Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Not a Decepticon" data-source="post: 9890954" data-attributes="member: 7020527"><p> <ol> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Stop making "blandification" happen, it won't happen.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Let me get this straight. You look at modern Cleric, that goes to battle with armor, often heavy, swining mace with divine power and dispersing will of their god, just like a Paladin, and you think they could not make sense as a Death Knight because these are for Paladins, and instead must be a Lich because a book from 80's, when Clerics were glorified health potion dispenser, said so? Are you, by chance, an Ultramarines fan?</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">"Knight" is not a class, even if I personally believe Fighter should be renamed Knight and Monk should be renamed Fighter. If Death Knight is related to concept of Knighthood, which can be given as a reward to any character, especially that of martial persuasion, it should be avialable to every class. And if we tie it to the name while keeping Charisma requirement, then we effectively locked out one Fighter subclass that should have access to Death Knight feats - Eldritch Knight.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">You want to know what is really bland? The utter, wasteful content bloat that would be facilitated with your insistence of keeping some vague and arbitrary demand of "class identity" rigid at all costs. We had this problem in 3.5 and it was just waste of paper to fill the space with feats, prestige classes and so on, whose only purpose was to be "cool thing X, but for class Z, instead of Y". It's a wasteful, self-indulgent and plain bad game design.</li> </ol></blockquote><p></p>

Verification