also make the effect stick around - if a lore bard casts fear then an enemy can run behind a wall or similar and just recover. With aura of conquest they are fixed in place and taking damage over time also.

A very small, probably negligible amount of damage, yes.

If the enemy runs behind a wall or something, you kill the enemies who aren't running behind a wall. (As you said above, there are probably several enemies unaffected.) At worst it's a way of splitting your enemy's forces. At best it pins them in place against a wall (no way to flee), prevents them from approaching, and imposes disadvantage on all of their attacks.


The lack of concentration also lets the Paladin run multiple fear effects - use the Chanel Divinity then hit whoever passed their save with a wrathful smite next turn. This isn't to say you are just doing fear either - you can have a fear effect and bless up at the same time, fear and aura of vitality or whatever you fancy.

Sure.


The spell list also makes the Paladin best at fear. Sure a lore bard could use a magical secret to grab wrathful smite but they are not going to get the same chance to land it reliably with only one attack and using their action to do this doesn't do anything like as much damage on the side.

IMO, Bards who want Wrathful Smite will probably just be Hexblade 2/Lore Bard X. You get Wrathful Smite, a good ranged attack, short rest spell slots to go along with your short rest Bardic Inspiration, and AC 19ish instead of AC 16. (AC 24 if you grabbed Shield as one of your Hexblade spells. Wrathful Smite + Shield + Expeditious Retreat is a pretty good selection.)


Conquest paladin is so powerful because it has so much stuff other than fear - AS WELL as the fear effects. If you do come up against a significant opponent immune to fear you can get +10 to hit instead.

On one attack. Honestly, nothing about Conquest impresses me besides fear and to a certain extent Spiritual Weapon. (It's not the greatest spell but it does have a good action economy.)


I think that the Oath of Conquest is a lot less specific than Oath of the Ancients in many ways - compare CDs, I would guess in most campaigns you are less likely to come across something that is not vulnerable to fear than you are to come across something that isn't a Fey or Fiend.

Agreed. Ancients is IMO pretty weak.


If we compare auras are we more likely to encounter something immune to fear or something that doesn't cast spells? Don't get me wrong the Ancients Aura is fantastic, but it is hardly universal and the resistance it gives is somewhat devalued as you are pretty likely to be passing your saves anyway due to your aura of protection.

I will say Ancients probably has the better capstone but extra attack, expanded critical, resistance to all damage is not by any measure poor.

[kenGarff]

Ancients is pretty weak? What would you say is the best overall oath then?
Thanks everyone for the discussions by the way.

[mgshamster]

Ancients is pretty weak? What would you say is the best overall oath then?
Thanks everyone for the discussions by the way.

Well... None of them are truly weak, per se. It's all relative.

You won't go wrong picking any of them, even if one is marginally "stronger" than another. You'd be fine just picking based on flavor or even picking randomly. All of them are viable, all have their strengths and weaknesses. One of them may be the best [in these situations given those parameters], and one of them may be the worst [for certain values of "worst"], but the range is rather small.

[Exocist]

Ancients is pretty weak? What would you say is the best overall oath then?
Thanks everyone for the discussions by the way.

Treachery :P

Another thing to consider is this - How high a level do you expect the campaign to go. While it's true some oaths might get very good higher level spells & abilities, if the campaign never goes that far then there was no point picking that oath.

[kenGarff]

My campaign will start from level 20 and not progress any further. It is going to be for a homebrew campaign and I’m not quite sure what will come about. My DM did tell us to optimize our characters if we can and that the campaign will be very difficult. I don’t quite know what to expect lol.

[MaxWilson]

Ancients is pretty weak? What would you say is the best overall oath then?
Thanks everyone for the discussions by the way.

I don't have a strong opinion on that (I guess I'd say that Devotion and Conquest are a tiny bit stronger than the others, in certain situations, with Vengeance also being strong in campaigns that feature lots of solo monsters) because IMO the strongest combination involve multiclassing (warlock or sorcerer or both) instead of pure Paladin, but I do like Paladin of Devotion the best because I think they have the best, most respectable code of values, including for characters who are not Paladins. I won't name characters from my campaigns because they would mean nothing to you, but Michael Carpenter from the Dresden Files is a terrific example of a non-Paladin who obeys Devotion tenets. I also happen to like getting access to Sanctuary for protecting other characters, and Protection From Evil (which goes well with Quickened Spell metamagic for demon-fighting).

(I've seen other fun combinations like Paladin/Mastermind but they're not particularly strong per se.)

Anyway, if you want to be strong I'd suggest two levels of Hexblade (Agonizing Repelling Blast, Shield, Expeditious Retreat, Hex or Armor of Agathys), or 2 levels of any kind of warlock and at least three levels of some kind of Sorcerer (Quickened spell and Extended Spell are my top picks, Extended Spell primarily for the synergy with Aura of Vitality). Paladin of Devotion 9/Warlock 2/Sorcerer 9 would be my target for level 20.

[kenGarff]

Thanks but my group is going straight single class. Thank you though.
I have seen ancients, conquest, devotion, and even vengeance as the mechanical best oath overall by various people here and several other places. I suppose they are really on par with each other.

