How to RP a Chaotic Oath of the Crown Paladin?

[Luccan]

How would you handle this clash of archetypes? This is for any Chaotic character, regardless of where they are on the Good-Evil axis.

I ask because I'm putting together a mini-setting where these are the only Paladins around; I'm really interested in seeing a good reason a Chaotic (or really, any non-Lawful) character might follow this Oath, if only so I can have suggestions for if someone wants to play a Chaotic Paladin in this setting.

[AntiAuthority]

I'm somewhat reminded of the Shin Megami Tensei franchise with this question. For context, the Law-Neutral-Chaos aspects are a large part of the series, and it shows a lot of variations of the alignments, where Chaotic characters can have a strict code of conduct and Lawful characters regularly break their own rules as they see fit.

That said... The text says, "The Oath of the Crown is sworn to the ideals of civilization, be it the spirit of a nation, fealty to a sovereign, or service to a deity of law and rulership. The paladins who swear this oath dedicate themselves to serving society and, in particular, the just laws that hold society together. These paladins are the watchful guardians on the walls, standing against the chaotic tides of barbarism that threaten to tear down all that civilization has built, and are commonly known as guardians, exemplars, or sentinels."

This could be played a near endless amount of ways.

For reference, chaos is usually associated with freedom (but not always... Alignments are tricky, especially since characters can display traits that go against what that alignment commonly portrays.)

The Crown Paladin could serve as a paladin to a god of freedom or chaos. But this one is more dependent on the god in question...

Your character may be chaotic but they don't necessarily enjoy being in an area of barbarism where they'll be constantly looking over their shoulder. They may fight against the decay of society because it helps them if everyone else around them has to abide by a certain set of rules. "I might not like being told what to do, but the alternative is this place devolves into an area where I constantly have to worry about being jumped by 5 people in broad daylight and wondering if I'm going to get gutted in my sleep... Yeah, I think I'll uphold the law, it's much less stressful." Most people don't want to live in a constantly dangerous environment...

If they swear an oath to a particular person, they may do it because they genuinely like and admire said person, like a king. Their loyalty lies with that particular person and that person's ideals. Why? They have the freedom to choose who they follow. They could admire this person as a parental figure, an ideal to strive towards, a lover or just a noble being that inspires awe in them. They don't have to, they want to. "I would follow this person to the ends of reality. This is my choice and nobody can take this away from me." Everyone, from the noblest to the most vile people, can have loved ones...

They may uptake the oath to protect other people's freedoms (this is mostly Chaotic Good and possibly Chaotic Neutral). For example, they aren't bound to a particular person, god or society but rather the ideal of freedom in and of itself for a just society. Even if they made an oath to a particular person or institution, their oath may include something like, "I swear to uphold all that I have said, to uphold the freedoms of the common folk... And if anyone, whether it be a king, head of the church or god tries to impede upon those freedoms, I will not hesitate to strike them down." Some will not be tied down to any particular entity...

Some Crown Paladins may see chaos as changing with the times or getting rid of things that are obsolete... Such a Paladin may actually help rebellions, revolutions or sweeping changes to help create a better, more stable society to come along. Essentially, the current kingdom wasn't living up to its full potential, and something new needed to take its place. "The old order was getting stagnant, not adapting to the changes of the world. It had to be destroyed so that a new, better order could come from the ashes. It's a lot like a forest fire, it may be destructive at first, but it gives birth for something new to be born in the process. Traditions should never get in the way of progress and results, and this society we have would have folded under its own weight if things kept going the way it was heading." Discard what's unnecessary and become better from the experience...

Some Crown Paladins may actually take an oath to try to become more lawful... Essentially, they're doing it to try to gain some discipline in their lives. It's not too uncommon for people to try to change themselves. "Ok, I have a bit of a problem with keeping my word and standing up for my beliefs... I need to stop doing this if I want to become the person I want to be, rather than the person I currently am. Maybe this way, I can contribute to society?" Self-improvement can take many forms...

There's more, but it depends on how one wants to interpret chaos. Is it just freedom, change, growth or something else?

