Talk:Death Knight (3.5e Class)

From D&D Wiki

Jump to: navigation, search

Just for speak ( EDIT: hotfix)[edit]

I do not want to raise controversy or the like.

but considering that the class is most likely taken from wow. nobody thought that at least one "summon mount Acherus Deathcharger" could go along well?

as for fighting on horseback, however, serve a wide range of talents that dk has not as easily as a warrior, would not give an undue advantage in combat. complement more class in my opinion, although it may simply revive a dead horse ... at level 8 , a bit too far for a proper horse...

EDIT : Correction: -given a description of Shadowmeld, I corrected the table (indicated twice as many uses)

                  -Deathshroud is now , as the description say , based on yours profanity bonus .

Verx 10:31, 22 August 2014 (MDT)

A Base Class? 1.5/5[edit]

I'm sorry. Not saying this wasn't well done. It was. Ignore the rating on that one, because it is unrelated. No. In total is scored a 1.5 over all. 5/5 on inginuity. But big negitives because it is a Base Class. Two lines from the opening description can be used in case.

-"The first deathknight was made in a pact between a powerful lich and a bitter ex-paladin. The ex-paladin swore his life to death and the undead and in return received profane powers from the lich."
-"Mercenaries devoted strongly enough to a life of war that they carry on in death their endless campaign of destruction"

Both of these make it sound out to immediately should be a Prestige Class. I mean, originally, the Death Knight is a monster, not meant to be used at all as a playable race/class. Just because World of Warcraft is doing it, doesn't mean D&D does too.

All that aside. From an unbiased position, you did a great job on balancing it out and making it a unique class.

-- Zero Beat 3:00 p.m. Oct 7, 2008

Formatting - Table[edit]

I'm having trouble with the Table. It keeps on moving itself to the bottom, no matter what I do. I really just copied the SRD Druid table and edited it to match this Class. Anyone know what's going on? --Pz.Az.04Maus 16:14, 9 July 2006 (MDT)

Now it always appears above the Profanities Table. This is getting extremely irratating, since it would confuse the hell out of people. This is really pissing me off... --Pz.Az.04Maus 16:41, 9 July 2006 (MDT)
 :/ Well, this helps. --Pz.Az.04Maus 12:50, 10 July 2006 (MDT)

Balance - 6/10[edit]

I Really Really like the idea of this class, and I think you did a magnificent job typing it up, I however do have a few issues with some of the abilities.

The Attack boosting Profanity gives a bonus to your base attack bonus, and this should never happen, instead make it a profone bonus to say attack rolls, that should stop that particular ability from being broken and still give you a bonus to hit. The Nether Blast can be channeled through a weapon is a slight issue for me, but I think it will be fine since it can only be used every five round, Might I suggest you change the duration from waiting 4 rounds to every 5 rounds, as every 5 rounds is a bit easier to understand.

The Other thing I have an issue is with Deaththralls, you can get a follower of anything you killed, this just shouts out RULE ABUSE to me, You Kill a level 20 wizard, oh look 20 hd, I reanimate him and I got a level 20 wizard following me around. If you really want to keep this ability I suggest turning it into mindless undead, that why many issues that could arise will not have to be dealt with.

Even though I just probably criticized half the class I really do like this class, it just needs to be less powerful. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Linkrulesx10 (talkcontribs) 21:28, 13 April 2007 (MDT). Please sign your posts.

Would you like/mind to fix the problems you mentioned above? --Green Dragon 21:18, 15 April 2007 (MDT)
No I would not mind, but then someone else will need to rate the class as I can no longer be unbiased :P
Well I made some changes taking my suggestions into account, Also I have a qquestion about the ability that prevents you from dying, what level does the death knight gain this ability, if this ability isn't in the level charts should I get rid of it, or add it, if I do add it I will be making it once a day Linkrulesx10 08:48, 16 April 2007 (MDT)
The ability that does not show up on the table is Revenant. Anyway, I would add it in and balance it—however it is your call. I think I would make it added at 20th level as it is very very powerful... --Green Dragon 09:52, 16 April 2007 (MDT)

Problems about Reverent[edit]

I have edited Reverent, although I still feel it may be a it over powered, Also can I get some suggestions on nether blast, is it to powerful an ability or just fine the way it is? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Linkrulesx10 (talkcontribs) 21:20, 21 April 2007 (MDT). Please sign your posts.

