Thank you for the vídeo, a thing from the oathbreaker that i dont like is the idea that some DM's have is that by breaking your oath you will instantly become an evil oathbreaker, what if you are a paladin that broke your oath of the crown because of a corrupt kingdom, or if you broke your oath of veangence because you forgived the one that you wanted to take revenge on, thats why i really like the oath of redemption and all the flavor around it
The Oathbreaker is generally reserved for evil characters because it was designed to be an enemy type that players can fight against, which is why it is in the Dungeon Master's Guide. Although your group can decide otherwise, the big reason why Oathbreakers are usually evil is because Oathbreakers break their Oaths in pursuit of dark ambitions such as gaining personal power. So the examples you gave would not usually create an Oathbreaker Paladin, it would probably just be a Paladin that lost some of their power or would be an Oathless paladin without any power depending on how big the change in character is. But thanks for the comment, I hope you liked the video!
@@Greyscaleslove in BG3 how you ask the oathbreaker how he became it and it’s because he was doing something he knew morally right, but it went against his oath. Like killing someone’s who, if you didn’t, would kill your entire town. Not all oathbreakers are evil. It’s oathbreaker, not necessary evil death knight
@@nanashi4147 Yeah there are always exceptions especially when we are talking about Paladins with their specific Oaths, but the default Oathbreaker from the Dungeon Master's Guide describes them as "a paladin who breaks his or her sacred oaths to pursue some dark ambition or serve an evil power". I can't list off every single exception so I stick to the general fluff in these videos and I would say that the Oathbreaker in BG3 is probably not being completely truthful about his past, because we see someone like Zevlor who is not evil, but did lose faith/compromise his oath but is not an Oathbreaker, simply a Fighter who lost his divine magic at the start of the game.
I played an oathbreaker paladin and it was really fun! The DM and I reflavoured the origin of how the paladin abilities worked, to fit with the backstory. They were a reborn who was a paladin in their past life (oath of conquest), and when they were reanimated the sliver of divine power they had remaining was imbued with negative energy
A note on supernatural resistance: Unless a monster specifically states it has the "magic weapons" property, it doesn't innately cause magical damage with its attacks. This means that, since you'll likely be battling adult or ancient dragons as the most common boss type at this level, you gain resistance to all of their attacks, save for their breath weapon
While I agree that monsters don't normally get magic natural attacks, higher level enemies would normally have some spells to throw at you or if the enemy is intelligent, can have magical weapons as their special equipment. The base dragon stat block is all well and good, but remember that dragons are really intelligent, they probably have ways beyond their natural body to kill you and your group. Thanks for watching the video!
I suppose if your goal is to get a strong undead army then that could be an interesting idea, but spending 6 levels on a Wizard multiclass is gonna be kinda tough to do with the Paladin and your going to be stretched for Ability Score improvements between your Charisma spellcasting and Intelligence spells. But it's still a pretty fun idea to try out!
@@Greyscales no multiclass. For max power undeads you need to be two. One Oathbreaker and one School of Necromancy wizard. Multiclass wizard for a paladin is bad idea sibce they are so MAD.
@@hyko8355 In order to get the undead buffs from the Oathbreaker, you will need to invest at least 7 Levels to get Aura of Hate. The Necromancer buff called Undead Thralls arrive at Level 6. So you would need to multiclass for a total of 13 character levels to get both features if that is what you want.
@@Greyscales I think there's a missread. I meant if you want the most for a zombo combo of the necro and his paladino friendo you need to have two players. One the main necromancer and the oathbreaker being the "commander". This way the undeads are created by the wizard and they get full buffs from the 6 lvl feature and also paladin auras. Killing zombies with a +5 or +4 mod to their Con save is quite difficult for monsters who can't dish out enough damage.
I am planning on going Oathbreaker with my Pally soon. Oath of Conquest is pretty evil and my character is starting to see that maybe his "heroic" king isnt as heroic as he was led to believe all his life
@@kuropotato8097 because it's not. He plans to wash his mistakes away in the blood of those who have (in his mind) wronged him. He isn't going to be swearing any new oath for a very long time lest he be made a fool again
@@kuropotato8097 Oath of redemption is swearing to put everybody onto the path of righteousness, no matter the risk or danger, solely destroying those that there's physically no chance of redemption for.