[Rukelnikov]

Tenets of the Crown

The tenets of the Oath of the Crown are often set by the sovereign to which their oath is sworn, but generally emphasize the following tenets.

Law. The law is paramount. It is the mortar that holds the stones of civilization together, and it must be respected.
Loyalty. Your word is your bond. Without loyalty, oaths and laws are meaningless.
Courage. You must be willing to do what needs to be done for the sake of order, even in the face of overwhelming odds. If you don't act, then who will?
Responsibility. You must deal with the consequences of your actions, and you are responsible for fulfilling your duties and obligations.

Tbh, I don't think you can be very chaotic while still keeping your oath at the same time.

You must respect the law, you must respect your word, and more importantly #3, "you must be willing to do what needs to be done for the sake of order".

I guess you could be someone who is chaotic by nature but doesn't like being that way and wants to change, so they take up the oath and have this conflict of how they are vs how they want to be.

[Jervis]

Be an Anarcho-Monarchist.

Basically find a reason for a chaotic person to serve royalty. Example Alucard from hellsing who is capital C capital E Chaotic Evil but works for the good guys because he's loyal to the boss for other reasons.

[Thrudd]

I don't know...it seems like Oath of the Crown is deliberately designed as the exemplars of Lawfulness. I don't see a lot of wiggle room to uphold that oath while still being "chaotic", unless we reinterpret both law and chaos pretty heavily. The point of a paladin is that they really believe in their oath, and their faith and belief in their principles is what gives them their powers. So you can't really say they are just someone following orders of a lawful lord, but don't really believe in the rightness of their cause or harbor "chaotic" sentiments. If the system itself is chaotic, then there wouldn't be a lawful order to uphold, the expectation of loyalty or a "rightful lord" that anyone respected. The "rightful lord" might be a selfish prick, and the laws they uphold might be brutal and oppressive, but it's still definitely a lawful system and the paladins need to believe in the rightness of upholding the laws.

[BoutsofInsanity]

Law. The law is paramount. It is the mortar that holds the stones of civilization together, and it must be respected.
Loyalty. Your word is your bond. Without loyalty, oaths and laws are meaningless.
Courage. You must be willing to do what needs to be done for the sake of order, even in the face of overwhelming odds. If you don't act, then who will?
Responsibility. You must deal with the consequences of your actions, and you are responsible for fulfilling your duties and obligations.

Look man it's easy.

Trailer Voice Guy: "He is a Paladin on the edge. Serving the Crown loyally his entire life. But he isn't afraid to break the rules to get things done."

Paladin: Looking down at the corpse of a drug dealer "I aint afraid of breaking the rules to get things done! I AM THE LAW".

Trailer Voice Guy: "He always tells the truth, for what is a man other than his word?"

Paladin: In an office looking at the Guard Captain "I may act rashly sometimes, and I don't always follow procedure. BUT I never lie chief. When I say he did it, you know he did it."

Captain: Slams hand on desk "Damn it Paladin I know! But we need proof damn it! And now your actions have put the precinct in danger. Your off the case! Give me your badge and sword!"

Trailer Voice Guy: "Even if the danger is dire, he always fights against danger!"

Paladin: Looking at his love interest "I know it's dangerous. That is why I must fight! So no one else can!"

Trailer Voice Guy: "And at the end. He takes the punishment. Because he has too. He isn't the hero we deserve. But the one we need!"

Paladin: "I killed those people because they were evil and child murderers. But I broke the law and disobeyed the Crown. FOR THE CROWN. I accept my punishment and go to prison willingly."

Trailer Voice Guy: "He is... CHAOTIC CROWN PALADIN. PALADIN ON THE EDGE!"

[TyGuy]

How would you handle this clash of archetypes?

I would change the tenets (they're fluff anyways) or not have them be chaotic.

[ashtrails]

I think what's important here is that the Oath is deliberately left a bit open:

It says the law must be respected, not obeyed to the letter.

It says you word is your bond, but not what constitutes as a word being given or broken and that you _have_ to give it at every opportunity.
It doesn't say you never lie or cheat, or have a breakdown when something doesn't work out as ou promised.
It just says: when you actually give your word, it has weight and meaning, not only to others, but yourself, so it's implied you don't give it lightly. Any alignment can relate to that, and almost any character should be able to come up with a situation where they wouldn't break their word on a whim when given that way.

