Originally Posted by azarhal
What isn't deliberate about:
- attacking non-hostile
- making enemies non-hostile via dialogue and then murdering them
- double crossing people (I have yet to see someone trying it with Minthara at the Grove, but someone did Oath break by taking both quest in Anders vs Karlach, but I'm not quite sure if the person found out Anders's secret)

( Directed discussion about Oaths and tenets, etc.)


These may be failures to follow - but they are not in themselves renunciations of the principles to which you swore. A renunciation of your oath is and must be a more overt, deliberate and impactful thing, than failing to follow a tenet one time, or straying from the path you swore to. The oath and its tenets are different things: Failing, in a situation, to follow one of the tenets of your Oath is not the same thing as breaking your oath - they are very different things, by an order of magnitude.

Defining going against your word as the 'wickedness' spoken about in one of the tenets is also a stretch, and a very liberal one at that. Going against a word you give does not break any of the tenets listed, not on its own. What you are doing may end up in defiance of those tenets, depending on what it is, but simply breaking your word on something, without context of what, does not. More likely, in game terms, is that everything is keying off Oath of Devotion, since keeping your word is a devotion tenet, not an Ancients one... and others here have reported that failing to show mercy or preserve life haven't caused breaks.

If you're able, everyone should take a moment to set aside all internal thoughts and definition they might have of 'paladins must be good, honest, chivalric, religious, devout people' That is not a part of the definition of paladin any more, and has not been for the past fifteen years at least. Paladins can be anything - what matters is their dedication to particular ideals, divinities or causes, and the divine power they can tap through that dedication and faith. Nothing else is essential - not honesty, not integrity, not chastity (hah!), not eloquence, not fairness, not mercy, not forgiveness, not kindness, nor any virtue you care to name; none are essential to a paladin, unless their particular oath and cause makes it so (such as Devotion, which does make integrity an important tenet - but it's because of that specific oath, not because of paladin in general).

==

Quote
I also have an issue with people claiming Paladins don't need gods and can be any alignments in 5e when the subclass talks using divine symbols and divine abilities all the time and the oaths tenets force you to act into specific alignment range.

It's not a claim; they don't. You might prefer the extremely old-school rigid lawful-stupid lock-in, but that's simply not the way it is; this is not a 'claim' - it's a fact, and has been so for the past fifteen years of the game.

Paladins drawn on divine power to grant them capabilities, and it is the bond of their oath and their dedication to it that allows this. The power does not need to come from a specific deity, or any single deity at all, and the Paladin does not need to worship a particular deity, even if the source of their divine power is drawn from that deity's portfolio in some way. A holy symbol is a focus for your Oath - it Can be the symbol of a deity who serves as your divine intermediary, if that's the route you take, but it doesn't need to be. It only needs to honestly represent the form of your Oath - an Oath of Glory Paladin might even use their own family crest as their symbol. In that case, their power most likely derives from tapping the folios of divinities who favour champions and heroes, or divinities who appreciate individual excellence of body and form - and many of those latter aren't nice divinities, by the way, and the Oath of Glory in no way requires you to be a good person, by any stretch. Importantly, though, the Paladin in question may not even know who any of those divinities are, and certainly does not need to worship them, or preach their name - simply doing the work that their oath entails is enough. The individual Oaths are quite varied as well - but how they are conducted leaves space for a broad spectrum of alignments (some more than others, granted). Between all the various oaths we have, there is room for a paladin of any alignment to comfortably exist. Remember: alignment is not so much about what you do - it's about why you're doing it. Everyone can be the person that saves the world, good or evil, lawful or chaotic - why they are saving the world, however, is another matter.

==


If we go back to Lae'zel in the cage...

The situation we have is this:

- Some people that you have never seen before and know nothing about are talking about killing another person that they have trapped in a cage; they sound scared and uncertain, but they're still talking about killing an imprisoned person.
- That person is not a stranger - it's the person that, recently, fought alongside you and helped you to escape from a terrible situation; they weren't very nice about it, but they fought as your ally against something far worse nonetheless.
- Your recent ally tells you to get rid of the people.

- You (perhaps because you don't trust your ability to lie convincingly), agree to help them 'deal with' the person, if they let her down from the cage.
- These people Will kill your recent ally if you let them, and they've made this clear.
- You side with her and defend her from them once she's out of the cage; however, you have an Oath to uphold, so you resolve to show mercy in this situation - you're not about to kill some random people you don't know over what could simply be a misunderstanding. You knock them out, make sure they're stable, and leave them to nurse headaches in a couple of hours, then get out of there with your companion.

As an Oath of ancients paladin, you've acted in what is arguable the best way you could in a difficult situation; unable to talk either side down, you at least ensured that no-one was killed unnecessarily; you preserved life, showed mercy, and encouraged people to be better as much as you could in the situation.

Only, according to the game, you broke your oath and now face the wrath of fiery damnation for forsaking your duty, fire and brimstone, dark powers, sudden visitations from dark figures who apparently have a psychic link to your brain and know your every action!

Main issue: That last point made in the bullet points is irrelevant, and not even considered because the point at which the game decides you broke your Oath is the moment you side with Lae'zel - namely, the moment you went back on what it perceived to be your word. This has nothing whatsoever to do with any of your tenets as an Oath of Ancients Paladin - which you actually upheld with aplomb in this situation.