Cleric or paladin for a member of a religious military order?

[Rfkannen]

I was just thinking, when you think holy knight you typically think paladin, but would cleric work better?

What im thinking is representing a member of a military orders such as the templars and the hospitaller (but for a d&d god like bahamut or thor))

Now in 5e paladins it specifically points out that paladins are more tied to justice than a gods cause, and that most of them are adventures. While a member of a military order would probably care more about the rules of the church and their order than justice. So to me it seems that with the fluff of 5e, paladins are not really the type to actually be part of a miliarty, while a cleric might.

Now granted you could just ingore that fluff, and if your just looking at the mechanics of the class it might be different. (Im not sure, whats your opinion?)

Would you use different classes for different orders, if so what classes for what orders?

What do you think about this?

tldr; What class would you use to make a hospitaller/templar?

ps. What domain/oath would you pick?

[Armored Walrus]

I'm pretty sure the Templars, etc. were the original inspiration for the paladin class. A "holy warrior". It was marketing the took the "holy" aspect away from them. You could go Knight subclass of Fighter with Acolyte background and RP that just fine, or Cleric with soldier background, or plain old fighter who is religious.

To answer your questions, I'd probably go Devotion Paladin if I were trying to make this type of character. Or vengeance if I wanted to play a more gritty and less romanticized version of how a Templar probably actually thought and behaved on crusade.

War cleric with soldier background I think would be fun as well.

[Rfkannen]

I'm pretty sure the Templars, etc. were the original inspiration for the paladin class. A "holy warrior". It was marketing the took the "holy" aspect away from them. You could go Knight subclass of Fighter with Acolyte background and RP that just fine, or Cleric with soldier background, or plain old fighter who is religious.

To answer your questions, I'd probably go Devotion Paladin if I were trying to make this type of character. Or vengeance if I wanted to play a more gritty and less romanticized version of how a Templar probably actually thought and behaved on crusade.

War cleric with soldier background I think would be fun as well.

That's seems like a good idea. Good way to do it!

I think I remember hearing something about hosoititals being called out as an example of clerics in basic before paladins existed but I could be wrong.

I would believe Templars were the inspiration but I always pictures them more like the knights of the round table or the peers of Charlemagne, both if which had a number of members more like a very big adventurers party than an army. I'm probably splitting hairs though.

[djreynolds]

Its not the greatest film but Kingdom Of Heaven had David Thewlis playing a Knight Hospitaller/ hospitaler and you easily accomplish this with the cleric class

And though it may seem underpowered, divine strike and BB/GFB (from magic initate or wherever) could be powerful

[T.G. Oskar]

That's seems like a good idea. Good way to do it!

I think I remember hearing something about hosoititals being called out as an example of clerics in basic before paladins existed but I could be wrong.

I would believe Templars were the inspiration but I always pictures them more like the knights of the round table or the peers of Charlemagne, both if which had a number of members more like a very big adventurers party than an army. I'm probably splitting hairs though.

Actually, if you go for AD&D 1st or 2nd editions, the Clerics were inspired by the Knights Templar and the Hospitallers; in essence, a pure religious-military order. The Paladins were inspired by the Twelve Peers, the Knights of the Round, and the knights-errant instead. It so happens that, as Paladins' spellcasting abilities became slightly more prominent, the idea that Paladins were the "champions of the gods" also became as prominent, hence stealing the spotlight from the Clerics-as-religious-military-warrior-priests. Add to it that AD&D 2nd Ed. spheres, D&D 3.x's Domains and currently 5th Ed.'s domains made it possible to have a healer priest, a cultist and so more, the idea of the war-priest clad in heavy armor as the ONLY representation of the Cleric diluted. The Druid was meant to be an alternative representation of the Priest in 1st and 2nd Editions (moreso in 2nd, where the Druid was essentially an alternate Cleric with different powers, and the DM was invited to create equivalent versions of Clerics that stripped the idea of a "war-priest" and made it something different), and it was grandfathered to this day, where it oddly overlaps with a Nature Domain Cleric as if they weren't in essence the same thing (they aren't, as the Druid is inspired on animism, shamanism, worshipping of Nature as a force and not a deity, actual Druids in a way, and being champions of nature instead of divinity).