The other 2 are just what you'd expect from someone who pledged their very soul and existence to a concept higher than they are and you would expect they had a reason so fundamentally woven into their psyche and background that their alignment does not matter when it comes to the ideal they believe in (in this case safeguarding civilization)


A paladin who is not held back by machinations, or lawful types who hide behind laws to explpoit the system is what such a paladin would probably be.

Paladins often strife for an ideal, not the letter of a word. A functioning civilization (be it good or evil) will only work with your help, so you will help it as good as you can. That's what would give a chaotic Crown Paladin their drive and purpose (and powers).


Chaos is not always 'lol- random', but a tendendcy to disregard and despise those that would impede the freedom of others or be tied down by rules made by those in power profiting the most from them (which also may apply to good as well as evil to certain degrees).

Being Chaotic also doesn't mean you don't have principles - you can be loyal, and you can be aware and accountable regarding your actions. Or your chaotic nature just touches other parts of your life than what you do on duty, but ifluences your duty in a subtle way.

Especially for good characters, being a Crown paladin shouldn't be too hard. The Good part in Lawful Good should do a lot more heavy lifting anyway and the line gets pretty blurry there, so that you might as well be Chaotic Good, caring more about the people and the spirit of a law than its perfect execution.

You could also weave it into your world ultra-democratically: each Alignment Pillar is represented in the order and there's no 'spiritual stagnation' and a general 'all sides will be heard' spirit going on with the only unifying thing is that the Oath they have sworn and the civilization they safeguard is 100% paramount to them.

[Thrudd]

The oath doesn't say what your loyal to. it just talks about society. society does not have to take the form of a big sprawling civilization full of bureaucracy and lords and whatnot. it can be as simple following the laws of freewheeling nomads who like to bring joy. just because its nomadic, walking free, living in tents, adapting to whatever environment and probably chaotically aligned they come across doesn't mean its not civilization.

there is also nothing in that oath saying that any particular person is more valid to swear yourself to than any other. kings are nothing more than an illusion, a trick of power, and whoever you respect and want to fight for is your true sovereign. if that person is yourself well...technically there is nothing saying you can't be a civilization of one and that you can't swear an oath to yourself to follow your own rules because your the one true sovereign of yourself.

alternatively the tenets aren't actually mechanical in any way. they're just flavor text. the tenets might be simply be different for more chaotic paladins swearing themselves to more chaotic causes but the powers are the same.

I mean, if we ignore all the text as "just flavor", then there's nothing left. As much as you might not like it, D&D does things by organizing characters into classes and subclasses. If a player wants a chaotic paladin, they would find a paladin subclass that is described as being compatible with that sort of behavior/ideology. The "Oath of the Crown" very much explicitly a lawful order. If we want to hombrew the subclass to define it's tenets differently, making it accessible to more chaotic characters, but keep the same powers, someone can easily do that - but it would be weird calling it "oath of the crown" if the character doesn't actually believe in loyalty to a crown. Society and Civilization are definitionally more than one person - so no, it wouldn't make sense to say you are only loyal to yourself, and the civilization you protect and serve is just you, and you hold the "crown". If a character understands that kings are nothing but a trick and it's all about who has the power, they certainly wouldn't swear an oath to serve a crown, nor believe anyone had the right to rule by law or deserved their loyalty, which is the whole point of the oath. and again, if a character just follows some laws but doesn't really believe in them, they can't be a paladin - paladins get magic from actually believing in their cause. The oath implies there is an office, a "crown", that the paladin believes is worthy of their service and loyalty. They believe the laws instituted by this crown are just and necessary for protecting their society, and so upholding them is of the utmost importance. If the character doesn't believe those things, then they wouldn't be this sort of paladin, they'd be another class or subclass.

The way to allow chaotic characters to be paladins in this setting, where there is only "oath of the crown" subclass available, would be to change oath of the crown so it actually isn't "oath of the crown", but something else that isn't so much about serving law and order and hierarchy. By definition, paladins are the ones who actually commit and believe fully in their oath- so the wording and the specifics of the oath are important. They aren't just fighters who belong to an order of knights but can really believe anything they want.