About Reverent. I think it is still overpowered as anything that enables one to live past −10 is overpowered. I would recommend making it so they can live longer as if empowered by their deity and then they die, even if they heal. I think that this ability should just make them live longer but still make them die in the end. Just my thoughts. Also the class features of this class should be organized by when they get the class feature not randomly... --Green Dragon 12:47, 22 April 2007 (MDT)
So I guess it has then fallen to my shoulders to re edit the class then, well I won't do it now as it is time for me to head off to bed but I shall add in your suggestion, the only issue I have is with editing this class is that I am chanigng someone else's work, but I guess I shall have to get over that if I want to enjoy myself here huh? (Dammit forgot to sign my last post... sorry) Linkrulesx10 06:13, 23 April 2007 (MDT)
Don't worry about this class if you do not want to, please do not feel pressured to edit this. Also, as long as you keep the original idea in mind, editing someone else's work is no problem here. If this user wanted their work locked they should have asked for Template:Locked Page to be present, and they did not. Finally people make mistakes, and I think having many people looking over and helping the original authors idea only makes it better—not worse. --Green Dragon 19:29, 23 April 2007 (MDT)
Well I am slowly starting on organising this class I will only be doing it 10 - 15 minute increments cause I am fairly busy with other things in my life, but I should have this done by the same time next week. Linkrulesx10 06:08, 25 April 2007 (MDT)

Review[edit]

It's hard for me to rate the class, because its not really like an existing class so I would need to playtest it. I don't see any glaring errors, though, it looks okay. Actually, I think it is even on the weak side, because it is supposed to be a melee class but it does not have a full BAB. What I do like about the class is the flavor. It is the first class I saw on this board that is cool and unique.

There are some minor things I would change.

  1. I'd rather like to see the special abilities toned down in exchange for a full BAB. One could reduce Netherblast damage.
  2. I wouldn't hand out all profanities at first level, instead, they should be gained one after another, like the auras of a Marshall.
  3. Death Thralls should be explicitely stated as using Animate Dead as a spell-like ability once per day.
  4. I don't quite get the Death Knight code. If he worships Death, why does he accept undead? Aren't undead cheating death?
  5. Wraithshift: If this one is just granting a flight speed, why is the description so complicated?
  6. I really don't get the "only bone armor" restriction. So all I have to do is attach that little metal skull to any armor I wear and I'm done? So simple. If you ask me, just remove that part. Most players will give their Death Knight stylish armor anyway, there is no need to force this.

--Mkill 06:46, 14 June 2007 (MDT)

If you would like to edit this, go ahead.... The author is not really present here anymore. --Green Dragon 12:02, 14 June 2007 (MDT)
I implemented #2, #3, #5 and #6. The class much easier to understand and a bit more balanced now.
As for #1 and #4, I'm not sure how to change these without changing too much of the basic concept. --Mkill 00:28, 18 July 2007 (MDT)

Revised Death Knight Code[edit]

1. The First Allegiance is to Death, not Life.

The Death Knight forsakes everything that binds him to Life, his desires, his feelings, his loved ones. He exists only to serve death.
He must protect sites where the dead are laid to rest, and he must ensure that all slain allies and enemies receive proper rites for their passage to the afterlife.
Only death itself decides when to take a life, and it is not for mortals to question this decision. All magic that brings the dead back to life is forbidden, and the Death Knight may neither use it himself nor accept anyone else using it.

2. The Second Allegiance is to Death, not Undeath.

The Undead try to cheat the natural cycle of life, and the Death Knight must use every available means to stop them and restore natural order. He must fight everyone who tries to create undead or uses them to gain power.

