Yeah I have a problem with evil paladins in general. Make them a separate class and call them blackguards. That's one thing 3rd edition definitely did better.
Strictly speaking, the blackguard was something of an prestige classes of the paladin, like a arcane trickster for the rogue. In general, there were additional rules for blackguards who had paladin levels. And I don't really understand why you should create many classes instead of making several ordered classes with many subclasses. By the way, due to the number of classes it does not help the balance too much.
Originally Posted by Eldath
The word "Paladin" still carries connotations of being an upstanding good person, which a tiefling is just not going to be, because that's not what they are about, for one, and for two, if they make our tiefling companion into an upstanding good person that will merely give a third exra special snowflake point at which I will just throw my hands up and murder her.
It seems to me that "oathbreaker" does not sound very heroic.
Originally Posted by Eldath
I know and I hate it.
Why? I would understand your idea if it was about cambions, but these are tieflings. The legacy of the fiends is not so strong in them. None of the editions indicate that the tiefling will always be evil and the aasimar good. In addition, in the history of D&D, there have been cases when originally evil creatures could be good. Remember the Fall-from-Grace from Planescape.