[Exocist]

Thanks but my group is going straight single class. Thank you though.
I have seen ancients, conquest, devotion, and even vengeance as the mechanical best oath overall by various people here and several other places. I suppose they are really on par with each other.

Paladin Oaths judged by starting at level 20:

Ancients
Spells: Misty Step is the best spell here. The rest are so-so or downright useless
Channel Divinity: Neither is going to be a good use of your action at this level. Turn the Faithless, while not resisted, just won't land at all due to high WIS saves/legendary resistance. Nature's wrath will be resisted by immune to restrained or they'll just make the check to break it.
Aura of Warding: IIRC a lot of monsters at that level have innate spellcasting that far outdamages their multiattack options so this might be very good.
Undying Sentinel: I'm going to list this as "Not good". It's Relentless Endurance at 15th level.
Elder Champion: Is an extremely good option, but it's 1/LR. Is your DM the "one/two big encounters" type - if so this is very good. If he is the 6-8 Medium-Hard encounters, not so good.

Conquest
Spells: Armor of Agathys is still good at this level, if monsters don't cast spells, chances are they'll multiattack. None of the hits should do 20-25 damage alone, so AoA is basically a guaranteed 40-50 damage if they attack you. Hold/Dominate Person might still be good if DM has humanoids, but high saves/legendary resistance might screw you. Spiritual Weapon should still be good if you're not using bonus action. If PAM/GWM, ignore.
Channel Divinity: Guided Strike is probably still alright, able to turn a miss into a hit 1/Short rest.
Aura of Conquest: Immunity to Frightened will probably be very common at this level, so not good.
Scornful Rebuke: Actually stacks up well with AoA, making that 40-50 damage 50-60. It's not a very flashy ability, but psychic isn't that commonly resisted (IIRC).
Invincible Conqueror: Not as good as Elder champion, but most of these will be good and have the same problem - DM being the 1/2 Encounters type vs the 6/8 Encounters type.

Devotion
Spells: Dispel Magic is probably the only standout here. It's still not great.
Channel Divinity: Sacred Weapon is great if DM is a fan of long, drawn-out encounters. Spending your action on your first turn to use it is less than ideal, but the bonus is pretty massive.
Aura of Devotion: IIRC Dominate Person/Monster is actually on a lot of enemy lists. So this might actually be good. Prone to DM metagaming and just not using those spells/hotswapping them for different spells.
Purity of Spirit: Does this do anything you don't already do?
Holy Nimbus: Not a great Paladin 20th.

The real standout here is Sacred Weapon basically.

Redemption

If your DM is throwing you through a sausage machine, you don't want this.

Vengeance
Spells: Actually a few very good spells here - Hunter's Mark, Haste and Misty Step have a lot of use. Dimension Door is situational, but useful to have. Banishment is a very good spell, but might be less good at this level (in general, most save to negate spells are less good the higher you go). Hold Person/Monster discussed above.
Channel Divinity: Vow of Emnity might be on par with Sacred Weapon. It only works on 1 creature and the bonus might be worth less on average, but requiring a bonus action rather than an action is huge. If your DM is a fan of 1-creature encounters, I'd say this is actually better than Sacred Weapon.
Relentless Avenger: Not great tbh.
Soul of Vengeance: See note on Vow of Emnity, but this is pretty good.
Avenging Angel: As far as capstones go, this isn't great. Immunity to Frightened renders the second feature pretty useless, so the first feature is why we're here. Without magic items, it might actually be good, but it is dependent on how long your DM stretches 1 hour out. Is it 1 encounter? 2? 3? The whole day? The answer to that question can change how good this feature is.

Oathbreaker
Spells: Contagion is good, subject to whether your DM says it starts working as soon as you hit them or starts working only after 3 failed saves. Rest isn't great.
Channel Divinity: Control Undead depends on what your DM lets you hit with it. It can range from pretty useless (Zombie/Skeleton) to really good (Alhoon/Demilich/Whatever)
Aura of Hate: Pretty good as a passive effect. Better with more attacks (PAM).
Supernatural Resistance: IIRC Most monsters don't have the ability that treats their attacks as magical, so this is actually good.
Dread Lord: Ok the first benefit isn't great, most monsters will have true sight/tremorsense/blindsight/whatever by now and immunity to frightened renders the second benefit of it moot. The bonus action attack actually does quite a fair bit of damage though (though probably won't compete with just whacking someone with your PAM/GWM).

Treachery
Spells: Invisibility (not as good anymore), Mirror Image (better on a caster, you're getting hit a lot. Works with sentinel though), Haste and Greater Invisibility (see invisibility) are the standouts here.
Channel Divinity: Truesight will probably render Conjure Duplicate moot, but it is also dependent on how your DM plays Illusions. Poison Strike looks so good (40 damage!) but it's poison damage so it'll run straight into immunity.
Aura of Treachery: Second benefit probably isn't great, but first benefit is good if DM is a fan of "wide" (multi-man) encounters.
Blackguard's Escape: Can actually be very good if you can stop a creature's multiattack dead in it's tracks with it. If you have other melees, this probably isn't so good because they can just hit someone else.
Icon of Deceit: Both the first and second benefits are really good, but I assume they'll fail at this level (Truesight/Tremorsense/Whatever and Immunity resepectively). 3rd benefit can't be taken away, but you need a way to have advantage on attack rolls that isn't being invisible. If you can get it off, this is probably equal to or better than Elder Champion in terms of sheer goodness.