3. The Third Allegiance is to Death, as its Honour lasts for all of Eternity.

The third allegiance demands that a deathknight be honorable. In this, his word is his bond, once sworn he shall uphold it so long as his trust is not broken. His word is to stand forever, like death itself.
Deathknights are expected to repay kindness with kindness and insult with vengeance.

Rating - 8/10[edit]

I can't honestly find any problems with this class, though it seems vaguely unbalanced somehow (hence the eight). But I LOVE the concept and it really does look like a viable class to play. Maybe I'll throw a Death Knight or two into my next campaign. --The Archivist 08:02, 20 September 2007 (MDT)

Rating - 8/10[edit]

Excellent mix of a cleric , marshal, paladin. This could be worthty of a core book entry. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.75.58.12 (talkcontribs) 11:13, 8 December 2007 (MST). Please sign your posts.

This rating has been nullified with the implementation of the new Rating System. --Green Dragon 15:07, 20 February 2008 (MST)

Thoughts[edit]

I don't see how or why a core druid would tolerate a deathknight.

Given the strong structure and supernatural nature of the class, I could see this as a prestige class. As a core class it would need some kind of support system (much as a monk is expected to come from a monastery).

Roszlishan 11:40, 8 December 2007 (MST)

Rating - 8/10[edit]

I give this Prestige Class a 10/10 because I can't find anything over powered With this class. Perhaps the Lawful Neutral code should be the option and have it better explain why the DK is allowed to use some of its powers. 24.74.76.196 14:42, 3 February 2008 (MST)

Amendum: Rater's comment stands out as comparing it to a core entry, which is an 8 not a 10. A 10 is above and beyond. --Green Dragon 16:23, 3 February 2008 (MST)
This rating has been nullified with the implementation of the new Rating System. --Green Dragon 15:07, 20 February 2008 (MST)

Revised Code for LN[edit]

here can be a revised Death Knight code for a Lawful Neutral Death Knight. A paladin of Kelemvor.

Death Knight Code: LN

1. The First Allegiance is to Death, not Life.

The Death Knight forsakes everything that binds him to Life, his desires, his feelings, his loved ones. He exists only to serve death. He must protect sites where the dead are laid to rest, and he must ensure that all slain allies and enemies receive proper rites for their passage to the afterlife. Only death itself decides when to take a life, and it is not for mortals to question this decision. Magic that brings the dead back to life is forbidden, and the Death Knight may neither use it himself nor accept the use of it for himself. Only direct divine intervention can bring a Death Knight back to life (Wish or Miracle spell). Only divine mandate should dictate if the Death Knight should live past his/her due time.

2. The Second Allegiance is to Death, not Undeath.

The Undead try to cheat the natural cycle of life, and the Death Knight must use every available means to stop them and restore natural order.

3. The Third Allegiance is to Honor for all of Eternity.

The third allegiance demands that a Death Knight be honorable. In this, his word is his bond, once sworn he shall uphold it so long as his trust is not broken. His word is to stand forever, like death itself. Death Knights are expected to repay kindness with kindness and insult with vengeance. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.74.76.196 (talkcontribs) 14:42, 3 February 2008 (MST). Please sign your posts.

I have added it. --Green Dragon 16:23, 3 February 2008 (MST)
Doesn't #2 kinda conflict with the fact that he creates undead, rebukes undead, and possibly becomes undead himself? Neutral Death Knights should probably turn undead, and the other two abilities should be swapped.71.187.116.32 20:17, 17 February 2008 (MST)
Feel free to change it. --Green Dragon 02:32, 18 February 2008 (MST)

More Profanities![edit]

We need to expand the list! Anyone have any Ideas? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.132.204.238 (talkcontribs) 14:38, 7 February 2008 (MST). Please sign your posts.

