okay all although I know what a death knight is define one as it is not really clear what they are past have necromancy spell and heavy armour?
beyond aesthetics and different spell lists what makes them different from a paladin and what is the role play meat here?
a warlock is closer to a cleric just of a weaker or not-sanctioned power.
if the arcane gish is an int caster lean into brains and strategy and make them more versatile between dex and str
but not from the will of the divine.
arcane would be less a warrior of god than a magic soldier
you make it have something to replace the healing and be more strategic than the paladin that can nova really fast, a fight smarter not harder version.
thematics is the hard part
no we should just have more types of half caster and accept paladin as a limited options class like druid or wizard
define what you mean by a death knight?
and it still does not feel right nor like what we want.
artificer could be a full caster and nothing breaks in its concept a full caster...
I can get unified in the sense that all parts can be used with all other parts but monolithic does nothing, they need some more experimental voice on the team to counter them
mystara could be done with the right team, also the dog folk could sell the product of the furries alone.
but I can see darksun might have some taste issues but stranger setting with psionics as a class like eberron with artificers could do well
rationally speaking a secondary dm focused book only about how to build up settings and adventures would both sell reasonably, be useful for retention of customers and even if less money is made would be so useful that it being a loss leader would be viable
I have finally finished this book, I found the ending to be dry and the latter half feeling rushed.
regardless I can finally kick this off the bucket list as the book where my name comes from.