@@embodying8moth82 I've actually got a character who's an Oathbreaker that broke a Good oath. The reason for this is that between the choice of the moderate good of saving a grove (she was an Ancients paladin), and saving a nearby town that was being used as a sacrifice by the cultists defiling the grove, she chose to save the town. After serious consideration of both her past oath, and all other oaths open to her, she came to a realization: there's one flaw shared between all of them. Each Oath solely focuses on one aspect of "Good" above all others, even to the detriment of what would be a greater good in some circumstances. A Redemption paladin MUST give people the chance to repent, even if the risk of them deciding not to do so far outweighs the benefit of them potentially doing so. An Ancients paladin MUST protect nature, even if doing so means condemning countless innocents to death. A Vengeance paladin MUST strike down the evildoer, even if temporarily cooperating or negotiating with one can prevent evil or cause good. A Devotion paladin MUST be honorable and just, but honor will lead a thousand men to their deaths hen a knife in the dark sends but one. A Glory paladin MUST be recognized as a hero and be recognized for themselves wherever they go, even though discretion and espionage can achieve goals otherwise impossible. A Crown paladin MUST obey a strict rule of codes, even if obeying said codes are unjust or inefficient. To bind yourself to one aspect of Good above all others is to refuse to cut out the cancer for the fear of hurting your lungs, whilst the body suffers. And so she renounced her oath, and all oaths forevermore, doing solely what SHE believes to be best, not what a code, king, or council demands she does.
A character idea I'm developing (might play it if my current pc dies) is an Oathbreaker Drider. She would've been an Oath of Vengeance paladin as a drow, but after Lolth turned her to a drider, she turned her back on Lolth and all the drow and escaped to the material plane, breaking her oath. She only cares for herself now, since she's learned that no one will help a hideous creature such as herself. She is also prone to mental breakdowns (might take a barbarian level for the rage?). Given the DM's permission, it could be a total redemption arc for her, where after the party accepts her, she learns to love herself, and eventually takes up the Oath of Vengeance again.
@@Greyscalesif I went oathbreaker I would make the backstory that the character’s a dark paladin who broke their oath and now uses their same powers to deliver Retribution upon the evil they used to serve. Their own black knight, the monster they made, now hunts them down. No rest for the wicked like them.
I played a Chaotic Good Oathbreaker that broke his oath after succumbing to nihilism. Most of the campaign was him coming to terms with his inherent desire to help and do good, and his belief that it was ultimately pointless to help, as every village he saved was ultimately raided and plundered by bandits, orcs, or zombies.
Ive been trying to figure out how to do a oathbreaker, i have a player who plans on becoming a oathbreaker but its because hes a oath of vengeance and he'll find out he can't kill a great evil because it'll lead to Armageddon
That would be pretty interesting as an idea to ask your DM about, but Paladins already get access to Find Steed, which you can more easily reskin as a spectral horse if you wish.
My Fallen Aasimar, Oath of Conquest Paladin, follower of Death (Jergal) uses her Find Steed spell with her main weapon, her scythe (a reskin of the glaive) and someone in my party has essentially deemed her the horsemen of death. It’s a really cool concept honestly, and a lot of fun
I would love to play one day an oatbreaker as an anti hero kind of character, not fully evil but definitly out there to do things that are "right" but not exactly morally clear, then again i blame WoW and my personal love for the DKs, previously evil turned "good", willing to do what the living cant, dark heroes, or as i always love to say...the monsters that hunt down monsters
Say I’m in a campaign where I would only make it to level 10 or 15 at most would oath breaker be worth it. I’m trying to decide weather or not to play oath breaker paladin or oath of conquest paladin
I would suggest for you to think about what kind of character you want to thematically play as and then have that become the driving force for the subclass because breaking your Oath as a paladin is a massive turning point (potentially) for your character. But assuming your group is ok with it then I would suggest picking Conquest if you want a more Control-oriented playstyle and pick Oathbreaker if you want to be hyper-aggressive.