Rating - 3/10[edit]

I give this Prestige Class a 3/10 because I don't know what the people that voted 8/10 for this where smoking, but this class is stupidly overpowered, i mean they can deliver a stupid amount of damage, just from being hit, and i mean 4 at 1st level, like 8 by level 5, that is more damage than some characters could do with a hit, no offense dude, i love the idea, but it needs some serious balancing, most of all, loose that one power that kills equal powered characters without lifting a hand! Zombiecow 00:24, 14 February 2008 (MST)

dude what are you talking about?
Thats no different than a spell. Read the profanities description. I guess you are talking about 4 dmg at first level from the "death armor". That's actually one of the weaker ones why do I say this? Because harmful effect of the profanities can be negated completely by a simple fortitude save and monsters and such that are in melee range generally have a high fortitude save so that effect wouldn't proc as much as you think.
I've play tested this class to know and as levels progress it gets even more useless as your save DC doesn't keep up for fortitude save bonuses but even so how do you figure that 4 dmg at lvl 1 is a high amount of dmg? Compared to what? I human barbarian with an 16 strength wielding a great axe does much more damage than that (1d12+4 or 1d12+7 in rage). So how is 4 dmg that can be negated equal a stupid amount of damage?
And since such damage is ALL negative energy damage then it is useless vs undead. If a player can't do 8 damage by 5th level then they are either a mage in melee or a pretty sucky character.
By 5th level that "death armor" wouldn't be much of a factor. Do the math here.
considering equal stats
a 5th lvl fighter with a 16 con has a fort save of +7 without and buffs or magic items..... a 5th lvl death knight's "death armor" at a 16 CHA would be a DC of 15. So this means that :a 5th level fighter would need to roll an 8 or higher to make the save and completely negate this damage. I don't see whats your beef about that? Besides this profanity helps the whole party (every ally within 60 ft)
You would give it a "3/10" just because of one ability that is rather weak?
Ok barring that ability...
Any more problems you have with it? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.74.76.196 (talkcontribs) 21:21, 17 February 2008 (MST). Please sign your posts.
It's a stupid amount of damage because yes, a barbarian might do more damage than the profanity, but that profanity happens if the knight gets hit, the knight also gets an attack, just like a fighter, and the fact it helps the whole party just makes it more over powered.
and I quote "just because of one ability that is rather weak?" how is that weak?, there is no spell that can deal that sort of damage as a constant short of some crazy 8th lv spells, no certain amount of time a day, no actually having to do anything but "get hit" what dose a fighter have to equal that oh "bonus feat" he might get +4 initiative, a chance to go first and loose a friendly hunk of his hp before the knight has even had his turn. and a barbarian "rage" it gives him a tad more hp and strength for a short amount of time once a day? how is a constant special that deals damage for people attacking them and all there allies.
anyway to answer the last question, besides that special there not too bad, a sturdy five to six out of ten for me and I'm a hard ass on those whom make over powered classes. I say, ditch that ability and they would be alot more balanced, the thing you have to realize, is when you make an ability that dose damage, compare it to other classes and ask yourself, is there level equivalent fairly balanced to mine?, but yea, besides that I like it.
This rating has been nullified with the implementation of the new Rating System. --Green Dragon 15:07, 20 February 2008 (MST)
but consider what i said earlier....its weak not because of the damage it does..but because of game mechanics. Generally anything that is doing melee damage has a high fortitude save. That damage is negated with a successful fort save.
consider what i said earlier about how easy it would be for a melee class or monster to negate this damage. Against a melee fighter there is about an average of an 35% chance of the damage taking effect. The fact that it effects all allies makes it somewhat useful, otherwise it would be almost completely useless. Play test it and see for yourself.
You would get frustrated at how many times opponents make their saves vs this.
At earlier levels it might get something a few times but as levels progress that ability becomes close to useless as fort save mods go up higher than the death knight's DC does. This is because most things that do melee damage either have high fort saves, or are constructs (immune to negative energy) or undead (healed by negative energy). relying on this ability to save the day is akin to relying on a critical from a greataxe to save the day, but I do see your point concerning the potential to constantly do that amount by just being hit constantly. Its just I don't see it being that much of a threat to a fighter of equal level. This is why I wouldn't even bother with it until it was the last profanity left and probably wouldn't use it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 12:54, 24 February 2008 (talkcontribs) 69.132.204.238 (MST). Please sign your posts.

Rating - 8/10[edit]

I give this Prestige Class a 8/10 because as far as the LN code and undead, remember what the core of the class is opposing. Its not opposing undead as much as it is opposing those that try to cheat death. That being said, Skeletons and Zombies (what the DK creates) are not technically cheating death. Those two are more like constructs powered by necromatic energy rather than living beings trying to cheat death. When a person tries to cheat death threw undeath they go for undead with an intelligence score. So in that regards....Skeleton = OK ....Lich = KILL. Even as far as rebuking undead and controlling them. Im sure that Kelemvor wouldn't have a problem with one of his Knights controling a vampire and using it to help kill off all the vampire's spawn before finally destroying the vampire itself...thus rebuke undead is much more effective than turning. 69.132.204.238 21:47, 18 February 2008 (MST)

This rating has been nullified with the implementation of the new Rating System. --Green Dragon 15:07, 20 February 2008 (MST)

Rating - 12/20[edit]

Power - 1/5 I give this class a 1/5 because It is very over powered in more than one aspect.

Wording - 4/5 I give this class a 4/5 because it is quite well written.

Formatting - 3/5 I give this class a 3/5 because It is well set up as a page, but not necessarily as a class.

Flavor - 4/5 I give this class a 4/5 because I like the idea, but it needs to be seriously re-balanced.

Zombiecow 01:47, 21 February 2008 (MST)

Rating[edit]

Power - 4/5 I give this class a 4/5 because it is an excellent blend of support, offense, and some defensive options. I feel that the raise dead ability is too limited and perhaps needs to be the same as the spell as an spell like ability. 69.132.204.238 13:27, 24 February 2008 (MST)

Power rating removed since this is a highly disputed area of this class, and, because it is so highly disputed, an IP does not have a say. --Green Dragon 21:01, 24 February 2008 (MST)

Wording - 4/5 I give this class a 4/5 because it is very well written although perhaps some dialog on the LN code should be added 69.132.204.238 13:27, 24 February 2008 (MST)

Formatting - 4/5 I give this class a 4/5 because barring more explanation of the LN code, I could see this class and its wording in one of the DnD books 69.132.204.238 13:27, 24 February 2008 (MST)

Formatting rating removed as it does not pertain to formatting. --Green Dragon 21:01, 24 February 2008 (MST)

Flavor - 5/5 I give this class a 5/5 because being a big fan of WoW, this class got my attention and would be cool to play in a DnD setting. 69.132.204.238 13:27, 24 February 2008 (MST)

Idea[edit]

What if you added a health cost so some fo the abilities? Say 1/4 of total health for Wraith, and 1/2 for thrall? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 65.78.71.80 (talkcontribs) 11:48, 9 June 2008 (MDT). Please sign your posts.

It may help the balance of the class. I would say go ahead and add it. --Green Dragon 21:44, 9 June 2008 (MDT

Sword Wraith -- Nice Touch![edit]

Speaking as someone who spent a lot of his weekend adding Frank and K material to the Wiki, I'me very gratified someone thought enough of the Sword Wraith to make an option for the Death Knight. Though I have to say, the Revenant might be more appropriate for a Knight who was killed before he could fulfill an oath...Genowhirl 22:11, 16 November 2008 (MST)