[Citan]

Hello.
I know I recently made a topic regarding sorcadin and I don't intend to flood the forums with my questions but I'd really like your help on this. My question is as followed:

1. What paladin oath do you believe is mechanically best, overall?
2. What paladin oath do you believe is mechanically best, overall, at level 20?

Sorry if this offends anyone that doesn't like optimization and what not.
Hi!

IMO...
1. Ancients, no-brainer.
2. Crown.
3. Devotion.

Before I'll go in detail, quick word about others...
Vengeance: completely overrated imo, but does bring a big oopmh against bosses with CD and Haste. Risky bet though on the latter, makes Resilient: Constitution (and possibly Warcaster) mandatory.
Conquest: seems very nice but only theorycraft, no actual play.
Redemption: same (especially spell selection), but does channel you into one role much more than the others.
Oathbreaker: same (I *don't* break oaths myself ^^): also, it limits you very much alignment-wise, which is a big deal to my eyes.


So...
Ancients: grabs the crown (haha) because it...
- provides you options in areas you suck (namely mass control, through movement or damage: Moonbeam is nice although small area, Plant Growth is extremely awesome -yeah, I dare that improbable emphasis-, Misty Step is always great -especially paired with previous one- and Protection From Energy helps you protect others at low levels.).
- provides you a single-target low-level control spell that is imo much, much better than Thunderous Smite (Ensnaring Strike providing advantage on your attacks since restrained: does target a save that is usually strong though).
- makes you, by close, far and between, the most resilient of all Paladins with magic resistance.
- at high-level, as a consequence, gives the most interesting Aura of all to everyone (pair it with Circle of Power and your party will be mostly untouchable -of course, that means all enemies will focus on you to break your concentration, but drawing fire is one of the classics jobs of Paladin anyways).
- and the capstone is stupidly strong, sporting 10 HP regen (seems not much? You are automatically "revived" from unconscious, no strings attached: it is a non-concentration effect), *every spell AS A BONUS ACTION*, and *IMPOSING DISADVANTAGE ON SAVE*.
Only the channel divinity seems lackluster, although it is a non-concentration, short-rest effect. The fact that target chooses the save makes it hard to use well, but it does help more often than not.
Basically, every level is loaded with gorgeous goodies.

Crown: is often underrated, although he's easily the second best to me. Two reasons for that.
1. Channel Divinity: a "non-concentration, Mass Compelled Duel" is a gold ability for a tank in my books. Especially when creatures understand that this guy strikes hard. Of course, it just restricts movement, so less interesting than (Conquest?)'s "fear effect".
But it's mass. Non-concentration. Short-rest. Put it on an Alert Paladin with ally's move buff and he can severely restrict tactical possibilities.
Especially paired with...
2. Spirit Guardians. I think nobody else needs to be said here. ;)
It's not all, you still get a protection feature for allies as well as Warding Bond, and a big resilience boost at higher levels. :)
Overall an Oath that improves your core role without pushing you too much into them. :)
Devotion comes next: some people above explained better than me how being immune to charmed can be awesome. However, the actual value really depends on what you face (hence campaign) and your party composition too. I don't remember every class/racial feature giving protection/immunity against charmed, but at least two of the most used races give advantage on saves against being charmed, and you have to add to that the fact that ~1/3 of classes are proficient in Wis saves, + the CHA bonus from Aura of Protection.
So actual risk is not *that*big usually except for pure martials.
The true value of Devotion is Sacred Weapon: sure, it uses an action, but it makes you *extremely* reliable whatever enemy you face, even ranged (just use it on a bow): so even a full-STR Paladin now becomes useful against flyers, and a DEX Paladin will become deadly. Contrarily to Vengeance, it works against any enemy.
The other features seem lackluster, but they do bring value, they are just not shiny like others: but perma-Protection against Evil and Good ought to be useful in any kind of campaign.
Same with spells: half of them are not really interesting, but Paladin has enough spells anyways to not care: Sanctuary and Freedom of Movement are useful though.
This Oath is perfect for multiclasses relying on weapon attacks or if you just want to play a "basic" Paladin using mainly slots on Bless/Divine Smite/Wrathful Smite/Blinding Smite/Banish Smite.

[MaxWilson]

- makes you, by close, far and between, the most resilient of all Paladins with magic resistance.


Note that it's not magic resistance, only resistance to damage from spells. Magic Resistance works against anything magical (grants advantage on saves), but the Ancients Aura does nothing against dragon breath, mind flayer mind blasts, Iron Golem breath, Androsphinx roars, dragon fear, etc., etc.

If it can be Counterspelled and it does HP damage, Ancients paladins have an edge against it. But so does anyone with Counterspell, or anyone with good healing abilities. IMO that's pretty niche.

