I'm disappointed about no Oath of Liberty, but I'll take a look at what they are bringing, when they get around to getting the page to work.
For subjugate, I get this - from the Random House dictionary:I think a lot of confusion comes from the connotations that come with a word like subjugation. They are generally negative, at least in this day and age.
The definition of such a word does not discuss anything particularly evil. To bring one to submission or under one's governance (usually through conquest) it in my opinion totally neutral.
This goest to the question of what alignment is for.We could discuss how a 'good' nation would have stopped once it was clear it had the upper hand in a war, and seek immediate peace.
not every foe is going to agree to play nice. In a world of stark good and evil, one could argue that evil must be opposed and expunged. If mercy or reasoning does not work, then you can turn to the strong will of a Paladin of Conquest.
I tend to run a far more grayer world morality wise.
I'm not sure that holding a city (or province, or . . . ) is the same as subjugating it.Even Richard knew there was no point in taking Jerusalem if they couldn't hold it. So yeah I guess if he couldn't subjugate his enemy, or at least the populace of the City he was trying to conquer, than he saw no point in fighting the battle.
In flavour, yes, but I don't think there is a lot of mechanical overlap. (Or, if there is, I missed it.)I am sharply reminded of the essentials blackguard, both of these seem to be paladin oaths that correspond to the vices of that blackguard.
In flavour, yes, but I don't think there is a lot of mechanical overlap. (Or, if there is, I missed it.)
I'm not sure that holding a city (or province, or . . . ) is the same as subjugating it.
"Subjugate" ins't just a synonym for "rule".
Welcome to a brave new world. Or should that be the new world order?
. . . or . . .
View attachment 79350He’s noble enough to win the world
But weak enough to lose it —View attachment 79350
View attachment 79350He’s a New World paladinView attachment 79350
So, we've had a lot of discussion about the flavor, about what is good and evil, but what are we thinking abut the mechanics.
The conquest fear channel divinity is cool, but their aura only giving disadvantage to fear checks seems to weak, as does their high level immunity to charm.
I think the aura can be improved by giving allies advantage on fear saves (Darth Vader effect) but what should we do about the level 15 ability?
I like that. My allies fear me more than anything else. Evil laugh.
As a DM I would be clear that you can't redirect an attack back at the critter who made the attack, and that means during the big boss solo fight, that power will probably hurt the party more than help: Don't hurt me, hurt him (points to the party's fighter), followed by the rest of the party never getting close the paladin again....not to mention the evoker wizard "forgetting" to cause the fireball to miss the paladin.....two or three times. Good power for an evil character (makes a note to add levels of treachery paladin to big bads).
Still undecided about poison strike.
I will say that treachery paladin makes a really good horde breaker if you are willing to wade into the horde.