Forced to become oathbreaker by linear game design.

[Martin]

Thanks Larian. Thought this was Dnd.. failed roll has to rescue laezel had to kill the tieflings apparently this made me break some oath i never made..

Maybe design the game to work better..

I didn't make any promises to the devilikin folk.. and I'm supposed to rescue laezel,, so if anything the design forced me to become an oathbreaker.. so what's the point in rolling dice.

[Bastila Shan]

Its not its only problem, you are funnelled into choices based purely on rng and companions. You cant have a true chosen path in the game unless you kill every companion and use hirelings even then you cant rely on persuasion checks

[zpc]

Read up on your oath. It might be sufficient to not kill opponents (don't know your oath). That's what the non-lethal-attacks-toggle is for in the passive tab of the HUD.

Also - Lae'zel is optional and if your character fail to free her (e.g. because of an oath holding him back or something else you declared in the backstory of your character for this ROLEPLAYING GAME) then this is a consequence shown by the game.

If you want to play nothing-does-matter-character you shouldn't pick a extreme character class (Paladins are extreme in their believes after all). Maybe a bard would suit your way of playing the game more?

And if you really have to play that paladin - you can "restore" your oath for a fee in the camp.

[darth.crevette]

This is why I'll probably never play a Paladin. On the tabletop you have a DM to argue with, but in a video game things like this can sound very arbitrary at times.

[Konomi☆Nanasaki]

Sounds like killing the Tieflings was your choice, breaking your oath. You didn't have to. You have multiple options in dialogue and even when failing a roll option you still didn't have to.

Sounds like you're the one thinking too linear tbh

[Jaggid Edje]

Originally posted by darth.crevette:

This is why I'll probably never play a Paladin. On the tabletop you have a DM to argue with, but in a video game things like this can sound very arbitrary at times.

It's even easier in BG3 than with a real DM. You don't NEED to argue it, as already said:

Originally posted by zpc:

And if you really have to play that paladin - you can "restore" your oath for a fee in the camp.

[Deylendor]

Why didn't you knock the Tieflings unconscious instead of murdering them?

As I see it you weren't forced ♥♥♥♥.

[Jaggid Edje]

Dude follows one path out of multiple choices in front of him. Then complains about "linear" game design because he didn't like the consequences of that path.

Methinks someone needs to learn what "linear" means.

[Dapper]

You do not HAVE to rescue Lae'zel. In fact, when I play it on my second playthrough I'll leave her to her own devices and if she shows up later, let Shadowheart kill her again.

Also, your oath literally tells you how it works.

[Norbac]

People will make up excuses to tell you it was clearly your fault.

[Shozou]

Sounds like your choice. You could have just knocked them out.

[grape cough syrup]

I'm playing a prot paladin with the ancient oath and I've encountered a few places where I can lose my oath (the wand quest with that woman, the necromancer with the white bird quest in the SCL) but if you stay away from blatant necro magic and don't kill random people it's not that bad. The tiefling quest at the beginning can be done without killing them, so just don't murder random innocents if you want to play a paladin would be my advice.

[Shozou]

Originally posted by Norbac:

People will make up excuses to tell you it was clearly your fault.

Because it is.

[[OTS]EchoZenLogos]

Originally posted by Martin:

Thanks Larian. Thought this was Dnd.. failed roll has to rescue laezel had to kill the tieflings apparently this made me break some oath i never made..

Maybe design the game to work better..

I didn't make any promises to the devilikin folk.. and I'm supposed to rescue laezel,, so if anything the design forced me to become an oathbreaker.. so what's the point in rolling dice.

If you try to rescue Lae'zel and fail, it seems obvious to me that a likely outcome would be her guards trying to fight you. If killing those innocent people is against your oath, you shouldn't be hastily trying to break her out in the first place like that.

You make the oath at the character creation by the way as a Paladin - you clearly can read what the oaths require. Personally I wouldn't recommend playing a Paladin unless you're willing to either become an Oathbreaker or are willing to role-play your oath strictly - because it can be more limiting.

I multi-classed into Paladin now that I'm level 8, but at this point I know my character's personality and how I want to play this game, so it hasn't affected me yet.

You can change your class at some point as well, not too far into the game, if you really want to. So you don't necessarily have to start the game over.

[Norbac]

Originally posted by Shozou:

Originally posted by Norbac:

People will make up excuses to tell you it was clearly your fault.

Because it is.

Make a roll, fail it. He broke a oath he never made.

It's clearly his fault for not leveling luck manipulation irl.

[[OTS]EchoZenLogos]

Originally posted by Norbac:

Originally posted by Shozou:

Because it is.

Make a roll, fail it. He broke a oath he never made.

It's clearly his fault for not leveling luck manipulation irl.

Does it fail you for simply failing the roll, or for killing the Tieflings?

Because those are two different things.