• gerusz@ttrpg.network
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      The problem with Redemption is that it’s an externally-focused oath, trying to redeem others. A conquest paladin having an “am I the baddy” moment and turning into a redemption paladin is like a douchy bully who suddenly finds Jesus then tries to convert people without apologizing for the years of bullying.

      D&D needs an Oath of Atonement which would be specifically focused on making up for the shit you did as a previous less-than-moral paladin subclass (mostly conquest, sometimes revenge, occasionally crown or devotion).

    • TheGreatDarkness@ttrpg.networkOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      All serious tho, one of ideas I know I will never be able to do is to play the same Paladin in 3 succesful campaigns in one setting, first as Oath of Conquest, then Oathbreaker, then Oath of Redemption. I first it’s a better growth if there is a transition phase before adopting the Redeption.

  • bam13302@ttrpg.network
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    “Oathbreakers” are evil, by definition, “oathbreakers” are not. A oath of conquest paladin that broke their oath for good reasons, would be more suited for a oath of redemption.