Templar as Paladin/Warlock/Cleric in 5th Edition

Rules 5th Edition D&D
#1

Greetings fellow travellers.

I’m going about hacking the 5e ruleset so that I can run Dark Sun with it. A considerable conceptual sticking point I’m grappling with is the mechanical niche of Templars under the 5e paradigm.

I understand that in the original boxed set Templar was its own class, sharing much mechanically with the Cleric. In the interests of differentiating the roles & flavour of the Elemental Clerics with the Templars of the Sorcerer Kings I’m thinking I’ll forego this most obvious path in favour of one of two other classes.

Those being the Warlock and, perhaps more controversially, the Paladin.

Perusing various online places, what consensus there is seems to point to Warlock being the ideal base for a Templar class. Sinister magic-users that gain power through pacts with non-divine entities.
Contrary to this, I find myself leaning more & more towards the Paladin due to reasons both conceptual & mechanical.

Firstly due to the name Templar, in some sense I relate them to the historical Knights Templar viewed through a certain moral lens. Dubiously ‘holy’ warrior monks acting as colonial interlopers to protect desert territory gained through bloody crusade. Agents of a ‘foreign’ cult imposed atop the local culture. A nice subversion of the class tropes that would also allow me to (perhaps) reintroduce the ‘True Paladin’ later on as a Templar of Oronis the Avangion.

Secondly, the existing 5e subclasses seem well suited to this framework. There already exists a Paladin of Conquest, who imposes magical fear to control his enemies & deals retaliatory psychic damage to those who dare attack him. An Oathbreaker Paladin (Dregoth?) who can bolster undead & fiendish allies whilst dealing necrotic damage to his enemies, and a Paladin of Ancients (Oronis…?) who fills a more traditional niche with a tilt towards nature, growth & renewal.

TL;DR - Is 5e Paladin a good basis for the Templar compared to Warlock/Cleric or have I just been staring at this for too long?

3 Likes
#2

Its certainly been suggested before, so, you’re at least not the only one to think it might be true.

1 Like
#3

Further complicating matters, the source material hasn’t been totally consistent over time on what a Templar exactly is & the specific nature of their power.

In the original boxed set (which I favour) I believe they were at least implied to be directly empowered by their sorcerous patrons, where later it was stated that through a convoluted set of circumstances the Sorcerer Kings gained the power to channel elemental planar energy to others. The so called ‘Living Vortices’, which always seemed to me an all too convenient, on-the-spot sort of explanation for Templars having similar powers to Elemental Clerics.

To my mind, Templars occupy this awkward space between divine & arcane. Should Templars be able to heal people? Should they show some sign of the profane nature of their power? Is their power sorcerous, psionic, elemental, holy? Should they be martially inclined by default?

What do you wise Athasian elders think? What IS a Templar, really, conceptually? What should, or should not they be?

1 Like
#4

The OG Boxed Set still listed them as a priest-like divine spellcaster, so while the Warlock route seems innovative and flavorful, its never really sat well with me, personally.

4e hate aside, the change in gameplay from using stolen clerical power in 2e to using arcane powers in 4e felt uncomfortable and weird to me when i ran it. But then, the whole thematic use of power sources in 4e DS felt like a flimsy excuse to me. :man_shrugging:

FWIW, IMO, templars are and have always been soldier-priests, and making them warlocks just steps on the toes of a SK’s royal defilers. It changes their in-universe role and feel, and that’s not outweighed or justified by the “but, warlock have patrons, and the sorcerer-monarchs are perfect warlock patrons” argument.

But of course, tastes may vary.

2 Likes
#5

Also, welcome to the arena!

2 Likes
#6

Thank you kindly, both for the warm welcome & your input on the topic.

I’m reassured to see my own leanings somewhat reflected in what you’ve said about maintaining an (albeit illicit) divine basis for the power of the Templar, and their thematic status as a kind of martial, often secular priesthood.

Another sort of sticking point of using Paladins is that unlike Clerics or Warlocks, they lack ‘full caster’ progression, meaning that aside from the non-spell mystical enhancements inherent in the class, Templars would only be able to access spells of up to 5th level.

I have mixed feelings about this, some might fairly say that this represents too much of a break with the classic image of the class. On the other hand, having essentially all the full-caster classes experience some level of othering or stigmatisation in the city states encourages an aesthetically satisfying low-fantasy feel that aligns well with the old source material of the setting.

3 Likes
#7

I’m not a huge fan of the Paladin being used as a templar, mainly because a degree of cynicism seems built into the templarate. I’m not super familiar with 5E (only played a few sessions) and I guess that there are anti-paladins types under the Paladin umbrella. That’s fine but I’d expect these paladins to be 'true believers ’ as well. This doesn’t gel with the templarate. If you are talking about just taking the mechanics and slapping the template lore on them, that might be alright.