Oathbreaker's got some interesting stuff going for it, but honestly I find that unless you really want to go the undeath synergy route, Oath of Conquest does pretty much everything Oathbreaker does, but better. There is quite a bit of overlap between them with an AoE fear Channel Divinity and having Bestow Curse and Dominate Person in their Oath spells, but Conquest's more refined where they differ (which is not too surprising, since it came out later). Conquest's Oath spells, when they differ from Oathbreaker's, are generally either stronger, more appropriate for the Paladin playstyle, or are at worst a sidegrade. Conquest's non-fear-based Channel Divinity is more broadly useful for when the fear option is not appropriate for the encounter, since it provides a guaranteed flat bonus to an attack instead of maybe hijacking a single undead enemy. Conquest's Aura takes the fear part of Oathbreaker's capstone, dials down the damage massively, but it's always on, contains a super powerful battlefield control component, and is available 13 levels earlier (plus it doesn't buff enemies). Conquest doesn't get Oathbreaker's always on Stoneskin at level 15, but they get the Stoneskin spell itself, plus always on reflexive damage (which stacks with Armor of Agathys, which they get at level 3). And for the capstone, Oathbreaker's is, as mentioned earlier, a higher-damage version of Conquest's level 7 aura, plus something akin to Spiritual Weapon (which Conquest gets as an Oath spell 15 levels earlier) and a more usable Darkness effect. Conquest's capstone is straight-up resistance to *all* damage, an extra attack, and a doubled critical chance, the latter two effects being exactly the kind of thing a character with Divine Smite would want.
I feel that it's more about the kind of character you want to play as, since the Oath of a Paladin is usually heavily influenced by their backstory or their journey as a player character. Conquest Paladins and Oathbreakers do have mechanical overlap, but I do think think they provide unique flavours to a group.
@@Greyscales Not to mention they are two different sides of the evil spectrum. conquest can be Lawfull neutral or evil while oathbreaker can be neutral evil or straight up chaotic evil. Infact conquest paladins are more blackguards while oathbreakers are more anti paladins
Yea I would agree that there is flexibility in terms of how a group can run one, but based on the DMG's description it is my assumption that an Oathbreaker Paladin is for Paladin's that broke their oaths out of personal dark desires, you wouldn't get the Oathbreaker subclass simply by loss of conviction or crisis of faith. But again, that is up to every group to decide for themselves and I'm happy that you liked the video regardless!
@@Greyscales Thank you, I’m so tired of the bullshit “I broke the Oath of Conquest LOL” argument for good Oathbreakers, if you want to reflavor the ability and fluff to make the subclass features more good aligned or the result of a curse that’s fine, but don’t act like the existing fluff isn’t there.
@@InquisitorThomas Except I am going to pretend the existing fluff isn't there, because it's poorly written. Black and white morality doesn't belong in a game creating complex, nuanced characters is supposed to be part of the experience. A paladin that swore an oath of conquest but later broke it and became an oathbreaker, not for selfish reasons but because they realized their original oath was wrong, makes for an interesting character, and disallowing such a character because of an arbitrary alignment restriction is poor game design.
![ลองสุ่มไอโฟน 990 โกงมั้ย? [ โกงมั้ยครับ ep.101 ] | DOM](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/bfsWe0j492k/mqdefault.jpg)
Thank you for the vídeo, a thing from the oathbreaker that i dont like is the idea that some DM's have is that by breaking your oath you will instantly become an evil oathbreaker, what if you are a paladin that broke your oath of the crown because of a corrupt kingdom, or if you broke your oath of veangence because you forgived the one that you wanted to take revenge on, thats why i really like the oath of redemption and all the flavor around it
The Oathbreaker is generally reserved for evil characters because it was designed to be an enemy type that players can fight against, which is why it is in the Dungeon Master's Guide.
Although your group can decide otherwise, the big reason why Oathbreakers are usually evil is because Oathbreakers break their Oaths in pursuit of dark ambitions such as gaining personal power. So the examples you gave would not usually create an Oathbreaker Paladin, it would probably just be a Paladin that lost some of their power or would be an Oathless paladin without any power depending on how big the change in character is.
But thanks for the comment, I hope you liked the video!
I would argue they would gain the oath of redemption
@@smile-tl9in I would say they would only gain the Oath of Redemption if they are actively trying to atone.
