Anyone who has ever played D&D surely knows of the holy avenger, the mighty magical sword whose true power manifests only in the hands of a paladin.

For purposes of a campaign to be set in the Forgotten Realms, I am attempting to ascertain where the notion of the paladin wielding a special sacred weapon first crossed into official Realms material. The Realms have experienced several in-narrative events created to coincide with, and explain, rules changes that came with each new edition of D&D -- the (first) Sundering, the Time of Troubles, etc. The functions of magic, and magic items, have often changed through these events. To understand how (or if) the holy avenger has changed in the Realms, I need to identify its starting point.

In case it helps, I trace the holy avenger back to early editions of D&D where it was presented as but one token of a broader type: the holy sword. The first printed appearance of the holy sword I can find is in Supplement 1: Greyhawk, which presented the holy sword as if it were a class feature part-and-parcel of the paladin:

Paladins with any form of "Holy Sword" are virtually immune to all magic (see MONSTERS & TREASURE, MAGIC & TREASURE, Swords).

(See p. 8.) Two kinds of holy sword were offered there, namely the holy sword +5 and the sword of sharpness. (See pp. 46-47.) In AD&D 1e, the DMG likewise described the holy avenger (technically named "Sword, +5, Holy Avenger") as "a holy sword." (See p. 165.) And the 1e PHB again treated the holy sword like a class feature, though without actually describing the properties of the weapon itself:

If a paladin has a "Holy Sword" (a special Magic Sword which your referee is aware of and will explain to you if the need arises), he or she projects a circle of power 1" in diameter when the Holy Sword is unsheathed and held; and this power dispels magic . . . at the level of magic use equal to the experience level of the paladin.

(p. 22; emphasis mine.) In 2e, the PHB (see pp. 27-28) did essentially the same. At least two 2e volumes specific to the Realms go on to mention holy avengers (though not holy swords):

  • Faiths & Avatars mentions holy avengers in reference both to characters with the Crusader kit (p. 184), and to the weapon carried by the avatar of Torm: "Duty's Bond, a massive two-handed holy avenger +5 with all the powers of a sun blade as well" (p. 163).

  • Warriors and Priests of the Realms mentions the holy avenger, but curiously only in reference to evil Crusader characters. (See p. 64.)

Both Faiths & Avatars and Warriors and Priests of the Realms show publication dates in 1996.

However, given that Faiths & Avatars couches its write-up of Torm in terms of his activity during the Time of Troubles, it is conceivable that an earlier-published Realms novel might have portrayed Torm in his mortal life as a paladin wielding Duty's Bond or some like weapon.

Are these the earliest-published references to holy avengers (or holy swords) in the Realms? Or is there an earlier origin, perhaps in 1e rulebooks or an early novel?

  • \$\begingroup\$ RE: "For purposes of a campaign to be set in the Forgotten Realms, I am attempting to ascertain where the notion of the paladin wielding a special sacred weapon first crossed into official Realms material." For the purposes of campaign-building it seems—to me, anyway—that it would be more valuable to know when such holy weapons appeared in Realms material by the material's date on Toril rather than by the material's date of publication in our world. Are you creating some kind of meta-campaign that sees PCs travel from edition to edition? \$\endgroup\$ Commented Jul 19, 2019 at 18:00
  • \$\begingroup\$ @HeyICanChan Eh. I get that later-published sources could've come along and retconned how weapons earlier in Toril's history worked. That'd be interesting to know, sure. But in my experience, trying to reconcile retconns like that would be a headache. I would rather understand how each edition conceptualized holy swords at the time, so I can build some kind of coherent narrative of how they changed and why. \$\endgroup\$
    – screamline
    Commented Jul 19, 2019 at 18:16
  • \$\begingroup\$ I think that the site's experts might find it interesting (and easier and more entertaining) to answer the straight-ahead question How have holy swords changed through editions? If that's the information that's actually needed, consider posing that question separately. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Jul 19, 2019 at 18:27
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ That's a shame. Honestly, I wish you hadn't self-censored as I think that's a much better question than this one—this one just has people CTRL-Fing through aging PDFs or pounding their heads on their desks trying to remember if the paladin in that one 1988 FR novel toted a holy avenger. That's also the kind of lore question that tends to attract a good deal of attention as lots of folks can participate by nitpicking. ;-) Please, reconsider posing it if that's the information you want. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Jul 19, 2019 at 18:36
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @screamline We’ve had similar questions about changes through all the editions, so that one would be fine I think. I think you should post it! \$\endgroup\$ Commented Jul 20, 2019 at 5:04

1 Answer 1


The holy avenger was officially part of the Forgotten Realms since the beginning.

The official beginning of the Realms in a game publishing sense1 starts in 1987 with the Forgotten Realms Campaign Set—the “Grey Box”—published for first edition AD&D. By that point the holy avenger was already an integral part of AD&D, appearing in the DMG (1979) on page 165.

Note that Supplement 1: Greyhawk is a 1975 supplement for the earlier, original D&D game (dubbed “original D&D” or “0e” (zero-e, oh-e)) published in a box of three stapled booklets in 1974. The holy avenger by any name was a well established part of the game before AD&D or the Forgotten Realms were even conceived of as publishing products at TSR.

The 1987 edition of the Realms predates the idea of AD&D edition changes and the accompanying cataclysms in the Realms. Those were later inventions by minds at TSR after Gygax had been forced out. This makes the holy avenger part of the baseline Realms from which every edition change and cataclysm later derived.

So for the purpose of tracing the origin of the type of magic sword, it’s integral to the Realms, and its AD&D description is the baseline version, before any Realms events that changed how magic works.

  1. A note on when official-ness applies to the Forgotten Realms. The origin of the Forgotten Realms predates D&D entirely, circa 1967, as it was an invention of Ed Greenwood’s childhood imagination before he encountered D&D. It’s not possible that anything derived directly from the D&D holy avenger was part of this pre-D&D conception of the Realms. Even when Greenwood was publishing his home game’s details in Dragon articles, it wasn’t “official” at that point even if his home game likely had a holy avenger at least in their rulebooks, as Greenwood’s articles were just a fan sharing his ideas and Dragon at that time often published fan/homebrew material that wasn’t endorsed as “official”. As Greenwood wrote more articles, the line between official and fan eventually blurred, to the point that TSR bought the Realms and published a novel and the Campaign Set in 1987. This answer uses that year as the most meaningful and clear beginning to the “official” Realms. The very first official publication was actually the novel Darkwalker on Moonshae, but only by a month since it was written in tandem with the official campaign set, so that doesn't impact the 1987 start-date.
  • \$\begingroup\$ Yikes, I hadn't grasped that Supplement 1: Greyhawk was actually 0e. Will it muck up your answer if I edit the question simply to remove the edition reference there, so as not to mislead readers? \$\endgroup\$
    – screamline
    Commented Jul 19, 2019 at 17:59
  • \$\begingroup\$ @screamline I'd leave it in if it was me asking, but I wouldn't object either if you take it out! \$\endgroup\$ Commented Jul 19, 2019 at 18:00
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Thanks. I'm mindful of readers who don't make it past reading the question being left with the wrong impression. \$\endgroup\$
    – screamline
    Commented Jul 19, 2019 at 18:02
  • \$\begingroup\$ @screamline Please leave it in, it provides a solid background to your question. \$\endgroup\$
    – ZwiQ
    Commented Jul 20, 2019 at 2:59

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .