Talk:Dragonblooded (3.5e Class)
Rating[edit]
Power - 5/5 It balanced, really. It seem like the warlock but with more... warrior flavor. How the draconic powers progress is pretty perfect, not overpowered or useless. --Lord Dhazriel 16:16, 29 December 2008 (MST)
Wording - 5/5 Pretty much perfect. --Lord Dhazriel 16:16, 29 December 2008 (MST)
Formatting - 5/5 As the wording, I don't find any real flaw in the formatting. --Lord Dhazriel 16:16, 29 December 2008 (MST)
Flavor - 5/5 Pretty much the big strong point of the class, the draconic flavor is indeed welcome. Finally you can play a dragon-type character without blowing up your LA --Lord Dhazriel 16:16, 29 December 2008 (MST)
Rating[edit]
Power - 2/5 I give this class a 2 out of 5 because The mega flare seems kinda overpowered for its ability.... I mean doubles the damagage effectively... doubles the range.... and the only real down fall is waiting a turn and 5d8 NON-leathal..... from a d12 pool. Don't really have much of a problem aside from the high HD and the Megaflare ability its pretty much just dragonborn turned into a class.
--Newbie 22:14, 27 March 2009 (MDT)
Wording - 4/5 I give this class a 4> out of 5 because good wording followed everything nicely but wasn't nic picking at it. Pretty good.--Newbie 22:14, 27 March 2009 (MDT)
Formatting - 4/5 I give this class a 4out of 5 because Same as wording mostly. --Newbie 22:14, 27 March 2009 (MDT)
Flavor - 3/5 I give this class a 3out of 5 because Its more or less just the dragonborn template in class form. Interesting idea though. --Newbie 22:14, 27 March 2009 (MDT)
Rating[edit]
Power - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because it seems to be well balanced.
Wording - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because after it makes perfect sense and it had no grammatical errors.
Formatting - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because all the links appear to be in order, as well as the organization and charts.
Flavor - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because that is its strongest point. It's great for creating interesting characters and adding a new set of skills to a party.
Rating[edit]
Power - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because it seemed to be pretty well balanced
Wording - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because i can find no problems what so ever.
Formatting - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because i can't find anything wrong with the formatting
Flavor - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because it makes for interesting characters and brings a new set of skills and abilities to a party.
Rating[edit]
Power - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because it seems like a balanced progression. --Milo High-Hill 01:21, 24 September 2010 (MDT)
Wording - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because I think that the wording is perfect with how it gets it point across. And at no point did I get confused. --Milo High-Hill 01:21, 24 September 2010 (MDT)
Formatting - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because It's is friendly spaced out and seemingly exactly the same as a WotC class. --Milo High-Hill 01:21, 24 September 2010 (MDT)
Flavor - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because It was a great class in which the characters could become a dragon (without the horrid LA) and not be one of those many tasteless template granting classes. --Milo High-Hill 01:21, 24 September 2010 (MDT)
Featured Article Nomination[edit]
— This article did not become a featured article. --Green Dragon (talk) 14:17, 25 May 2013 (MDT)Please feel free to re-nominate it once it meets the FA criteria and when all the major issues brought up in this nomination have been dealt with.
Support: This is a great article that balanced, full of flavour, and formated perfectly. It has "So far" had 6 reviews with 5 of them giving a perfect 20. But it needs an image. If it is going to become a feature article then it must have an image. --Milo High-Hill 17:45, 12 January 2011 (MST)
Comment: This needs an example NPC. --Green Dragon 22:30, 23 February 2011 (MST)
- Still no example NPC or image. --Green Dragon (talk) 14:17, 25 May 2013 (MDT)
Comment: I like the class, but... its a Witchalok. --Salasay Δ 16:13, 21 April 2013 (MDT)
Rating[edit]
Power - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because it's a good, all-round class with mobility, muscle, sensory boosts, and good defenses. --Rhyvurg 19:08, 26 February 2011 (MST)
Wording - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because it's easy to follow. --Rhyvurg 19:08, 26 February 2011 (MST)
Formatting - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because it was laid out perfectly, very organized and in order. --Rhyvurg 19:08, 26 February 2011 (MST)
Flavor - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because while dragon-based classes are easy to add flavor to, since there's so much fluff on them already, it didn't feel cheesy or tired. --Rhyvurg 19:08, 26 February 2011 (MST)
Rating[edit]
Power - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because it eventually turns into a dragon!
Wording - 5/5 I give this page a 5 out of 5.
Formatting - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because the formatting is well organized.
Flavor - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because the fact that your character has draconic parentage can be played into an awesome storyline.
Rating[edit]
Power - <<<5>>>/5 I give this class a <<<5>>> out of 5 because <<<It has strong abilities as well as decent qualities.>>> --Darkheart12w 10:15, 21 June 2011 (MDT)
Wording - <<<4.5>>>/5 I give this class a <<<4.5>>> out of 5 because <<<It tells you about the heritage but not why it has become like this.>>> --Darkheart12w 10:15, 21 June 2011 (MDT)
Formatting - <<<5>>>/5 I give this class a <<<5>>> out of 5 because <<<It is cool.>>> --Darkheart12w 10:15, 21 June 2011 (MDT)
Flavor - <<<5>>>/5 I give this class a <<<5>>> out of 5 because <<<It is very interesting.>>> --Darkheart12w 10:15, 21 June 2011 (MDT)