Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Ishmayl" data-source="post: 1918340" data-attributes="member: 4652">Thanks for the responses, guys and gals.&nbsp; I appreciate you guys taking a look at my class.Nifft,I realize this <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />, but I also realize, after posting plain text on the WotC message boards awhile back, that having fancy text at least makes it a little easier to read;&nbsp; reading plain text straight down a page gets a little tedious, especially when you have 4 pages worth.Nifft, I see what you're saying both about the class being too divided in support or tank, and also about &quot;stepping on the toes of several other classes,&quot; however, I have several original classes in my campaign, and only a few standard classes (barbarian and rogue are basically all that come from the PHB).&nbsp; And the abilities given to the knight-errant don't step on the toes of the classes actually in my campaign <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />&nbsp; As far as being tank/support all in one, that's pretty accurate.&nbsp; I don't have clerics, but instead of a class called magi'i;&nbsp; they're better support than standard clerics, but much worse tanks, so in my homebrew, the knight-errant is all you get to fill that role.I'm not sure I get why you don't think they synergize well... the purpose of the class is basically the defense of others, and all those abilities lend themselves to protection.No prob, I put it up here for criticism - both positive and negative.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Ishmayl, post: 1918340, member: 4652"] Thanks for the responses, guys and gals. I appreciate you guys taking a look at my class. Nifft, I realize this :), but I also realize, after posting plain text on the WotC message boards awhile back, that having fancy text at least makes it a little easier to read; reading plain text straight down a page gets a little tedious, especially when you have 4 pages worth. Nifft, I see what you're saying both about the class being too divided in support or tank, and also about "stepping on the toes of several other classes," however, I have several original classes in my campaign, and only a few standard classes (barbarian and rogue are basically all that come from the PHB). And the abilities given to the knight-errant don't step on the toes of the classes actually in my campaign :) As far as being tank/support all in one, that's pretty accurate. I don't have clerics, but instead of a class called magi'i; they're better support than standard clerics, but much worse tanks, so in my homebrew, the knight-errant is all you get to fill that role. I'm not sure I get why you don't think they synergize well... the purpose of the class is basically the defense of others, and all those abilities lend themselves to protection. No prob, I put it up here for criticism - both positive and negative. [/QUOTE]

Verification