BTW, if you find the Ancients capstone impressive (automatically revived from unconscious, at the cost of an action to activate), you will find the spell Aura of Life very impressive: revives everyone in a 30' radius from unconscious, every round for up to 10 minutes. You don't have to wait for 20th level to test out what it feels like to be quasi-unkillable, you can get it right from level 13. (Or level 10 as a bard.) Whether it's actually any good will depend on the behavior and motivations of the various monsters that you fight. If hungry ghouls see a target go down and move on to another target, that's quite different from hungry ghouls that see a target go down and start tearing into it grabbing gobbets of flesh to shove into their mouths. Ancients Paladin/Aura of Life would be great against the former and almost totally useless against the latter.

[kenGarff]

Thanks. I did not know ancients paladin, and others, would be so polarizing in opinions in regards to their mechanical effectiveness especially at level 20.

[Angelalex242]

Note that it's not magic resistance, only resistance to damage from spells. Magic Resistance works against anything magical (grants advantage on saves), but the Ancients Aura does nothing against dragon breath, mind flayer mind blasts, Iron Golem breath, Androsphinx roars, dragon fear, etc., etc.

If it can be Counterspelled and it does HP damage, Ancients paladins have an edge against it. But so does anyone with Counterspell, or anyone with good healing abilities. IMO that's pretty niche.

BTW, if you find the Ancients capstone impressive (automatically revived from unconscious, at the cost of an action to activate), you will find the spell Aura of Life very impressive: revives everyone in a 30' radius from unconscious, every round for up to 10 minutes. You don't have to wait for 20th level to test out what it feels like to be quasi-unkillable, you can get it right from level 13. (Or level 10 as a bard.) Whether it's actually any good will depend on the behavior and motivations of the various monsters that you fight. If hungry ghouls see a target go down and move on to another target, that's quite different from hungry ghouls that see a target go down and start tearing into it grabbing gobbets of flesh to shove into their mouths. Ancients Paladin/Aura of Life would be great against the former and almost totally useless against the latter.

Ancients Aura can be stacked with a Holy Avenger or a Circle of Power spell for Meteor Swarm to the Face=1/4 damage.

A good Ancients Paladin should be counting on taking 1/4 damage from any damage dealing spell.

[kenGarff]

Ancients Aura can be stacked with a Holy Avenger or a Circle of Power spell for Meteor Swarm to the Face=1/4 damage.

A good Ancients Paladin should be counting on taking 1/4 damage from any damage dealing spell.

Does that mean with holy avenger you’d go with sword and board for ancients paladin?

[Citan]

Note that it's not magic resistance, only resistance to damage from spells. Magic Resistance works against anything magical (grants advantage on saves), but the Ancients Aura does nothing against dragon breath, mind flayer mind blasts, Iron Golem breath, Androsphinx roars, dragon fear, etc., etc.

If it can be Counterspelled and it does HP damage, Ancients paladins have an edge against it. But so does anyone with Counterspell, or anyone with good healing abilities. IMO that's pretty niche.

BTW, if you find the Ancients capstone impressive (automatically revived from unconscious, at the cost of an action to activate), you will find the spell Aura of Life very impressive: revives everyone in a 30' radius from unconscious, every round for up to 10 minutes. You don't have to wait for 20th level to test out what it feels like to be quasi-unkillable, you can get it right from level 13. (Or level 10 as a bard.) Whether it's actually any good will depend on the behavior and motivations of the various monsters that you fight. If hungry ghouls see a target go down and move on to another target, that's quite different from hungry ghouls that see a target go down and start tearing into it grabbing gobbets of flesh to shove into their mouths. Ancients Paladin/Aura of Life would be great against the former and almost totally useless against the latter.
You make a good point about Ancients's Aura not covering non-magical spells. That is an important limitation indeed. It does not make it less impressive in my book though, but I guess it's up to each one to decide its worth for his/her own campaign. :)

I daresay your comparison of Ancients capstone with Aura of Life, let's say, hazardous to say the least. You're comparing an effect that requires concentration from a full 4th level slot to one part of a capstone that lasts one minute without concentration and works even when you're unconscious.

Not saying it's a bad spell, saying that you have much, much "better" (as in usually more potent in an encounter without specific parameters) spells to spend concentration on, whether a lowish Bless to keep slots on smite, to a Banishing Smite to divide and conquer, up to the crazy good Circle of Power (one could legitimately argue that better than reviving from 0 is preventing the fall to 0 in the first place).

And to take your own example, we don't care about the ghoul's choice: if there were several ghouls acting before Paladin's turn comes, he's toast anyways, with auto-critical death failure.
As long as his turns before the dreaded 3rd failed save...
1) Aura of Life: went down long ago when Paladin went unconscious: he's dead.
2) Ancient's Capstone: Paladin is fully capable with his tantamount 1HP (yeah, I've always found this stupid but hey, it's the rules) so he could, depending on situation, kill surrounding ghouls then move normally, or play safe and chain a Misty Step with Lay on Hands.
As stupid as may be, if he's some sort of bet-it-all crazy guy, he could unleash an Ice Storm to blow ghouls away and him included (unless he was smart and picked up Shield Master to add insult to injury and stand uncasthed with a shiny smile).

In fact, I see absolutely no logical reason to compare them because they don't fulfill the same role *at all*: Aura of Life is for Paladin to protect others. Ancient's capstone regen is to protect himself.

