Talk:Void Knight (3.5e Prestige Class)

Don't Remove

Means don't remove. The fluff sections exist for a reason. You don't have to fill them out now, but they need to stay. --TheWarforgedArtificer 18:33, 14 September 2009 (MDT)

Sorry, new at this, how do I put them back? Desril 18:43, 14 September 2009 (MDT)

I'll do it. But, in the future, if you try to remove something and you see that it keeps coming back, someone's probably trying to tell you something. Check the history for the main article. Two other things in addition; one, when making a post in a talk page, make sure to indent with one colon more than the previous comment(or just one colon if you are responding to the first comment). Two, sign your posts by puting four tildes ~~~~, which will generate your name and the time of posting. --TheWarforgedArtificer 18:40, 14 September 2009 (MDT)

Like this? And sorry, I thought the page was just being stubborn. Care to comment on/rate the class? Desril 18:42, 14 September 2009 (MDT)

Perfect, you learn quickly, that's good. However, you should still check the Page History or the Recent Changes, and you will see what was going on. Another thing, you also missed the (3.5e Prestige class) identifier tag in the pagename, but I already fixed that for you (as you'll see if you check the history).

EDIT: An added side note, the "ex-Void Knight" section is the only section that's actually optional, if your class has any special restrictions on gameplay, and if these are ever not met, the class losses some benefits or something, like a Paladin. If there is no way your class can become an "ex-class", go ahead and remove that section. --TheWarforgedArtificer 21:38, 14 September 2009 (MDT)

Rating

Power - 4/5 I give this class a 4 out of 5 because several of the abilities are powered beyond what they should be, with minor tweaking this class should be perfecty acceptable(mostly to the requirements) --66.148.156.58 13:19, 15 September 2009 (MDT)

Wording - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because the wording really gets the point across and is not confusing or overly complicated. --66.148.156.58 13:19, 15 September 2009 (MDT)

Formatting - 5/5 I give this class a 4 out of 5 because the formating in several areas could be improved with the use of italics for emphasis; otherwise excelent. --66.148.156.58 13:19, 15 September 2009 (MDT)

Flavor - 1/5 I give this class a 1 out of 5 because most of the class' current flavor comes from the very idea of a "void knight". The class currently has no lore which greatly takes away from the flavor of the class. Once this is fixed the class could easily net a 4 or 5 in the flavor category. --66.148.156.58 13:19, 15 September 2009 (MDT)

Rating

Power - 4/5 I give this class a 4 out of 5 because it is still somewhat too powerful, but nothing a little tweaking couldn't fix. --Desril 16:18, 16 September 2009 (MDT)

Wording - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because everything is worded well, and simple enough to understand. --Desril 16:18, 16 September 2009 (MDT)

Formatting - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because it follows the format guideline perfectly. --Desril 16:18, 16 September 2009 (MDT)

Flavor - 4/5 I give this class a 4 out of 5 because the concept is interesting, but the Lore could use a little more work. --Desril 16:18, 16 September 2009 (MDT)

Am I allowed to rate my own work? Desril 16:18, 16 September 2009 (MDT)

Rating

Power - 4.5/5 I give this class a 4 out of 5 because it is very powerful, but not entirely balanced. --Vexao 17:25, 21 September 2009 (MDT)

Wording - 4.5/5 I give this class a 4.5 out of 5 because it has good wording but there were one or two small things that were just off. --Vexao 17:25, 21 September 2009 (MDT)

Formatting - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because it had great format, was easy to understand, and contained more than enough info so that you didn't get lost trying to play it. --Vexao 17:25, 21 September 2009 (MDT)

Flavor - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because it provides and interesting game play option to the field and provides interesting ways to role play. --Vexao 17:25, 21 September 2009 (MDT)