So, it really depends. Both a Cleric and a Paladin can make a member of a religious-military order, but with modern thinking, you'd see the Cleric as a chaplain (spiritual guide for soldiers, as well as the one who invokes holy wrath), whereas the Paladin would be the soldier per-se. To accommodate both, though, you need to make the Paladin gain his powers as part of the order itself; by becoming part of the religious-military order, the Paladin must swear its Sacred Oath, therefore gaining its powers; loyalty to the Order would be an additional tenet they may need to add to their Oath. Or, alternatively, the Paladin simply happens to share the same goals, but its ordinance comes from a different source (think The Deeds of Paksenarrion as a whole):

Spoiler: Spoilers for the entire series

Show

Paks, after her battles in the Southern Lands, her adventures in the Elven ruins, and eventually her stint in Brewersbridge, discovers she has the possibility to become a paladin of Gird, one of the many gods of Good and one that espouses righteousness in battle, as well as training the lower classes to defend their lands. After the incident with the Iynisin, the dark elves, Paks becomes tainted by Achrya's evil and has to be purged from it, losing her courage along the way; that made her unsuitable to become a paladin by means of the Orders sponsored by Gird. That would be the first part: ordinance by means of a knightly order, or a religious-military order as it would.

However, after meeting again with the Kuakgannir and doing a spiritual journey with him, she realizes she's still gifted with the powers of a Paladin, except she has been ordained the old way - the god(s; Gird's not the only one who blesses her, as Falk and specifically the High Lord also do) directly ordains her with the powers of a Paladin, something thought of as either impossible, forgotten, or even wrong. This would be the way a Paladin is ordained usually in 5th Edition - the powers of Good take the oath from those they choose and bestow them with their powers.

Long story short - the church of Gird recognizes her as a Paladin, but she's not a Paladin of the church, but rather a Paladin by her own right; therefore, the church doesn't necessarily support her, but if she requires, she gets the aid. She still considers primarily a Girds(wo)man, but she doesn't have the sense of rivalry between churches, as the rivalry between the Girdsmen and the Falkians.

In short: a Paladin can be a member of a military-religious order, whether ordained by the order itself, or recognized as a fellow who shares the interests and has sworn allegiance to the order, but gains its powers from a different source. A Cleric of a war god, or of a religious-military order of a specific deity, tends to fit better, but both classes fit nonetheless.

Also, a small catch: a Fighter can also be a member of a military-religious order; the Fighter might be extremely devout to the order's tenets and whatnot, but doesn't have the deity's favor as a Cleric would, or the sponsorship of the powers of the Upper Planes (or Lower, YMMV) as the Paladin.

[Spore]

Fighters for bog standard grunts. Fighters with Magic Initiate for some blessed individuals. Paladins for one part of the leadership. War Cleric for the other parts. Maybe throw in a few Arcane/Light/Life Clerics for backup. At this point I feel the order and their god would just change the makeup of their order to fit tactical needs as most D&D powers are focussed around logistics and combat anyhow.

As for a character: Anything goes. Paladins always have this "I am the chosen one" flavor while Clerics are the "I have chosen this path for me". A Knight with holy blessings feels more like a "I have chosen to defend the values of this organisation but if you were to test my faith I don't think I'd hold up completey" or even the "I fight for this organization but I don't need to share their beliefs".

There is a lot to gain from the fluff of Paladins or Clerics but in the same time it regulates your RP somewhat. If you want to portray a different type of faithful follower, mundane classes offer a lot more creativity.

If you are a DM please don't have "stereotypical template holy warrior A" with fixed stats. Either don't have them have stats at all, or give the NAMED Npcs individuality.

[GlenSmash!]

I like that in 5e a Paladin's power is derived from an oath, rather than a god. This allows me to have quite a bit of differentiation between my paladins and my War Cleric, who is more of a Holy Warrior.

[Naanomi]

Fighter with the acolyte background?

[JackPhoenix]

I wouldn't limit it by class. While the common image of Knight Templar or Hospitaller is armored mounted warrior (or "knight"), both orders had a large number of non-combatants (in fact, more than actual soldiers).. Templars formed the precursor of modern banking system, Hospitallers cared for injured, sick and poor. Anyone can do those... the first would be great for bards or rogues, or anyone focused on intelligence and skills, the other for anyone proficient in Medicine. And even if you're specifically interested in combatants....