[kenGarff]

Thank you for all your help.
I will most likely go with ancients, half elf, and a polearm. I will probably use PAM and sentinel for feats. Thank you.

[MaxWilson]

Ancients Aura can be stacked with a Holy Avenger or a Circle of Power spell for Meteor Swarm to the Face=1/4 damage.

Can you elaborate on your math?

Circle of Power gives you advantage on your saves against Meteor Swarm, and converts "save for half damage" to "save for no damage."

Adding Ancients aura converts that from "save for no damage" to "save for no damage, half damage (because resistance) on a save." How do you get 1/4 damage?

Note that Counterspell just straight-up converts to "no damage, period." Ancients Aura adds an extra layer of protection in case your Counterspell fails, but meh, it only works against some things and all it does is reduce their damage. Aura of Devotion on the other hand protects you against charms (not just Charm Person/Dominate effects, but also including hypnotizing effects like Hypnotic Pattern) from spells, fey, vampires, etc., and it even works to nullify charms that were established previously. Your buddy got Dominated by an evil wizard? Move 10' away from him, now he's free from Domination as long as you stick close to him and are conscious.

I'd rather have the Devotion aura in most campaigns. Maybe I'd take Ancients in a campaign that was all about fighting Flameskulls and Hobgoblin Devastators.


You make a good point about Ancients's Aura not covering non-magical spells. That is an important limitation indeed. It does not make it less impressive in my book though, but I guess it's up to each one to decide its worth for his/her own campaign. :)

I daresay your comparison of Ancients capstone with Aura of Life, let's say, hazardous to say the least. You're comparing an effect that requires concentration from a full 4th level slot to one part of a capstone that lasts one minute without concentration and works even when you're unconscious.

Not saying it's a bad spell, saying that you have much, much "better" (as in usually more potent in an encounter without specific parameters) spells to spend concentration on, whether a lowish Bless to keep slots on smite, to a Banishing Smite to divide and conquer, up to the crazy good Circle of Power (one could legitimately argue that better than reviving from 0 is preventing the fall to 0 in the first place).

If Aura of Life is unimpressive compared to Bless, despite being an AoE "up from unconsciousness every round" for everyone in your party who is within 30' of you, then when you eventually get the Ancients capstone 7-10 levels later, that part of it is probably going to be fairly unimpressive too. Maybe you still like the whole package; I'm just pointing out that you get to play with an even better form of the "up from unconsciousness" part 7-10 levels earlier than that and see if you're actually going to enjoy it.


And to take your own example, we don't care about the ghoul's choice: if there were several ghouls acting before Paladin's turn comes, he's toast anyways, with auto-critical death failure.
As long as his turns before the dreaded 3rd failed save...
1) Aura of Life: went down long ago when Paladin went unconscious: he's dead.
2) Ancient's Capstone: Paladin is fully capable with his tantamount 1HP (yeah, I've always found this stupid but hey, it's the rules) so he could, depending on situation, kill surrounding ghouls then move normally, or play safe and chain a Misty Step with Lay on Hands.
As stupid as may be, if he's some sort of bet-it-all crazy guy, he could unleash an Ice Storm to blow ghouls away and him included (unless he was smart and picked up Shield Master to add insult to injury and stand uncasthed with a shiny smile).

In fact, I see absolutely no logical reason to compare them because they don't fulfill the same role *at all*: Aura of Life is for Paladin to protect others. Ancient's capstone regen is to protect himself.

I'm not following your point here. At tables where the ghouls switch targets when one goes down, Aura of Life will keep everyone in your party alive and fighting until the paladin himself goes down. At tables where the ghouls eat downed targets, Aura of Life does almost nothing and targets still get eaten.

For Ancient's Capstone, it plays out the same way. At tables where ghouls switch targets when one goes down, the capstone keeps the paladin up and fighting indefinitely (for one minute, anyway, once per day). At tables where the ghouls eat downed targets, the Paladin still gets eaten. (Yeah, he gets 10 HP/round, so it may take more ghouls to put him down, but that's not the part of the scenario that we're examining right now---we're focusing on the effects of monster behavior.)

Granted that Aura of Life is for protecting everyone else, whereas the Ancient's Capstone is about protecting yourself, but in both cases the utility is dependent on how likely the ghouls are to prioritize eating downed PCs over attacking armed-and-dangerous PCs.

[Citan]

If Aura of Life is unimpressive compared to Bless, despite being an AoE "up from unconsciousness every round" for everyone in your party who is within 30' of you, then when you eventually get the Ancients capstone 7-10 levels later, that part of it is probably going to be fairly unimpressive too. Maybe you still like the whole package; I'm just pointing out that you get to play with an even better form of the "up from unconsciousness" part 7-10 levels earlier than that and see if you're actually going to enjoy it.


Granted that Aura of Life is for protecting everyone else, whereas the Ancient's Capstone is about protecting yourself, but in both cases the utility is dependent on how likely the ghouls are to prioritize eating downed PCs over attacking armed-and-dangerous PCs.
First point: I didn't say that Aura of Life was unimpressive, plz don't put words in my mouth. But you're saying that Ancient's capstone regen is bland compared to it, and I'm saying its not smart to compare them because you compare one small part of a self-centered capstone to a concentration spell dedicated to party.

