Valdrax, thanks for the detailed reply (and the Form).
I would describe this "Knight" class as half Non-Magical Emotion Manipulator, half Strategist, with the rare bit of Melee Multiattacker and Minion Master. Faster-than-Human Movement not so much because none of the powers rely on having a horse.
Valdrax said:
Powers rely on equipment which cannot be used in extremely common adventuring environments.
Valdrax said:
Reliance on horses to close the range to provide control against distant enemies when horses cannot be used in many dungeons or other similar environments. It's an innovative idea, but deeply flawed. After all, there's a reason that they're taking away the mount from the Paladin.
Actually, none of the powers rely on a horse, minions, nor any other rare piece of equipment. I designed "Cataphract" so that it only enhanced existing powers, representing the horse making the knight better at controlling the battlefield (something his powers already allow him to do). IOW, the horse is just a bonus, not a necessity.
Valdrax said:
Powers rely on severe suspension of disbelief about monster / NPC behavior.
I dunno, Intimidate can change an NPC's behavior, so why can't a power? How is it that far-fetched that a power using a Charisma vs. Will test might prevent an enemy from taking a Second Wind? After all, if brave Thragor (high Wis, Iron Will feat) fails his Will save, he fails his Will save.
Valdrax said:
Concept may be required to put itself in harm's way too much, leading either to quick death or to stepping on the Defender's toes.
Good point. The Knight's Regal Aura requires him to be within a couple of squares (1/2 level + Cha) of the enemy. Fortunately, he is probably wearing heavy armor, has the HP/healing surges of a Cleric, and has a handful of ranged powers (the "Test" powers, Noble's Challenge, Onslaught). But you're right, the Knight cannot wade into battle and expect to tank like a Fighter or Paladin; he must rely on careful planning, Declare Arena, and his allies in order to avoid getting pummeled.
Valdrax said:
Powers are prone to absurd, game-breaking results.
Could you elaborate?
Valdrax said:
Reliance on minions may make the class take up an unfair amount of time at the table by making it a "party of one."
Valdrax said:
The horse and, worse, the minions may grant the class too many actions, making it a "party of one" that could render the rest of the party irrelevant (and bored during the class's turns). Until we see how WotC resolves the familiar / companion issues, I'd hesitate to give minions as a class feature. (Also, how are they replaced if/when they fall?)
Good point. I still am unsure of the best way to implement minions (if at all).
Valdrax said:
Use of non-magical mind-control that takes control of enemies firmly out of the hands of the DM / their players and which produces effects that are completely out of proportion with non-magical abilities.
On the contrary, none of the non-magical mind-control powers take control of enemies.
Regal Aura: Frightening Presence only works on minions. It's glorified intimidation.
Regal Aura: Sunder Morale prevents targets from taking Second Wind. The idea is the targets can't regroup because they lack the desire/will to throw everything they have into the fight with that intimidating noble warrior before them. No control is lost, and the inability to take Second Wind isn't a devastating loss.
Test of Grace/Honor/Mettle rely on the 4e design principle that HPs are both physical wounds and morale. These powers lower the targets morale (HP), but don't take away control of their actions. PC/NPC can still attack the Knight using Test of Grace, but since they lost the Charisma vs. Will test, they will pay for it and may think twice. But the whole point of these powers is that it's a tough choice which is left up to the NPC/PC targetted.
Noble's Challenge is similar, the damage reflecting loss of morale in the target because they've lost face, and the damage to minions reflects their resulting loss of morale because of their leader's cowardice. In my view, the problem with this one is that not all enemies will have this sense of honor and might just ignore the Knight - let them win the Will save to prove it. Maybe some prerequisites on who can be targetted are needed?
Valdrax said:
I think that #2 is the biggest problem. You can force a creature to surrender with several powers belonging to this class. Any creature. Including fanatics, berserkers, thralls, creatures that don't speak Common, and even creatures that have no minds -- with no logical, non-magical basis for doing so.
Valdrax said:
This is a problem with all non-magical mind-control. It makes little sense against many, many enemies even without the language barrier. (Also, you failed to tag several of these as fear effects which then runs the risk of leaving the class useless in many situations. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.)
When I originally wrote the "Challenge" powers I had as a prerequisite that you had to speak the target's language and that they had to be sentient, but then I thought of a Knight fighting a foreigner. This foreigner might not understand the gist of the Knight's words, but he sure gets the intent of this articulate and heavily armed warrior. I think fanatics/berserkers would have a bonus to Will saves so that they'd resist the Cha vs. Will save.
Actually, I have no problem with labelling them as fear effects since 4e has done away with immunities in favor of resistance. Thus a wraith might be fear-resistant, but not fear-immune, in my understanding. I think most D&D campaigns will feature sentient foes who are subject to mind-control, otherwise that would limit the effectiveness of psionic powers and
illusions.
Valdrax said:
The usual blurring-the-line problems that all melee Controllers have: fragility vs. not rendering Defenders irrelevant and severely limited range of effect without outdoing the Striker at movement.
I wouldn't call the Knight fragile. He has the Cleric's HP/healing surges, proficiency in heavy armor and weapons, and powers/features which weaken his foes. Fighters & Paladins still are needed to prevent the enemy from attacking, and soak up the damage.
It's true there's a limited range of effect - I did this intentionally because these are just 1st level powers. As the knight gets more powerful, his powers can affect more of the battlefield, unlike the wizard who begins with several long-range attacks.
Since none of the class depends on a horse nor supplies incredible movement powers.
Also if the knight is mounted, then his companions and enemies may very well be mounted too. So we don't have to worry about this class "outdoing the Striker at movement".
Valdrax said:
Also, Declare Arena completely defies logic. How exactly does it make squares into difficult terrain at-will, even accounting for all the mind-control problems above? Do opponents have any way of knowing which squares are marked? If so, how? Are allies affected?
Declare Arena is means to simulate two things: (1) the knight anticipating the enemy and positioning himself to take advantage of the terrain, while (2) intimidating the enemy into shifting their position unfavorably.
Good point about marking squares. Yes, the opponents know that they're facing difficult terrain/cover because they can see it, and yes allies are affected too.
Valdrax said:
Finally, one final non-Mt/C nitpick: The Knight's Code kind of restricts what kind of characters you can make with this class. Where the Black Knight, or the Knight of Chaos?
Hmm, yes this is definitely a lawful knight in the medieval european sense, but there certainly is the possibility for evil knights (a la the Black Knight) who are honorable, courageous, and courteous but wicked to the core.
Thanks for all your comments!