Barbarians can't wear heavy armor without penalties, but they are perfectly fine in medium armor, like half-plate. Here's your warrior, he's got the "holy fervor" part right, he gets so angry at unbelievers he gets combat bonuses!
(Valor) Bards are less limited by heavy armor, though they lack native proficiency. They are more of a leader types, but can hold their own in combat, and have access to healing. And they can nab Find Steed for one of the best mounted warriors in 5e
Clerics are obvious, with more focus on magic than combat.
Druids don't fit at all, mechanics or fluff-wise.
Fighters, sure... real knights were closer to fighters than clerics or paladins already
Monk, although they may protect pilgrims (or someone) from enemies while "undercover", they don't fit the image of knight
Paladin is a holy warrior, focused more on combat than cleric, but also capable of holy magic.
Rangers don't fit the image of a classic knight, and sadly can't get horse as a companion in 5e, but scouts are useful for any militant organisation.
Rogues fill the same function as rangers, even though their focus is more on espionage and urban enviroments. And those heretic cults won't infiltrate themselves, will they?
Sorcerers, warlocks & wizards are far from the image of classic knights, but in a fantasy setting, magic support is always useful on the battlefield. Wizards have easier time here, but honorable mention goes to Stone sorcerer (though no armor) for being more melee-focused (and access to smites) and Celestial warlock for not drawing their power from dubious sources.

In the end, all you really need is faith, conviction and willingness to work with others towards greater good.

[KorvinStarmast]

I'm pretty sure the Templars, etc. were the original inspiration for the paladin class. A "holy warrior". It was marketing the took the "holy" aspect away from them. You could go Knight subclass of Fighter with Acolyte background and RP that just fine, or Cleric with soldier background, or plain old fighter who is religious.

In part. The Knights Templar were knights dedicated to the Temple in Jerusalem ... The Knights Hospitaller were as much into the healing thing as anything else originally, and still survive to this day as Knights of Malta. (Templars got rounded up and Jacques DeMolay and others put to death by King of France). (PS, a great book on these two orders is called "Monks of War." I bought it before I took a trip to Malta, and am glad I did. )

Actually, if you go for AD&D 1st or 2nd editions, the Clerics were inspired by the Knights Templar and the Hospitallers; in essence, a pure religious-military order.

More OD&D than 1e for that, but I do recall an article by Gygax or one of the other early pioneers explaining how the Cleric in Men and Magic was an attempt to capture the "go to war cleric/knight" like the Knights Hospitaller. Might have been on dragonsfoot. *memory is shot*

The Paladins were inspired by the Twelve Peers, the Knights of the Round, and the knights-errant instead.

Yeah, and originally by Oiger the Dane/Holger Dansk in Poul Anderson's Three Hearts and Three Lions. (Oiger the dane being one of Charlemagne's paladins ...)

It so happens that, as Paladins' spell casting abilities became slightly more prominent, the idea that Paladins were the "champions of the gods" also became as prominent, hence stealing the spotlight from the Clerics-as-religious-military-warrior-priests.

Amen to that! That happened in 1e for sure, and as you point out even moreso later.

Note on Druids: they arose in Eldritch Wizardry (OD&D) as a sub class of Cleric that needed wisdom and charisma as min score stats, though originally they were an NPC/Monster in Greyhawk (p. 34) who spiritually led barbarians.

DRUIDS: These men are priests of a neutral-type religion, and as such they differ in armor class and hit dice, as well as in movement capability, and are combination clerics/magic-users. Magic-use ranges from 5th through 7th level, while clericism ranges from 7th through 9th level. Druids may change shape three times per day, once each to any reptile, bird and animal respectively, from size as small as a raven to as large as a small bear. They will generally (70%) be accompanied by numbers of barbaric followers (fighters), with a few higher-level leaders (2-5 fighters of 2nd-5th levels) and a body of normal men (20-50).

----

In short: a Paladin can be a member of a military-religious order, whether ordained by the order itself, or recognized as a fellow who shares the interests and has sworn allegiance to the order, but gains its powers from a different source. A Cleric of a war god, or of a religious-military order of a specific deity, tends to fit better, but both classes fit nonetheless.

Also, a small catch: a Fighter can also be a member of a military-religious order; the Fighter might be extremely devout to the order's tenets and whatnot, but doesn't have the deity's favor as a Cleric would, or the sponsorship of the powers of the Upper Planes (or Lower, YMMV) as the Paladin.

Well said, and all in all a GREAT post!

[Herobizkit]

From 3e lore, St Cuthbert had an order that was (almost?) exactly like the Templars, complete with three separate orders (including the Hospitalers).

To me, Paladins and Clerics are respectively FIGHTER/caster and fighter/CASTER, if that makes sense. In general terms, The Paladin is a Warrior first who is 'bred' to take the fight to Evil (pursing it aggressively); the Cleric is traditionally stay-put-at-the-fort type and tends the flock who have been wronged by Evil.

I think that only in the Forgotten Realms are there swaths of Paladins who hang out together. More traditionally, Paladins are the lone crusader for justice.