[Rukelnikov]

Whoa, dude, get off your lecture about rules sacredness high horse.

the tenets don't affect any rolls. don't affect any math. they're effectively flavor text already. thats all that I meant. unless those tenets provide affect the math, they're nothing as far as the system is concerned. furthermore this is slippery slope fallacy, just because we ignore one part of the text doesn't mean we inevitably ignore all of it. the actual mechanical meat is what affects the math and what can be done, which can be attached to any tenets. your precious system isn't being burned in a trashfire or anything, chill.

But they do affect, if you break your oath (willfully and with no show of repentance) you lose your subclass

[Jervis]

Whoa, dude, get off your lecture about rules sacredness high horse.

the tenets don't affect any rolls. don't affect any math. they're effectively flavor text already. thats all that I meant. unless those tenets provide affect the math, they're nothing as far as the system is concerned. furthermore this is slippery slope fallacy, just because we ignore one part of the text doesn't mean we inevitably ignore all of it. the actual mechanical meat is what affects the math and what can be done, which can be attached to any tenets. your precious system isn't being burned in a trashfire or anything, chill.
At that point you’re playing it just for mechanical reasons and RP goes flying out the window at Mach 6. Seeing as this is a RP related thread I think the actual fluff is valid, seeing as he didn’t ask how to RP a “Oath of the Belgian Waffles Paladin who uses the mechanics of a Oath of the Crown Paladin”.

[Slipjig]

"How can I be [alignment] while [doing something diametrically opposed to the alignment]?" is a pretty heavy lift, RP-wise. Especially for paladins: most classes are a skillset, but for paladins (and to a lesser extent clerics) your class represents something fundamental about who you ARE.

The best thing I can think of is that you come from a place that has a system of government that prizes individual freedom over everything else ("so long as you harm none, do as you will"), and you are committed to defending that system of non-government. Your sworn enemies will be anybody who tries to enforce their will on others, whether that aspiring tyrants, slavers, and any lawmen from the surrounding kingdoms who pursue fugitives into the Free State.

[Telonius]

Something like this, maybe...


Looking at the kid, I made a real effort to stop rolling my eyes. Seriously, this was the heir to the throne? He was obviously making an effort to hide who he was, but he was sticking out like a sore thumb. He wasn't fooling anybody. The barkeep was pretending he didn't notice, but if I didn't do something quickly this was going to turn ugly fast.

"Look. I know you're trying to figure stuff out, do right by everybody. We all know betting's against the rules. But you have to ask yourself why there's a rule about that."

"To benefit everyone, of course."

"Kid, look out there. See the people in this room? That's everyone. That's the kingdom. Not the people in the castle. Not the guard. Not the prince, wherever he is." I stared straight at him, and his eyes went wide. "No worries there, even though I'm pretty sure there's a rule against hiding your identity. You want to uphold the law? There's too many laws to do that, and most of them aren't serving the people."

He thought a bit. "But ... the law has been ... I mean, how would you fix that?"

"You'd need a King for that." I drew in a deep breath, put my hand in my pocket, and rubbed my symbol of Olidammara for luck. He wanted to fix things? Now that was unexpected. But you seize opportunity wherever it shows itself, Ollie be my witness. This was going to be a gamble, maybe the biggest one I've ever made. "But I tell you what. If I ever met a prince, I'd make a promise. Show him around, let him see what this civilization is he's supposed to be ruling over. And show him where the law just needs to leave people alone. It's an awful lot more often than most princes would think. And in return? I'd enter his service as a Paladin."

As the wheels in his head started turning, mine did too. This was either going to end in the gallows, or in glory. I was ready to take that gamble.

[Slipjig]

While I think this has the makings of a great story, I don't think your narrator is Chaotic. He thinks the current body of law includes some dumb laws and should be overhauled, but he still thinks the law should exist, and that a clued-in king will be a more just ruler. Based on this snapshot I'd say he's at least NG, potentially even LG.