Second point: you seem to not see the difference in predictive behaviour: provided enemy has some sort of intelligence, in the case of Aura of Life, once Paladin is down he won't get up (by himself at least): he's effectively a threat no more. Because, quick reminder, down = unconscious = broken concentration = no more Aura of Life. Whereas with capstone's regen, he is as deadly on the next round than the round before, because that's one of the stupid thing designed in 5e.
So in first case, priority for enemies would be to attack whoever they think is able to get Paladin back up. Second case, finishing off Paladin should be much higher in priority because he's a guy that hits hard and has other perks.

And back on my point: if enemies have no intelligence meaning they would eat the first target then capstone is plain better: it means that a lone ghoul just cannot kill the Paladin.

You have been making all your argument about Aura of Life protecting the whole party. Yeah sure, but you're theorycrafting just for your own argument like people always are in the perfect situation for Aura of Life. Except we never actually stated any party composition. What good would Aura of Life be for if you're the only frontliner while everyone hangs back several dozen feet away for example? Why would you prefer Aura of Life to Aura of Purity if you know you'll face enemies with conditions for example? Why would you spend concentration on it rather than Banishing Smite if there is a caster with Death Ward in party?

Aura of Life is a good spell, but it's a frigging 4th level spell, that you get when fullcasters have Raise Dead and Simulacrum, along with a plethora of protection spells, and a spell whose worth is completely dependant on...
- Everyone's positioning. Sure, technically you could move on your turn so a downed ally "revives" on its turn, but that also means abandoning your current position. -Of course this is something true of all Auras-.
- And yourself maintaining concentration (and since usually a Paladin takes hits by choice so squishies take less, there is mostly 0% chance to last more than 1 minute unless the number of enemies is very small, like the party fights an Ancient Dragon or other big, lonely creature like that).
- Plus, it you enter an encounter where having auto-revive people during several minutes seems like a must-have, then it usually means you are trying to chomp something too big for your current fangs anyways (because you're basically starting a confrontation in which you expect at least 1 people of your party to be down on every round, possibly several. That is not an indicator of the power balance -or strategy's smartness level- being in your favor. XD)

So it's much, much more situational than all "cast and forget" spells such as Bless, smite spells, which have more immediate effects, or non-concentration buffs like Death Ward which are more predictible without hampering action economy.
It will be a killer spell for some situations, like Aura of Purity may be the winning button for other people. But specific situations in both cases.

If a party is used to having several people downed at the same time, then there is something wrong somewhere, in tactics, in strategy, or in encounter planning.
If a party is correctly balanced and correctly playing its strength, Paladin should rarely have to micro-manage himself the lives of other people barring the few keeping the front line with him (thus being close by). And for those, Paladin has other ways to help, between Cure Wounds / Lay on Hand in life or death matters, Aura of Vitality (available earlier, restricts your movement much less) to get up otherwise, archetype features to prevent people getting downed, or possibly dips into Cleric/Divine Soul Sorcerer for Healing Words.
Paladin is otherwise best used on staying in the most heated area because of being able to take hits while hitting back hard.

And "in void" (not having anything set about campaign/party/encounter), discussion is naturally off to center on Paladin self, precisely because of that. And on Paladin self, Ancients capstone is arguably the best of all, and the regen is not that small a part of it, even if it still won't prevent your concentration to drop if you're downed. But it's that + disadvantage on close-by enemies (much lower chance of wasting any smite spell, including the great Banishing one) + any Paladin spell as bonus action...
- Remember the "downed ally" of earlier? Bonus action Cure Wounds then move back to Attack.
- You discovered a boss's weakness to cold? Bonus action Elemental Weapon then Attack smite at leisure.
- You don't have Shield Master, but you'd very much like to provide advantage against the big boss for you and all your melee pals? Bonus action Command "drop" (WIS save at disadvantage or get prone).
- You're setting up for the BIG ONE of the day? Action capstone > Bonus action upcast Bless (spreaded party) or Circle of Power (two-fold party or tight party).
- Your party needs to flee, you stayed behind to draw fire and now you'd like to flee while ensuring enemies won't catch up (non-flying at least ^^)? Bonus action Plant Growth (so you can use action on Dodging or Dashing).
- Just for you: "your party got ambushed and a big AOE laid waste to half everyone because you didn't have time to spread out? Bonus action Aura of Life.

The big deal of it, and probably the reason why many people would prefer other capstones, is that this capstone's power is very much dependent on your spellcasting.
So if you tend to use slots for smiting first, or if you don't like the spells much besides the bonus action ones, this capstone is certainly ill-suited compared to set and forget ones that are straight-forward enhancements to your schtick like "Be a Bear Champion" Conquest one (absolute best for lone frontliner) or "You'll never fall to mind control" Crown one (best for party if you like being defensive, tied with "Whenever you come close you're terrified" if you like being offensive).
For those who like to use Paladin's spells though, this is absolutely gorgeous.

[mgshamster]

Thank you for all your help.
I will most likely go with ancients, half elf, and a polearm. I will probably use PAM and sentinel for feats. Thank you.