In terms of cleric and warlock style templars, why not both? What is to say there aren’t templars of both types? Go with whatever feels cool to you. There is no canon Dark Sun in 5E, so your judgement is as good as anyone’s. For what it’s worth:

2E: Templars were uber-clerics. That’s right - mechanically, they were straight up better than the standard 2E cleric.
3.5E (Athas.org official fansite): Templars were spontaneous divine casters, similar to the mystic in the Dragonlance setting.
4E: Templars were 4E warlocks.

You could use all three. Paladins as the militant arm of the templarate. The cleric style and warlocks as mystical arms. It would give templars more versatility as enemies.

#8

Greetings Redking,

5e does indeed toss all the Paladin derived classes under the greater umbrella of Paladin subclasses. Oath of Devotion would be your traditional Paladin. Oath of Conquest would be what I’d probably use as a “default” Templar, the oath of might makes right.

Even so, I’d definitely be reflavouring it. This to me seems necessary in any case as the Templar/SK relationship is a unique one not modelled by any other class. The 5e Paladin is all about upholding a set of sworn ideals, not about retaining the favour of a patron. Nor is the Warlock really, you can’t “fall” by defying your patron, the patron just knows where you live. As for the Cleric, as you say, belief has nothing to do with it. You don’t have to believe in Tectuktitlay’s divinity to be his Templar.

By the same token each class being discussed shares some aspect of the Templar; the upholding of sworn duties for the Paladin, the transactional pact of the Warlock, the maintenance of personal favour for the Cleric.

On the topic of 2e Templars being superior Clerics, I was under the impression they had lesser spellcasting abilities at low levels & no option for “Advanced Being” transcendence in the endgame in return for broader domain access. My command of 2e mechanics is superficial at best however.

EDIT: I forgot to address your point about perhaps not restricting Templars to a single class. To my mind this gives the Sorcerer Kings a greater feeling of primacy than I’m comfortable with. If they can create Paladins and Warlocks and Clerics (oh my!) they are in some sense greater than the gods themselves. It also, again to my sensibilities, robs the Templars of having their own distinct mechanical identity.

2 Likes
#9

I’d say that depends on how you look at it - my one favorite bit from 4e’s DS was that they made “templar” a Theme, not a class. So, you could play a “war templar” fighter or a “auditor” psion or a “toyal defiler” wizard or a Raamite assassin-templar (i forget their specific name) as a rogue.

So, deconvoluting class and in-universe role COULD be super cool. Or very confusing. :man_shrugging:

1 Like
#10

It’s a novel idea. Under such a paradigm, is the Templar still benefitting from some investiture of supernatural power, or merely societal power?

If the Templar is reliant on the Sorcerer King for their class abilities, a Templar Fighter/Rogue/Psion or whatever seems to be getting a pretty raw deal compared to a free agent, who could get those same abilities without the dependency. If they don’t receive these abilities from the Sorcerer King, they’re not really beholden to them in the same way as the OG Templars were.

If being a Templar comes with no signature abilities that are only acquirable through the Sorcerer Kings, it makes them seem kind of like chumps, no? Like we’ve sort of reduced Templar to a mundane job title.

1 Like
#11

Well, it was 4e, so templars got to choose from a small selection of templar-specific powers, so in that case, they still got supernatural power from their SM.

I’m not a 5e expert, but i can’t really think of a mechanical effect you could apply to characters of any/all classes to grant them similar abilities. Maybe a feat?

On the other hand, maybe the exact opposite is the way to go: a 1e-ish take where you just call declare a character a “templar” - a job description, as you said - and so you could be a war templar (paladin), OG templar (cleric), royal defiler (wizard/warlock), etc.

#13

@Arioch

A couple of things to think about regarding Templars and aligning a class to them in newer editions of D&D

  1. Look at the 5E classes now (2024) and see how those classes fit the original theme of the templar as several classes did not exist or have changed dramatically from 2E.

  2. Compare the statements in the original books to see what themes remain.

  3. In the original Templar write-up, other than spells & controlling undead, all the abilities of the templars are secular and temporal – nothing mystical. Look at those 5E mechanics (skills/expanded spell lists, feats, etc) that can mimic those 2E abilities in the 5E ruleset?

Here are sample 5E2024 classes written as if they applied to a Templar. Let me know which one of the three sound most fitting for a Templar.

1. Templars draw power from the realms of the gods and harness it to work miracles. Blessed by a deity, a pantheon, or another immortal entity, a Templar can reach out to the divine magic of the Outer Planes-where Sorcerer-Kings dwell-and channel it to bolster people and battle foes.