Now that I've had time to take a look at it...the class is just waaay too busy. The ability boosts, for example, are too much. And...spell immunity? Sorry, that's just way out there. Netherblast is waaaaay too powerful--if it were cut to 1d6/every 2 class levels and DIDN'T inflict negative levels, I'd be looking at it more seriously. I haven't take a look at the profanities yet. Also, learn this DC formula for general use: 10 + 1/2 character level + Mod. It's proven, it works, it's good enough to happen often without being too powerful that people can't pass it. Likewise, why do you have a Death *Knight* who doesn't get Full BAB? Personally, a lot of these abilities, I don't associate with Death Knights. There seems to be no coherent theme to the class, other than Evil/Negativity. Back to basics, man--Control undead and burn people!Genowhirl 22:33, 16 November 2008 (MST)
Someone thought it'd be nice to add Power Word Kill, instant undeath, and other stuff to an already schizophrenic class. -- Genowhirl 20:51, 20 November 2008 (MST)
This was a great class, but now it appears someone came in and shot it up with steroids. I liked the balance and abilities before, but there's just so much that has been screwed up (like d10 for Neatherblast!!??!?) Luckly i have some of the info saved to my computer, but whoever broke this you ruined a perfectly good class. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.132.173.69 (talkcontribs) 11:53, 24 November 2008 (MDT). Please sign your posts.
Should we revert this page to this revision? Or is it still bad their as well? --Green Dragon 15:03, 24 November 2008 (MST)
YES! I still don't like the flavor given to the class itself, but I'll concede that that's a lot closer to balanced than this current mess. Genowhirl 11:10, 25 November 2008 (MST)
Okay, I reverted it. --Green Dragon 13:28, 25 November 2008 (MST)

Rating[edit]

Power - 3/5 I give this class a 3 out of 5 because the bonuses given by the Profanities are very powerful, while the other abilities are moderately powerful. --138.251.244.152 18:42, 11 November 2009 (MST)

Wording - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because the wording was precise and flavorful, without any spelling or grammatical mistakes. --138.251.244.152 18:42, 11 November 2009 (MST)

Formatting - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because I love Death Knights ^^. Not really. I gave it a 5/5 because it is a nice class, with just enough power, with a great deal of flavor, and it looks like it would be great fun to play. --138.251.244.152 18:42, 11 November 2009 (MST)

Flavor - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because the flavor was as excellent as I could hope for for a Death Knight base class. This class looks like it would be great to play. --138.251.244.152 18:42, 11 November 2009 (MST)

Rating[edit]

Power - 1/5 I give this class a 1 out of 5 because it is WAY overpowered, this would make up for needing most of a party, all by him or herself. Cut the powers in a fourth I would guess, drop one of the good saves. Model it off of the fighter. --63.76.14.67 18:19, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Wording - 3/5 I give this class a 3 out of 5 because it is written fine and easy to read. --63.76.14.67 18:19, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Formatting - 3/5 I give this class a 3 out of 5 because the formatting is fine. --63.76.14.67 18:19, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Flavor - 4/5 I give this class a 4 out of 5 because the flavor text is good and the concept is thought out. --63.76.14.67 18:19, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Rating[edit]

Power - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because it has very powerful abilities and a great varity in spell and melee combat --195.254.168.248 05:07, 3 May 2011 (MDT)

Wording - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because the description for every special attack or ability has a description and in generel there is alot of information which is very helpfull and precise about the class. i love the information (like the notes and the code), kep up the VERY good work! --195.254.168.248 05:07, 3 May 2011 (MDT)

Formatting - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because standars completely live up to my expectations. --195.254.168.248 05:07, 3 May 2011 (MDT)

Flavor - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because the elements added in this clas is very creative and new-thinking. wonderfull elements of honor and codes combined with evil and death are mixed together in a cocktail of a very intersting class! --195.254.168.248 05:07, 3 May 2011 (MDT)

Rating[edit]

Power - <<<2>>>/5 I give this class a <<<2>>> out of 5 because <<<it is so ridiculously overpowered.>>> --173.245.55.230 08:05, 2 August 2011 (MDT)

Wording - <<<5>>>/5 I give this class a <<<5>>> out of 5 because <<<Very clear>>> --173.245.55.230 08:05, 2 August 2011 (MDT)

Formatting - <<<Insert Your Rating Here>>>/5 I give this class a <<<Insert Your Rating Here>>> out of 5 because <<<insert why you gave the rating and how to improve it>>> --173.245.55.230 08:05, 2 August 2011 (MDT)

