D&D 5E Paladin Oathbound/Oathbreaker

[shadowoflameth]

In the DMG the Oathbreaker is available as an option at 3rd level, but although the Oath Breaker has some great stuff, if a character in a good party went Oath Breaker, he might not want everyone to know, and may like the features of his oath. What do DMs feel about allowing a player to convert to an evil god and change alignment to match. He'd have to take out his holy symbol at some point, but for example with the rules as written an Oath of Devotion paladin of Tiamat or Asmodeus that still looks angelic wouldn't mechanically change and could be introduced at first level. Thoughts?

 

[Al2O3]

The oaths are not related to the god. Changing god would not help. However, changing the Oath from Devotion or Crown to Vengeance could work in some cases I guess.

But check the tenets of the oaths. Those are the rules that are supposed to be followed. If they are not, then there is no easy way to keep the features and the Oathbreaker becomes plan B. Breaking the rules of a god but not the Oath will not take anything away from the features. Of course, the DM can decide from the start that Oath tenets will not be enforced.

 

[Krachek]

Oathbreaker need DM approval. So it is mainly design to npc.
The wearing of the holy symbol fit well for lawful god. But an evil god, who works with lie, tricks, and other cheap shot wont care about wearing its symbol. He will care more about blood and souls in sacrifice...

 

[shadowoflameth]

all of which makes sense, Thanks. It does give me some ideas though about what I was thinking. If the Oath demands Honorable behavior and obedience to just authority then what about a paladin of a lawful evil god? or a tyrant king?

 

[Al2O3]

I think the tenets tend to be obvious about it. Devotion: compassion and honour would not fit with evil. Ancients: really needs twisting to not be anti-evil. Vengeance: can ally with an evil to destroy another evil. Crown: Works with Lawful Anything.