@@Greyscaleslove in BG3 how you ask the oathbreaker how he became it and it’s because he was doing something he knew morally right, but it went against his oath. Like killing someone’s who, if you didn’t, would kill your entire town. Not all oathbreakers are evil. It’s oathbreaker, not necessary evil death knight
@@nanashi4147 Yeah there are always exceptions especially when we are talking about Paladins with their specific Oaths, but the default Oathbreaker from the Dungeon Master's Guide describes them as "a paladin who breaks his or her sacred oaths to pursue some dark ambition or serve an evil power". I can't list off every single exception so I stick to the general fluff in these videos and I would say that the Oathbreaker in BG3 is probably not being completely truthful about his past, because we see someone like Zevlor who is not evil, but did lose faith/compromise his oath but is not an Oathbreaker, simply a Fighter who lost his divine magic at the start of the game.
I played an oathbreaker paladin and it was really fun! The DM and I reflavoured the origin of how the paladin abilities worked, to fit with the backstory. They were a reborn who was a paladin in their past life (oath of conquest), and when they were reanimated the sliver of divine power they had remaining was imbued with negative energy
What the heck?? I just made this exact character for my new campaign! Great minds think alike
I think this class would work well with a few levels dipped in hexblade
A note on supernatural resistance:
Unless a monster specifically states it has the "magic weapons" property, it doesn't innately cause magical damage with its attacks. This means that, since you'll likely be battling adult or ancient dragons as the most common boss type at this level, you gain resistance to all of their attacks, save for their breath weapon
While I agree that monsters don't normally get magic natural attacks, higher level enemies would normally have some spells to throw at you or if the enemy is intelligent, can have magical weapons as their special equipment. The base dragon stat block is all well and good, but remember that dragons are really intelligent, they probably have ways beyond their natural body to kill you and your group.
Thanks for watching the video!
Necromancer Wizard+Oathbreaker Paladin=Chonky zombos
If you combine the two they quickly become a wrecking ball.
I suppose if your goal is to get a strong undead army then that could be an interesting idea, but spending 6 levels on a Wizard multiclass is gonna be kinda tough to do with the Paladin and your going to be stretched for Ability Score improvements between your Charisma spellcasting and Intelligence spells.
But it's still a pretty fun idea to try out!
@@Greyscales no multiclass. For max power undeads you need to be two. One Oathbreaker and one School of Necromancy wizard.
Multiclass wizard for a paladin is bad idea sibce they are so MAD.
@@hyko8355 In order to get the undead buffs from the Oathbreaker, you will need to invest at least 7 Levels to get Aura of Hate.
The Necromancer buff called Undead Thralls arrive at Level 6. So you would need to multiclass for a total of 13 character levels to get both features if that is what you want.
@@Greyscales I think there's a missread. I meant if you want the most for a zombo combo of the necro and his paladino friendo you need to have two players. One the main necromancer and the oathbreaker being the "commander".
This way the undeads are created by the wizard and they get full buffs from the 6 lvl feature and also paladin auras.
Killing zombies with a +5 or +4 mod to their Con save is quite difficult for monsters who can't dish out enough damage.
@@hyko8355 oh ok, I get it now I thought we were talking about a singular character build not team composition, my bad sorry.
Keep up the good work. I am glad when I see a new video from you popping up.
Thanks, I am happy to hear you feel that way!
I am planning on going Oathbreaker with my Pally soon. Oath of Conquest is pretty evil and my character is starting to see that maybe his "heroic" king isnt as heroic as he was led to believe all his life
That does sound like the oath of redemption tho
@@kuropotato8097 because it's not. He plans to wash his mistakes away in the blood of those who have (in his mind) wronged him. He isn't going to be swearing any new oath for a very long time lest he be made a fool again
@@kuropotato8097 Oath of redemption is swearing to put everybody onto the path of righteousness, no matter the risk or danger, solely destroying those that there's physically no chance of redemption for.
@@embodying8moth82 I've actually got a character who's an Oathbreaker that broke a Good oath. The reason for this is that between the choice of the moderate good of saving a grove (she was an Ancients paladin), and saving a nearby town that was being used as a sacrifice by the cultists defiling the grove, she chose to save the town. After serious consideration of both her past oath, and all other oaths open to her, she came to a realization: there's one flaw shared between all of them.