Flavor - <<<5>>>/5 I give this class a <<<5>>> out of 5 because <<<Its unique, well thought out, and original>>> --173.245.55.230 08:05, 2 August 2011 (MDT)

Rating[edit]

Rating[edit]

Power - 4/5 I give this class a 4 out of 5 because I feel that thematically and mechanically the Dark Knight class compares to a mix of Warlock and Fighter. The Death Knight's Profane Auras feel very similar to the Warlock's 'passive' Invocations. Netherblast is much like Eldritch Blast, but the DK cannot use his Netherblast every round. Death Knight to me feels like a middle ground between Warlock and Fighter, much like Paladins are kind of a mix of Fighter and Cleric, and Rangers Fighter/Druid. It does not get a perfect five because I can see how it could be considered overpowered in normal DnD in comparison to other base classes. But I play Pathfinder, where lacking classes were made to be a bit better. Death Knight fits in with power level just fine there. --VK 13:01, 20 January 2012 (MST)

Wording - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because The article is very well written, down to the point of including bits of flavor text that help to make features and abilities stand out. --VK 13:01, 20 January 2012 (MST)

Formatting - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because It is very well organized. I have some classes and such saved in TXT files that I copied from some other sites. Looking through one last night I found myself absentmindedly cleaning up the formatting, adding indents, correcting misspellings and grammar. I have not found anything that triggers my "Must Fix!" reflex. --VK 13:01, 20 January 2012 (MST)

Flavor - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because The class works very well thematically, the aspects of its differing abilities easily bind together in a way that lets the class fill a niche in the game that I've been trying to fill for quite some time. Everything makes sense with this class. --VK 13:01, 20 January 2012 (MST)

Reversion Due to Alteration[edit]

Not quite sure what's going on here, if he was wanting to copy over some formatting for his own class or what but Thamior478 made a bit of a mess cutting out a majority of the content and altering the class's ability table.

I don't know his intent, as he didn't put anything on the talk page. So I went and reverted the article to the January 21 version of the class. --VK 12:49, 27 February 2012 (MST)


Rating[edit]

Power - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because at level one, with a greatsword, each attack rolls 4d6. --Pieratemaster (talk) 15:11, 30 May 2012 (MDT)

Wording - 4/5 I give this class a 4 out of 5 because it is easily read --Pieratemaster (talk) 15:11, 30 May 2012 (MDT)

Formatting - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because it uses text boxes --Pieratemaster (talk) 15:11, 30 May 2012 (MDT)

Flavor - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because scaryscary --Pieratemaster (talk) 15:11, 30 May 2012 (MDT)


I think that "power" needs to be renamed "balance" in the ratings system, because people don't seem to understand it. Marasmusine (talk) 15:40, 30 May 2012 (MDT)

Rating[edit]

Balance - 4/5 I give this class a 4 out of 5 because As powerful as this class is at early levels, it continues its melee prowess with interwoven magical abilities keeping it multidimensional with the other classes. --174.66.166.110 13:34, 31 January 2014 (MST)

Wording - 3/5 I give this class a 3 out of 5 because --174.66.166.110 13:34, 31 January 2014 (MST)

Formatting - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because --174.66.166.110 13:34, 31 January 2014 (MST)

Flavor - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because --174.66.166.110 13:34, 31 January 2014 (MST)

Possible Flaw[edit]

Something I have noticed while playing this class in the Lawful and Neutral Doctrine.

A lot of the Death Knights abilities do negative energy damage. Lawful and Neutral Death Knights want to stomp out undead. Negative energy damage heals undead (as far as I know).

So unless I'm missing something here this kinda makes the Lawful and Neutral Death Knights unable to perform their doctrine to their full power. I'm still quite new to D&D so I'm not sure what exactly could be done to fix it or if I'm missing some rule (in which case please educate me on it)

Otherwise I'm really really enjoying this class.

Home of user-generated,
homebrew pages!


Advertisements: