D&D 5E Should Oathbreakers do Necrotic damage rather than Radiant?

[Scott Steven Bell]

I just dont see the ties to Radiant damage for smiting etc.

It makes much more sense for them to do Necrotic.

 

[Lanliss]

Personally, I think that a fallen paladin should be non-magical, so their smite should just be bonus damage of whatever their weapon damage is.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

I think a fallen Paladin should just be a Fighter of half his original Paladin XP total.

But a really exceptionally wicked fallen Paladin, a la Lord Soth, could be an Oathbreaker, and I'd be cool with distorting a bunch of his abilities--turning his Divine Smite (radiant damage) into Corruption (necrotic damage) or Monstrous Hypocrisy (psychic damage) would be fully within-bounds. It's an NPC class, after all.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

I'd absolutely cause their damage to switch to necrotic with that Oath. I'd also have evil clerics replace the sacred flame cantrip with the necrotic profane flame cantrip (no other difference).

 

[Hawk Diesel]

I don't understand the idea of the Oathbreaker mechanically. Paladin is literally the only class that has a built in self-destruct consequence for role playing decisions.

I like the Eberron/Keith Baker take that so-called divine power is not necessarily tied to the gods but rather to some internal force of will. Or if it is an external divine gift, then the gods are too big to be concerned with one individual misusing their divine gift, or the gods have machinations that are not so easily understood by mortals and our limited grip of morality. Thus evil clerics working in service of good gods without losing their powers.

I don't see this as much different for paladins. Their power may be focused by their oath, but the oath is the tool and not the source. A Fighter doesn't stop being a Fighter just because they lose their sword, nor does the wizard stop being a wizard if they lose their spell book. I can see things being harder, but they don't necessarily suddenly become something else.

I feel like if the player is making decisions and doing things that are more relevant to RP, then the consequences should be similar. Such a paladin might be outcast from his order, hunted by his former friends, forced to live with the memory of innocent blood on their hands, or so much more. All are more interesting and less handicapping mechanically than changing the class or how it functions.

But in answer to the OP, if you did become an oath breaker, I would allow the smite to deal necrotic. It's balanced against radiant and is conceptually aligned with the character.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

I like the Eberron/Keith Baker take that so-called divine power is not necessarily tied to the gods but rather to some internal force of will. Or if it is an external divine gift, then the gods are too big to be concerned with one individual misusing their divine gift, or the gods have machinations that are not so easily understood by mortals and our limited grip of morality. Thus evil clerics working in service of good gods without losing their powers.

Paladins aren't necessarily connected to the gods at all, even in settings other than Eberron. It is the force of the Paladin's will and oath that grants them their powers, not a god, and there are no gods sitting in judgement, able to strip the paladin's powers away.

I don't see this as much different for paladins. Their power may be focused by their oath, but the oath is the tool and not the source. A Fighter doesn't stop being a Fighter just because they lose their sword, nor does the wizard stop being a wizard if they lose their spell book. I can see things being harder, but they don't necessarily suddenly become something else.

Oathbreakers aren't just Paladins who slipped a bit. To become an Oathbreaker requires not just wilfully breaking your oath, but actively rejecting and repudiating the concept with the same force of will that it was sworn in the first place.

 

[thethain]

It is important to remember that in 5e damage types are not inherently tied to alignments. Radiant damage is basically damage created from some kind of supernatural source (oaths and divine intervention are the most common) necrotic damage is damage that withers and destroys life. Keep in mind a cleric of the most evil deity would still be able to sacred flame, to the cleric and its evil deity, the cleric's mission of kicking puppies is sacred and worthy of divine influence.

Similarly an oathbreaker paladin (actually turned evil) has changed his oath towards evil means. The tie to his cause is still so strong it can literally change reality, its just now the cause is evil instead of good.

An oathbreaker isn't just a paladin who gave up on his cause, he found a new one.

Now if a paladin were to simply lose his will, then yea, he'd likely just become a fighter (probably a few levels lower)

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Krachek]

An oathbreaker is typically a DM guy. DM may allow a player to play an oathbreaker if its campaign is setup for this.
Necrotic or not is up to the DM.

Otherswise rules are vague.
If a paladin willfully violates his or her oath and shows no sign of repentance, the consequences can be more serious. At the GM’s discretion, an impenitent paladin might be forced to abandon this class and adopt another. Again no words about oathbreaker. DM call.

 

[MonkeezOnFire]

I wouldn't change it. Light does not have to equal good. I find it thematically more interesting that evil paladins can wield divine might just as well as the champion of good. It makes the world feel more gray morally (though I get that some people aren't into that).