Each Oath solely focuses on one aspect of "Good" above all others, even to the detriment of what would be a greater good in some circumstances. A Redemption paladin MUST give people the chance to repent, even if the risk of them deciding not to do so far outweighs the benefit of them potentially doing so. An Ancients paladin MUST protect nature, even if doing so means condemning countless innocents to death. A Vengeance paladin MUST strike down the evildoer, even if temporarily cooperating or negotiating with one can prevent evil or cause good. A Devotion paladin MUST be honorable and just, but honor will lead a thousand men to their deaths hen a knife in the dark sends but one. A Glory paladin MUST be recognized as a hero and be recognized for themselves wherever they go, even though discretion and espionage can achieve goals otherwise impossible. A Crown paladin MUST obey a strict rule of codes, even if obeying said codes are unjust or inefficient.
To bind yourself to one aspect of Good above all others is to refuse to cut out the cancer for the fear of hurting your lungs, whilst the body suffers. And so she renounced her oath, and all oaths forevermore, doing solely what SHE believes to be best, not what a code, king, or council demands she does.
I personally recommend taking the eldritch adept feat for devli's sight. I believe that would round out the oathbreaker really well overall.
I'm playing an oathbreaker who's a good guy. His God is evil and killed his party in the past.
A character idea I'm developing (might play it if my current pc dies) is an Oathbreaker Drider. She would've been an Oath of Vengeance paladin as a drow, but after Lolth turned her to a drider, she turned her back on Lolth and all the drow and escaped to the material plane, breaking her oath. She only cares for herself now, since she's learned that no one will help a hideous creature such as herself. She is also prone to mental breakdowns (might take a barbarian level for the rage?).
Given the DM's permission, it could be a total redemption arc for her, where after the party accepts her, she learns to love herself, and eventually takes up the Oath of Vengeance again.
Every little meme you put into the video was absolutely perfect 🤣
I'm proud that I live in a time that has access to the internet, and I'm really happy that you enjoy my videos!
Inflict wounds Is really good if you think of it as a way to heal your undeads
Unfortunately, necrotic damage does not usually heal undead in fifth edition, but I suppose you could always homebrew that in!
Damn, this really inspired me to make an oathbreaker paladin
Let your hate flow through you and I'm glad that you liked it!
@@Greyscalesif I went oathbreaker I would make the backstory that the character’s a dark paladin who broke their oath and now uses their same powers to deliver Retribution upon the evil they used to serve. Their own black knight, the monster they made, now hunts them down. No rest for the wicked like them.
I played a Chaotic Good Oathbreaker that broke his oath after succumbing to nihilism. Most of the campaign was him coming to terms with his inherent desire to help and do good, and his belief that it was ultimately pointless to help, as every village he saved was ultimately raided and plundered by bandits, orcs, or zombies.
I would suggest a shot for every star wars meme or reference but I don't think I want all that blood on my hands...
Not my favorite Paladin subclass but it’s up there. Great video as always.
I really appreciate the kind words, thanks Night Zebra!
Ive been trying to figure out how to do a oathbreaker, i have a player who plans on becoming a oathbreaker but its because hes a oath of vengeance and he'll find out he can't kill a great evil because it'll lead to Armageddon
Crazy Thought: What if you decided to switch out one spell for "Phantom Steed" and build an Oathbreaker Paladin as one of the Four Horsemen?
That would be pretty interesting as an idea to ask your DM about, but Paladins already get access to Find Steed, which you can more easily reskin as a spectral horse if you wish.
My Fallen Aasimar, Oath of Conquest Paladin, follower of Death (Jergal) uses her Find Steed spell with her main weapon, her scythe (a reskin of the glaive) and someone in my party has essentially deemed her the horsemen of death. It’s a really cool concept honestly, and a lot of fun
You forgot aura of protection. That's like the best paladin perks !
The video was more focused on the subclass stuff rather than the base class but yea I probably should've mentioned that.
