Talk:Black Blooded (5e Class)

Incomplete stub was deleted due to not having any substance to what it was actually saying... If it was re-added with a better description so it can be addressed I will look into it.

Call to Action

I've seen this happen but this is so far the worst case: repeated tagging without explaining. The user is ignorant or stubborn the mistakes that exist. I haven't seen questions asked about black blood but it continually appeared in the stub. I too have fought for archetypes the wiki was against me that archetypes are not required. The user clearly mentions to discuss things, where's the harm in conversation instead of stub warring? or devil's advocate, where's the harm leaving the darn stub and learning what the issues are? What are talk pages for if people are just gonna vague summaries for their stubs? can we get some constructive cooperation going for this instead of...what it has been? Please? BigShotFancyMan (talk) 12:47, 19 November 2017 (MST)

I would like to point out that the stub currently on the page only mentions multiclassing prerequisites and proficiencies; archetypes are in fact not required but simply recommended strongly. I have yet to review the class in detail, but from the cursory glance I gave it, I can already tell that the grammar and game terminology on this page need much improvement.

On an unrelated note, perhaps this might be more appropriate as a sorcerer bloodline rather than a standalone class? — Geodude671 (talk | contribs | email)‎ . . 14:58, 19 November 2017 (MST)

While I generally agree with this sentiment (and have brought it up before), I don't think the stub template was unreasonable. While it was short, it explicitly names the (few) issues at play. And terminology can be checked against the glossary or index of the core rules for accuracy. I would like these issues to be addressed, and then Geodude can elaborate more if he still has issue.--GamerAim (talk) 15:50, 19 November 2017 (MST)

I've started going through the page and cleaning up the wording and terminology issues. Some specific things I'd like to point out:

• 5e doesn't have reflex, fortitude, or will saves; it instead has saving throws that use one of the six ability scores. Typically, an effect that would force a reflex save in 3.x would force a Dexterity saving throw in 5e. Similarly, a 3.x fortitude save would usually be a 5e Constitution save (but sometimes might be Strength), and a 3.x will save would usually be a 5e Wisdom save (but sometimes might be Intelligence or Charisma).
• Similarly, 5e doesn't have free actions, standard actions, move actions, etc. It has actions, bonus actions, and reactions, of which you usually get one each per round.

I also have some questions:

• What is the actual name of this class? It's mentioned in a few places as being "black blooded" (including the page title), but it's also mentioned as "black blood" and "black-blooded." This should be made consistent. I personally would like to see it changed to "blackblood" because I think it sounds cooler, but that's just me.
• Is the range of the ranged blood weapon attack supposed to be 10/20? That seems really short. It also didn't specify the size of the blood pool it creates. From the language used for the blood pool feature I'm assuming the intention is for it to make the same size of blood pool as a use of that class feature fueled with 5 HP? I'm not entirely sure, though.

I've revised up to the Bloody Movement feature, if anyone feels like picking up where I left off before I get around to it. From the glance I gave the class, it does seem mechanically sound, unique, and balanced (maybe even a tad underpowered). — Geodude671 (talk | contribs | email)‎ . . 22:01, 19 November 2017 (MST)

A Few of my Players Quite Like this class so, I'll give bringing it up to playability a try. I'm going to go ahead and make a few edits and remove the deletion tag. Feel Free to Inform me of any changes you recommend or additions to add. --Magician (talk) 02:24, 30 August 2021 (MDT)

Black Blood Review

Review Here

The class was marked for deletion so I went over it and added 3 Archetypes and redid some abilities, would like it to be looked over and see what you think. Leave any Comments or Change Suggestions You Have Here --Magician (talk) 05:28, 30 August 2021 (MDT)