Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Steampunkette" data-source="post: 8314537" data-attributes="member: 6796468">It's definitely something that is more a narrative choice of the DM than anything else.But.Canonically, the Sorcerer-Kings -can- strip away the powers of a Templar. In the 2e books it was specifically referenced as their Spellcasting abilities (Including any additional spellcasting power gained from a high Wisdom score). Back then, you'd still retain the rest of your class abilities (+2 to saves, Aura of Protection, Lay Hands, Etc) but you'd lose your spells.Which, honestly... would be a -really- cool twist for 5e. Have Warlocks and Paladins lose their spellcasting, but retain all other class features.And then have Oathbreakers regain their spellcasting in their -defiance- of the Sorcerer-Kings, which results in them losing their Noble Status and probably becoming a Hunted Criminal. That would be a heck of a way to go. While maybe Warlocks could try to find another source of power, like the Obsidian Oracle or a different Sorcerer-King.I also kind of love the idea of a Swords and Sorcery campaign where a Warlock Templar turns against their King, loses their spellcasting ability, but retains things like their Pact Tome, which lets them do -ritual- casting. Could even have NPC Spelless Templar Cultists as a big narrative thing in a campaign where one or more of the players are Templars going after the "Heretics" and wind up learning -why- they all turned against the King... maybe joining forces, maybe even losing their -own- spellcasting once the King finds out about their betrayal...... damn. Now I kinda wanna write that adventure/campaign...</blockquote>

Verification