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.

What the heck?? I just made this exact character for my new campaign! Great minds think alike

That sounds like a campaign that George R.R. Martin would be proud of!

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.

@@hyko8355 oh ok, I get it now I thought we were talking about a singular character build not team composition, my bad sorry.

Thanks, I am happy to hear you feel that way!

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'm proud that I live in a time that has access to the internet, and I'm really happy that you enjoy my videos!

Let your hate flow through you and I'm glad that you liked it!

I really appreciate the kind words, thanks Night Zebra!

Unfortunately, necrotic damage does not usually heal undead in fifth edition, but I suppose you could always homebrew that in!

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.

The video was more focused on the subclass stuff rather than the base class but yea I probably should've mentioned that.

Unfortunately, I already have a few other videos lined up, but I will consider it for the future. Thanks for the suggestion!

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.

Good luck dude, I'm sure you would make a great anti-hero.

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.