An excellent choice! Enjoy the game!

[Sception]

I want to contest the point about conquest pallies not being best at using fear. They really are. The biggest weakness of the Fear spell, and the freightened condition generally, has always been enemies scattering, only to end up drawing in additional mobs or join later encounters, achieving essentially the opposite of what control effects are supposed to do (ie, break larger fights into smaller, more manageable chunks). Even if they can't just leave and come back later, any wall or other terrain feature in the area can be used to negate the penalty. Enemies freightened by conquest pallies can't do any of that.

On top of that, conquest is the only oath apart from crown that has concrete mechanical tools to prevent groups of (melee) enemies from targeting back line party members, making them basically the best tanking oath by default.

Yeah, fear immunity is a much more concrete weakness than any other oath has (apart from maybe oathbreaker buffing enemy fiends/undead). I wouldn't call conquest the strongest oath overall, only the strongest for tanking and control specifically, and with fear immunity being more common at higher levels I definitely wouldn't call them the strongest at level 20, though their above average lvl 15 and 20 features keep them from falling behind.


What I would call Conquest is the best *designed* paladin oath, in terms of all their features being both mechanically effective and thematically rich. Furthermore, their oath spells and features synergise with their parent class features to a greater degree than other oaths, retroactively turning paladin levels that look like duds to other paladins into real gems. Every single level of paladin is a gift to a Conqueror in a way that just isn't as true for other oaths, even if those oaths might produce 'stronger' characters overall, whether in the sense of hitting harder or having fewer exploitable weaknesses.

...

As for how to outfit an Ancient, I'd go with sword & board or maybe halberd with polearm master if vuman. Either way probably pick up sentinel at some point to add some tanking utility to your defensive features, but otherwise focus on boosting attack stat and cha. I'd probably take defensive fighting style for the improved AC regardless.

I played a half elf dex-based ancients pally in a campaign a while back. I ended up dual wielding for aesthetic reasons, and that went well enough, though the extea AC would have helped more, I think. Fun character, though.

[Galactkaktus]

Thanks everyone for the opinions!
I do have another questions, however.
For an ancient paladin, what weapon(s) do mechanically best? Is it Greatsword? S&B? Polearm?

I think they are quite close at the start but if you introduce +3 shields and +3 weapons S&B should be abit better.

[Willie the Duck]

Is it more beneficial to take PAM with a polearm than GWM with a greatsword?


I think they are quite close at the start but if you introduce +3 shields and +3 weapons S&B should be abit better.

It sounds like an end-game game or the like for the OP, where the DM is crafting resources to the party. In a more normal setting where you are collecting treasure and bickering/bartering with your party members over who gets the +1 halberd and who will accept the +2 trident instead, I find that I prefer to select defensive fighting style with the paladin and then pick whichever weapon the rangers and barbarians and fighters can't use because they've specialized. So much more of the paladin's awesomeness is going to come from spells and making saves and smites at appropriate times than on optimizing GWM or PAM.

[MeeposFire]

It sounds like an end-game game or the like for the OP, where the DM is crafting resources to the party. In a more normal setting where you are collecting treasure and bickering/bartering with your party members over who gets the +1 halberd and who will accept the +2 trident instead, I find that I prefer to select defensive fighting style with the paladin and then pick whichever weapon the rangers and barbarians and fighters can't use because they've specialized. So much more of the paladin's awesomeness is going to come from spells and making saves and smites at appropriate times than on optimizing GWM or PAM.

Also paladins get a a lot of value getting lots of ability scores high. Paladins get value from a high attack stat, high con for toughness, and high cha has many important benefits. Some other classes do not have this so picking up feats are more important but I find that feats have to really compete with standard ASIs.

[kenGarff]

My DM is giving us some good items to start off and we are essentially well established adventurers attempting to fight some gods in a setting that he made. Anyways, all paths seem awesome! Thanks guys

[MaxWilson]

My DM is giving us some good items to start off and we are essentially well established adventurers attempting to fight some gods in a setting that he made. Anyways, all paths seem awesome! Thanks guys

Excellent! Glad you found one you liked. They are all pretty good. Good luck with your game!

[hwem]

I know you didn’t ask this at all but I saw someone one shot casters as a vengeance paladin in level 20 oneshot pvp events at a store nearby my place. He somehow got a Pegasus, haste’s it and himself, instantly flew to a caster and one shot the caster before the guy can react and flew away lol. Then when his mount got killed he somehow got wings and flew around really fast and did the same thing. He killed like 8 casters lol.

[krugaan]

Also, is a wheel of cheese mechanically better than four quarters of a cheese wheel?

Well, a wheel of cheese could mechanically be used as a wheel, four quarters of a cheese wheel, not so much. Without severe modifications, I guess.

[2D8HP]

Ancients.
'sides the "At 20th level, you can assume the form of an ancient force of nature, taking on an appearance you choose. Using your action, you undergo a transformation.

For 1 minute, you gain the following benefits:

At the start of each of your turns, you regain 10 hit points.

Whenever you cast a paladin spell that has a casting time of 1 action, you can cast it using a bonus action instead.

