Talk:Soul Chain Warrior (3.5e Class)

Rating

Power - 3/5 I give this class a 3 out of 5 because everything checked out as balanced for an intermediate class except the Base Attack Bonus (-1) and the Base Save Bonuses (-1), which I feel are overpowered. I'm honestly not a huge fan of odd fraction progression to begin with; it's more confusing than it's worth. I suggest reducing the BAB to 3/4 (as Cleric) and making Fortitude your good save. This will put your power level on par with the Soulknife, easily the Soulchain Warrior's closest well known relative ability-wise. --Zekage 11:02, 14 September 2011 (MDT)

Wording - 2/5 I give this class a 3 out of 5 because there are numerous instances where you either throw in something vaguely without any hard statistics for rules application ("or even attempt to throw them") or you word something I'm sure I've seen somewhere in an odd manner. This made it difficult for me to follow along while keeping a mental tally of what is balanced. Your best bet is to go through the original sourcebooks and see how they word stuff, then imitate. It may seem tedious, but believe me, when you're running a game and a player asks some annoying rules technicality question, you want to have an answer for them. --Zekage 11:02, 14 September 2011 (MDT)

Formatting - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because your tables are neat and easy to read with no noticeable flaws. No suggestions for improvement there. --Zekage 11:02, 14 September 2011 (MDT)

Flavor - 4/5 I give this class a 4 out of 5 because you missed a wonderful opportunity to plug deals with Kytons (Chain Devils) here as a possible source of the Soulchain Warrior's power. Also, I would personally drop the "Warrior" and call them Soulchains. When naming a base class, the simpler the better. --Zekage 11:02, 14 September 2011 (MDT)

Rating

Power - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because its almost a playable class varient of the Chain Devil --173.245.48.104 12:30, 10 November 2011 (MST)

First, useing the word almost in a rating denotes it isn't perfect(5/5). Second, your rating has nothing to do with the power level of the class. --Ganre 06:42, 21 November 2011 (MST)

Wording - 4.5/5 I give this class a 4.5 out of 5 because it was well written, though a bit wordy at times --173.245.48.104 12:30, 10 November 2011 (MST)

Formatting - 4.86/5 I give this class a 4.86 out of 5 because of uniqueness --173.245.48.104 12:30, 10 November 2011 (MST)

This rating has nothing to do with the formatting of the article.--Ganre 06:42, 21 November 2011 (MST)

Flavor - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because this is a neat idea and shows that great time and effort went from the author's imagination to the page. --173.245.48.104 12:30, 10 November 2011 (MST)