D&D 5E Paladins: what alignments do you think are most appropriate/common for each oath?

[Quartz]

What do you think is the most likely/common/acceptable alignment(s) for each oath?

Oath of Devotion?

LG or LN

Oath of Ancients?

Any Good - stresses the Good over the other part of the alignment, 'be the light'

Oath of Vengeance?

Any Lawful - stresses the Lawful over the other part of the alignment - but just possibly CG.

 

[Rocksome]

I always consider them to be representative of the 4 non-neutral corners of the alignment chart I.e.


LG NG CG
LN N CN
LE NE CE

With Devotion as LG, Ancients as CG, Vengeance as LE and Oathbreaker as CE.

 

[Mephista]

I always consider them to be representative of the 4 non-neutral corners of the alignment chart I.e.


LG NG CG
LN N CN
LE NE CE

With Devotion as LG, Ancients as CG, Vengeance as LE and Oathbreaker as CE.

I like that. I'm now officially tempted to work on a fifth True Neutral Paladin. Anyone have any ideas for what that would comprise?

 

[Voort]

I'm now officially tempted to work on a fifth True Neutral Paladin. Anyone have any ideas for what that would comprise?

Well, 5E lists 'ignores moral questions' as the only version of True Neutral, so no balancing good & evil option. First thing that comes to mind would be a paladin of a neutral craft/knowledge focused faith. Their code would be something like: to protect knowledge, foster education and training, and be true teachers & inventors. Not sure how well that fits on the basic paladin, though.

 

[The Human Target]

People think Vengeance paladins are evil?

Yikes.

That's why alignment is a terrible game idea.

 

[Riley37]

That's why alignment is a terrible game idea.

It's almost as if people in real life didn't all agree on what behavior is good, and what behavior is evil!

 

[DMCF]

No restrictions IMO

Clue in Tron could be considered lawful evil and path of devotion and a Paladin dedicated to an evil god of trickery would work just as well but be chaotic. Ancients could be titans, gods and elemental forces so anything works. Vengeance? Same.

The power of 5e is cultivating these for good RP.

 

[Winterthorn]

Oath of Devotion: I think LG fits best. LN and NG are possible. Devotion implies loyalty and commitment and I don't see chaotic personalities sticking to their promises.

Oath of (the) Ancients: begs the question who the Ancients are - deities or entities of all alignments? A full pantheon? Does it beg a balanced view? Perhaps LN fits best, then TN, followed by LG or LE at the extremes...

Oath of Vengeance: I find this difficult, because I don't see mercy in such an oath, and mercy is really a quality unique to goodness. In fact vengeance seems rooted in something very emotional and personal at the risk of throwing away any sense of objective fairness or justice. So LN and LE fit well, and NE fits too.

I've avoided the chaotics because I don't see oath/pledge/vow making as something a chaotic personality would stick to, let alone respect if they were evil.

Ultimately I think its best to follow our intuition when it comes to alignments for these Oaths; "best fit" is somewhat subjective.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Devotion: LG, though LN and NG should be common as well.

Ancients: CG, though NG should be common as well, and CN wouldn't be met with confusion.

Vengeance: LN, though LE should also be common, and TN would not be considered unusual.

All of these should be taken with the caveat that they *can*--if you very carefully construct the motives--work for essentially any alignment. The Oath of Vengeance could easily be Chaotic Evil; consider Yuthura Ban from Knights of the Old Republic II. She starts off as a Jedi, but chafes under their rules and regulations; she's a freed slave, and wants to set other slaves free too. Eventually she gets so angry, she leaves, and joins the Sith Academy, where she quickly becomes a powerful figure (second-in-command, actually). But her concern for others is, by and large, replaced with a hunger for power and a pitiless streak. (The PC can precipitate a crisis of faith through the right dialogue choices, in fact.) Still, Yuthura is a good template for a Chaotic Evil Paladin of Vengeance: someone who has been legitimately wronged, and who will go to (nearly) any lengths to see justice served. The tricky part is the whole aiding other people who are victims thing, but that could be swung in a sufficiently "Evil" direction if the player handles it right, e.g. "You know the merchant who killed your parents, just for their land? I can teach you how to exact the revenge you deserve." Either helping others to be more evil themselves/to seek evil ends, or (on a different tack) helping others and using that help to control them.

Perhaps a different way of putting it: I think some oaths are very difficult to sell for certain alignments. Evil in general is difficult for both Devotion and Ancients. Chaos is difficult for Devotion and Vengeance. Depending on how you interpret the Vengeance stuff, you might even say that Law is difficult for Vengeance and Ancients. (I wouldn't--as my stuff shows above--but you *could.*)

 

[Mephista]

Well, 5E lists 'ignores moral questions' as the only version of True Neutral, so no balancing good & evil option. First thing that comes to mind would be a paladin of a neutral craft/knowledge focused faith. Their code would be something like: to protect knowledge, foster education and training, and be true teachers & inventors. Not sure how well that fits on the basic paladin, though.

Don't see why a knowledge focused 'din couldn't work out. In the Brimstone Angels series, there's a former paladin of Ogma. Some of the stuff from that could work as a basis for an oath. As for abilities, it could be tied to ritual magic or extra skills in some ways. Have to remember to keep it distinct from anything a Knowledge cleric can do - I'm a firm disbeliever in overlap.

Hmmmm...... so.... I guess I'll post some ideas I have below.

People think Vengeance paladins are evil?

Yikes.

That's why alignment is a terrible game idea.

I think that Lawful Evil is actually far less "real world evil" than Chaotic Neutral. But, yes, the Avenger subclass has a strong bounty-hunter/assassin vibe. They're called dark knights for a reason, after all. The description says that "Paladins who uphold these tenets are willing to sacrifice even their own righteousness to mete out justice upon those who do evil."

One of the curious things about the Avenger is that, when I was reading the writeup, I immediately thought about the Pact Primeval. The ancient pact that Asmodeus made with the gods of light, where he promised to punish the forces of evil in exchange for divine power. The arch-demon pretty much embodies the idea of the LE Avenger.

Now, while we may end up in disagreement over if that should constitute Lawful Evil, I really can't see them as Good as core describes the Alignment. Most PC avengers would likely end up as LN, given that most people shy away from LE, but I see most LE paladins as Avengers before Oathbreaker.

Oath of (the) Ancients: begs the question who the Ancients are - deities or entities of all alignments? A full pantheon? Does it beg a balanced view? Perhaps LN fits best, then TN, followed by LG or LE at the extremes...

Generally speaking, the write up suggests that we're talking about druidic dieties. Also, remember that this subclass is based, in part, on the Primal Defender Warden class from 4e. So "Nature" as a god, a nature goddess, fey gods, primal spirits.

While 3e and earlier put druids/nature as Neutral only stuff, there was always an odd counterpoint with the Outer Planes, where the Beastlands and Arborea were Chaotic Good "idealized nature" realms. Given the discussion of light, beauty, and love in the Warden's oath (and the fact they're called fey knights as well as the prevalence as gods of love/beauty as CG beings) I tend to assuming that this Oath follows the ideals of the outer planes instead of the whole neutral thing.