Enemy creatures within 10 feet of you have disadvantage on saving throws against your paladin spells and Channel Divinity options.
Once you use this feature, you can't use it again until you finish a long rest." which isn't too shabby, you just can't really seperate "fluff" from "crunch", and you actually have to play out the Tenets, and the Oath of the Ancients Tenets make it the 'party' Paladin "The tenets of the Oath of the Ancients have been preserved for uncounted centuries. This oath emphasizes the principles of good above any concerns of law or chaos. Its fair central principles are simple.

Kindle the Light: Through your acts of mercy, kindness, and forgiveness, kindle the light of hope in the world, beating back despair.
Shelter the Light: Where there is good, beauty, love, and laughter in the world, stand against the wickedness that would swallow it. Where life flourishes, stand against the forces that would render it barren.
Preserve Your Own Light: Delight in song and laughter, in beauty and art. If you allow the light to die in your own heart, you can't preserve it in the world.
Be the Light: Be a glorious beacon for all who live in despair. Let the light of your joy and courage shine forth in all your deeds." who wouldn't want that?

Would you play one of the buzzkill Oaths (Crown, Devotion, or Redemtion)?

Or one of the douche Oaths (Conquest, or Vengeance)?

Just say NOPE.

Go Ancients and P-A-A-A-RTY

[EvilAnagram]

Ancients.
'sides the "At 20th level, you can assume the form of an ancient force of nature, taking on an appearance you choose. Using your action, you undergo a transformation.

For 1 minute, you gain the following benefits:

At the start of each of your turns, you regain 10 hit points.

Whenever you cast a paladin spell that has a casting time of 1 action, you can cast it using a bonus action instead.

Enemy creatures within 10 feet of you have disadvantage on saving throws against your paladin spells and Channel Divinity options.
Once you use this feature, you can't use it again until you finish a long rest." which isn't too shabby, you just can't really seperate "fluff" from "crunch", and you actually have to play out the Tenets, and the Oath of the Ancients Tenets make it the 'party' Paladin "The tenets of the Oath of the Ancients have been preserved for uncounted centuries. This oath emphasizes the principles of good above any concerns of law or chaos. Its fair central principles are simple.

Kindle the Light: Through your acts of mercy, kindness, and forgiveness, kindle the light of hope in the world, beating back despair.
Shelter the Light: Where there is good, beauty, love, and laughter in the world, stand against the wickedness that would swallow it. Where life flourishes, stand against the forces that would render it barren.
Preserve Your Own Light: Delight in song and laughter, in beauty and art. If you allow the light to die in your own heart, you can't preserve it in the world.
Be the Light: Be a glorious beacon for all who live in despair. Let the light of your joy and courage shine forth in all your deeds." who wouldn't want that?

Would you play one of the buzzkill Oaths (Crown, Devotion, or Redemtion)?

Or one of the douche Oaths (Conquest, or Vengeance)?

Just say NOPE.

Go Ancients and P-A-A-A-RTY

He makes a compelling argument.

[Georlik]

For ancients, which weapon and/or feats go well?
I was thinking polearm or sword and shield with PAM/sentinel and Shield Master/sentinel, respectively.
Thanks everyone.
As someone here has said:
"Quarterstaff is the spiked chain of fifth edition."
Polearm master+quarterstaff+shield+dueling = pure cheese (as fully covered in the provided link)
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?494881-Paladin-oaths-weapon-of-choice-feat-support-race-and-action-economy

I also love the Ancients capstone+Comand (flee)+ Warcaster + Booming Blade combo (also covered by its author in the thread).

Inspiring Leader+Protection is also very good, especially at lower levels.

There are always more feat combos, but I really prefer to max Str/Dex and Cha, which usually leaves taking only 1 feat (with pointbuy) if you are not minmaxing hard.

[pixelG]

As someone here has said:
"Quarterstaff is the spiked chain of fifth edition."
Polearm master+quarterstaff+shield+dueling = pure cheese (as fully covered in the provided link)
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?494881-Paladin-oaths-weapon-of-choice-feat-support-race-and-action-economy

I also love the Ancients capstone+Comand (flee)+ Warcaster + Booming Blade combo (also covered by its author in the thread).

Inspiring Leader+Protection is also very good, especially at lower levels.

There are always more feat combos, but I really prefer to max Str/Dex and Cha, which usually leaves taking only 1 feat (with pointbuy) if you are not minmaxing hard.

As per Sage Advice ruling, BB is triggered only by willingful movement, for this reason it will not work with Dissonant Whispers, Command (flee), Suggestion and so on... :(

[ciarannihill]

As per Sage Advice ruling, BB is triggered only by willingful movement, for this reason it will not work with Dissonant Whispers, Command (flee), Suggestion and so on... :(

It makes sense that it works the same way that AoO would work from a rules and balance perspective, but as with that rule at my table I don't distinguish between willful or not, since both rely on movement mechanically occurring, not the rational behind it (creating an opening for AoO or causing the person to contact the whirling thunderous energy in the case of BB). Movement of any kind should logically, IMO, trigger both -- so they do at my table. It also has the benefit of encouraging the combined use of multiple abilities to have more potent effects than they would have individually, which I love.

Having said that this is not RAW, so if you're not comfortable with houserulings do not do this.