I would love to play one day an oatbreaker as an anti hero kind of character, not fully evil but definitly out there to do things that are "right" but not exactly morally clear, then again i blame WoW and my personal love for the DKs, previously evil turned "good", willing to do what the living cant, dark heroes, or as i always love to say...the monsters that hunt down monsters
Good luck dude, I'm sure you would make a great anti-hero.
can you do genie warlock?
Unfortunately, I already have a few other videos lined up, but I will consider it for the future. Thanks for the suggestion!
Say I’m in a campaign where I would only make it to level 10 or 15 at most would oath breaker be worth it. I’m trying to decide weather or not to play oath breaker paladin or oath of conquest paladin
I would suggest for you to think about what kind of character you want to thematically play as and then have that become the driving force for the subclass because breaking your Oath as a paladin is a massive turning point (potentially) for your character.
But assuming your group is ok with it then I would suggest picking Conquest if you want a more Control-oriented playstyle and pick Oathbreaker if you want to be hyper-aggressive.
3:09 not if you have 6 constitution😭😭😭
Oathbreaker's got some interesting stuff going for it, but honestly I find that unless you really want to go the undeath synergy route, Oath of Conquest does pretty much everything Oathbreaker does, but better.
There is quite a bit of overlap between them with an AoE fear Channel Divinity and having Bestow Curse and Dominate Person in their Oath spells, but Conquest's more refined where they differ (which is not too surprising, since it came out later). Conquest's Oath spells, when they differ from Oathbreaker's, are generally either stronger, more appropriate for the Paladin playstyle, or are at worst a sidegrade.
Conquest's non-fear-based Channel Divinity is more broadly useful for when the fear option is not appropriate for the encounter, since it provides a guaranteed flat bonus to an attack instead of maybe hijacking a single undead enemy.
Conquest's Aura takes the fear part of Oathbreaker's capstone, dials down the damage massively, but it's always on, contains a super powerful battlefield control component, and is available 13 levels earlier (plus it doesn't buff enemies).
Conquest doesn't get Oathbreaker's always on Stoneskin at level 15, but they get the Stoneskin spell itself, plus always on reflexive damage (which stacks with Armor of Agathys, which they get at level 3).
And for the capstone, Oathbreaker's is, as mentioned earlier, a higher-damage version of Conquest's level 7 aura, plus something akin to Spiritual Weapon (which Conquest gets as an Oath spell 15 levels earlier) and a more usable Darkness effect. Conquest's capstone is straight-up resistance to *all* damage, an extra attack, and a doubled critical chance, the latter two effects being exactly the kind of thing a character with Divine Smite would want.
I feel that it's more about the kind of character you want to play as, since the Oath of a Paladin is usually heavily influenced by their backstory or their journey as a player character. Conquest Paladins and Oathbreakers do have mechanical overlap, but I do think think they provide unique flavours to a group.
@@Greyscales Not to mention they are two different sides of the evil spectrum.
conquest can be Lawfull neutral or evil while oathbreaker can be neutral evil or straight up chaotic evil.
Infact conquest paladins are more blackguards while oathbreakers are more anti paladins
𝕡𝕣𝕠𝕞𝕠𝕤𝕞 💦
Oathbreakers don't have to be evil, but yeah good video otherwise
Yea I would agree that there is flexibility in terms of how a group can run one, but based on the DMG's description it is my assumption that an Oathbreaker Paladin is for Paladin's that broke their oaths out of personal dark desires, you wouldn't get the Oathbreaker subclass simply by loss of conviction or crisis of faith.
But again, that is up to every group to decide for themselves and I'm happy that you liked the video regardless!
@@Greyscales Thank you, I’m so tired of the bullshit “I broke the Oath of Conquest LOL” argument for good Oathbreakers, if you want to reflavor the ability and fluff to make the subclass features more good aligned or the result of a curse that’s fine, but don’t act like the existing fluff isn’t there.
@@InquisitorThomas Except I am going to pretend the existing fluff isn't there, because it's poorly written. Black and white morality doesn't belong in a game creating complex, nuanced characters is supposed to be part of the experience. A paladin that swore an oath of conquest but later broke it and became an oathbreaker, not for selfish reasons but because they realized their original oath was wrong, makes for an interesting character, and disallowing such a character because of an arbitrary alignment restriction is poor game design.
Jocrap background