Because their power is a divine gift, Templars typically associate themselves with temples dedicated to the deity or other immortal force that unlocked their magic. Harnessing divine magic doesn’t rely on specific training, yet Templar might learn prayers and rites that help them draw on power from the Outer Planes.

2. Templars are united by their oaths to stand against the forces of annihilation and corruption. Whether sworn before a Sorcerer-King’s altar in a sacred glade before nature spirits, or in a moment of desperation and grief with the dead as the only witnesses, a Templar’s oath is a powerful bond. It is a source of power that turns a devout warrior into a blessed champion. Templars train to learn the skills of combat, mastering a variety of weapons and armor. Even so, their martial skills are secondary to the magical power they wield - power to heal the injured, smite their foes, and protect the helpless and those who fight at their side.

A Templar tries to hold to the highest standards of conduct, but even the most dedicated are fallible. Sometimes a Templar transgresses their oath. A Templar who has broken a vow typically seeks absolution, spending an all-night vigil as a sign of penitence or undertaking a fast. After a rite of forgiveness, the Templar starts fresh. If your Templar unrepentantly violates their oath, talk to your DM. Your Templar should probably take a more appropriate subclass or even abandon the class and adopt another one.

3. Templars quest for knowledge that lie hidden in the fabric of the multiverse. They often begin their search for magical power by delving into tomes of forbidden lore, dabbling in invocations meant to attract the power of extraplanar beings, or seeking places of power where the influence of these beings can be felt. In no time, each Templar is drawn into a binding pact with a powerful patron.

Drawing on the ancient knowledge of beings such as the Sorcerer-Kings, Templars piece together arcane secrets to bolster their own power. Templars view their patrons as resources, as a means to the end of achieving magical power. Some Templars respect, revere, or even love their patrons; some serve their patrons grudgingly; and some seek to undermine their patrons even as they wield the power their patrons have given them.

These are excerpts from the original boxed set.

Templars worship the sorcerer-kings and draw their magical energies through them. The sorcerer-kings grant magical spells to their templars for services rendered. (OBS-RB pg29)

A templar’s spells are received directly from the sorcerer-king he worships. (OBS-RB pg34)

Templars draw their magical powers through their sorcerer-kings**, who in turn draw upon the Negative Material plane** (OBS-RB pg 70)

Templars are clergymen devoted to the sorcerer-king of their city. Like other priests, they are granted spells in return for their worship. Unlike true priests, who draw their power from the elemental forces of the world, Templars tap into the magical forces of their sorcerer-king. When a templar beseeches his monarch for a spell, the sorcerer-king grants the request by employing his own mystical energy to power the templar 's magic. Because of the strain this places on both the sorcerer-king and the surrounding land, young templars do not ask for (or receive) many spells. (OBS-WJ pg13)

Clerics worship one of the four elemental planes: earth, air, fire, or water. They call upon magical energies from those planes, specializing in one element’s magical applications on the prime material plane. (OBS-RB pg29)

Druids A druid will ally with a particular spirit, acting as that spirit’s earthly counterpart, drawing his magical energy from the spirit in question. (OBS-RB pg29)

#14

@Xelu

What a post, thank you.

My group doesn’t use the 2024 “5.5e” stuff, we’ve tweaked the system in so many small ways over the years that we’re quite comfortable with it & from what I’ve heard the reception for the new material is decidedly mixed.

As previously mentioned, it’s fairly clear that Templar isn’t thematically interchangeable with Cleric, Warlock or Paladin. Though it shares elements with each. I don’t see the utility of appealing to a setting-agnostic flavour paragraph meant for those unfamiliar with the class concepts. Particularly in the case of Paladin which contains its own antithesis in the form of certain subclasses (Conquest/Oathbreaker) which happen to be the specific ones being proffered in the discussion.

Worth asking I suppose, if anybody has seen a homebrew Templar class for 5e that they were particularly impressed with?

#15

Yeah, I agree. I’m not sure I see or understand the utility of comparing the flavor text of the templar class with that of clerics, warlocks, or paladins in an exercise focused on the mechanics of those classes. A similar conversation could surely be had about elves, halflings, or wizards, so… :man_shrugging:

This, however, makes a lot of sense to me - I feel like it’d be easy enough to just expand the Persuasion skill the way Athas.org did with Diplomacy in 3.5e, allowing new uses of it for those identified as “templars”…

And yes, checking around so you don’t reinvent the wheel is a great idea.

#16

I personally have the Templar Background and I have both Warlock, Clerics and Paladins filling the role

1 Like