[Keltest]

The easiest way I think would be to give the paladin a personal relationship with whatever authority writes the laws. Your paladin believes the laws are correct and just because they know the lawmakers in question and trust that the laws are written in such a way to protect people without oppressing them. The faith is based on trust in the benevolence and goodness of the lawmakers and members of the community.

Basically, you dont trust laws for their own sake, but you trust these people, and these people have made the laws, so you believe the laws are operating in good faith.

[MutantDragon]

I might as well throw in my two cents. A crown paladin is all about maintaining society, right? Instead of the general concept of society, they can instead maintain a specific society, right? So, instead of the traditional feudal societies that pop up in D&D, what if there were a society founded on the ideals of liberty? Personal freedom is the main goal of the society, so a chaotic paladin would make perfect sense as a living embodiment of what said nation is all about.

[Telonius]

While I think this has the makings of a great story, I don't think your narrator is Chaotic. He thinks the current body of law includes some dumb laws and should be overhauled, but he still thinks the law should exist, and that a clued-in king will be a more just ruler. Based on this snapshot I'd say he's at least NG, potentially even LG.

Yeah, the snapshot was just showing the moment of decision. What he's planning on doing is turning every bit of the oath on its head, serving the prince as a sort of a "last tyrant" necessary for abolishing the lineage; and staying close enough to guide him to doing just that. So he'd be following the letter of the oath (serving the crown by correcting it; and the civilization as he sees it), thereby keeping his Paladin powers. All the while making the crown want what he wants (freedom, equality, and chaos). Basically, completely pranking the Paladin order, and getting away with making it a farce right under their noses.

The tension throughout the campaign would be for him to keep his Chaotic alignment; that while "corrupting" the prince (not exactly the right word for it, but moving the prince's alignment to Chaotic) he doesn't fade into Neutrality or Lawfulness himself. How many compromises he's willing to make, that sort of thing.

[Mastikator]

Guys and gals I've figured it out.

Play as a fey race, like fairy.

The crown in this case is an archfey.

Background? FEYLOST

Personality trait: I live by my own queen's set of weird and wonderful rules.
Ideal: Changeability. Change is good, which is why I live by an ever-changing set of rules. (Chaotic)

You receive new laws every day and toss out old laws every day. But by golly you follow them to the letter and the spirit!

Law: The queen's laws are paramount. It must be respected.

Loyalty: You are loyal to the queen and always act in ways that benefit her and represent her wishes.

Courage: You stand up and do what's needed for order, order according to the archfey and the faerie court

Responsibility: You accept all the consequences for your actions, face them with pride. For they are the fruit of the faerie order!

[Psyren]

The "Spirit of a Nation" bit from the description could definitely be chaotic in bent. Chaotic and Neutral good characters are often beholden to the welfare of the people, even and especially when their existing laws and power structures work against them - see Robin Hood for example. He is one of the quintessential CG characters, yet he was in fact devoted to the Crown - just not to the guy "legally" wearing it at the time, or his enforcers.

[KorvinStarmast]

Tbh, I don't think you can be very chaotic while still keeping your oath at the same time.

You must respect the law, you must respect your word, and more importantly #3, "you must be willing to do what needs to be done for the sake of order".

I guess you could be someone who is chaotic by nature but doesn't like being that way and wants to change, so they take up the oath and have this conflict of how they are vs how they want to be. That would be an own goal.

[Samayu]

Lawful is as lawful does. If you act lawful to follow the oath you made, you're lawful. If your character has to act lawful, it might as well be lawful. If the player has made a choice not to act chaotic when they wanted to play a chaotic, what's the point?

[Rukelnikov]

That would be an own goal.

I don't understand

[Kane0]

I think you're describing the loose cannon trope, yes? Someone ostensibly part of a chain of command but prone to independent thought, tends to chafe against authority figures and typically follow the percieved intent of orders rather than the literal phrasing.

Edit: an example I'm thinking is Captain Nick 'Havoc' Parker, commando for an international anti-terrorist military. He is an extremely effevtive soldier and for a time leader of an elite six-man team, but he just doesnt work well in a team and doesnt respect the brass despite doing what he's told. He will do all the things a hero often does, but he is basically filled to the brim with bravado and attitude.