Purple Dragon Knight Retooled as Banneret in D&D's Heroes of Faerun Book

The much-maligned Purple Dragon Knight Fighter subclass is being retooled towards its original support origins in the upcoming Heroes of Faerun book. Coming out of GenCon, an image of a premade character sheet of a Banneret is making its way around the Internet. The classic support-based Fighter subclass appears to have replaced the Purple Dragon Knight subclass, which received a ton of criticism for not resembling the Purple Dragon Knight's traditional lore.

The Banneret's abilities includes a Level 3 "Knightly Envoy" ability that allows it to cast Comprehend Language as a ritual and gain proficiency in either Intimidation, Insight, Performance, or Persuasion (this appears unchanged from the Purple Dragon Knight UA), plus a Group Recovery ability that allows those within 30 feet of the Banneret to regain 1d4 Hit Points plus the Banneret's Fighter Level when the Banneret uses its Second Wind ability. Scrapped is the Purple Dragon companion that the UA version of the subclass had, which grew in power as the Purple Dragon Knight leveled up.

The Banneret was the generic name for the Purple Dragon Knight in the Sword Coast Adventurer's Guide. The Banneret/Purple Dragon Knight was originally more of a support class that could provide the benefits of its abilities to its allies instead of or in addition to benefitting from them directly. For instance, a Banneret's Action Surge could be used to allow a nearby ally to make an attack, and Indomitable could allow an ally to reroll a failed saving throw in addition to the Banneret.

 

[Sorcerers Apprentice]

If you want to play a D&D character who rides a dragon, then I think the best way is to pitch to your gaming group a campaign where the characters are all dragonriders. Then the DM can adapt the challenges the group faces to the extra mobility and combat power a dragon mount gives.

No halfway balanced subclass, or even a full dedicated dragonrider class, is ever going to live up to the fantasy of riding a dragon.

So I think this was a good move from WotC. Too bad the new Banneret subclass is just as bad as being a Warlord as the old SCAG purple dragon knight, but that's another matter...

 

[mellored]

Exactly. All magical.

Still more options than Cha has.

The tactical warlord in 4e showed that there is an archetype that can be implemented. It's not even an obscure one.

It should be a full class, but i don't expect that.

Even something simple like you get 1/2 Int bonus rounded up to initiative rolls and 2 (+ Int bonus) d6 superiority dice to spend on a restricted (warlord type) manoeuvres. Plus you add your Cha bonus to the hp you heal.

New Fighting Style: Assault Leader
You gain the Commander's Strike from the Battlemaster subclass. You can use it at-wil. Your die is equal to your Intelligence.

New Feat: Ambush Tactics
+1 Dex, +1 Int, or +1 Wis
When you take a short rest, you can give up to 5 allies, including yourself, a bonus to their next initiative roll equal to the ability score you selected. They do not get this bonus if surprised.

 

[Pauln6]

Still more options than Cha has.

It should be a full class, but i don't expect that.

New Fighting Style: Assault Leader
You gain the Commander's Strike from the Battlemaster subclass. You can use it at-wil. Your die is equal to your Intelligence.

New Feat: Ambush Tactics
+1 Dex, +1 Int, or +1 Wis
When you take a short rest, you can give up to 5 allies, including yourself, a bonus to their next initiative roll equal to the ability score you selected. They do not get this bonus if àsurprised.

I'm not sure I want more dex feats but yeah, something like that. At-will commander's strike might be a bit much when you consider the other option is one manoeuvre per short rest but you could certainly allow it a number of times per short rest equal to your intelligence modifier without bonus damage.

 

[Nikosandros]

The subclass formerly known as PDK.

 

[Scribe]

All they had to do was call it something different. This hand wringing that 'the grognards ruined everything' is hilariously misplaced.

Name it anything else, make something NEW, and dont retcon things.

Its not even remotely close to being difficult to understand or implement and satisfy more (not all) people.

 

[tombowings]

If the currently WotC posse aren't excited by the Forgotten Realms as they stand, they can always create a new setting.

FR fans already have the realms. A new setting gives other a chance to find their fantasy home.

And, no, I don't care about the WotC posse's financial success or their obligations to its shareholders. I consider splitting the fan base a good thing.

 

[Mecheon]

People objected to this change because it’s nonsensical, not because it’s implausible. Just like motorcycles and women’s swimwear existed in Edwardian Britain, it would still be nonsensical to make bikini babes on motorcycles a major focus of Downton Abbey. Thankfully, WotC acknowledged their own mistake.

We are talking about a bunch of cut-rate paladins (Because, let's be brutally honest, the game already had a knightly class, its the paladin) who's only noteworthy thing is having a neat name that barely makes sense with them. The 'oh its was a black dragon but more purple' is a terrible origin story, and what most folks probably know the PDKs for is being an incredibly eh support class in NWN and far inferior to just going straight fighter or throwing in some Champion of Torm, or being one of the worst subclasses in 5E.

So now a decent name is, once again, wasted on a dull, useless organisation and potentially another bad subclass, rather than getting any interesting 'why should we care about these people' to it

They’re more commonly called “deep dragons” but yes they have a long history in FR. You’d know this if you cared enough to learn about FR before saying that the setting needs to be changed to become more “new and interesting”.

Deep dragons being called purple dragons was a 4E thing and pretty blatantly not applicable to their 5E versions who aren't, y'know. Purple, instead going for more of a cave dwelling salamander look. Also, you'd know there's another purple dragon, from Dragon Magazine, the ol' laser breath one

 

[ECMO3]

Depends on what feedback WotC got on the survey. I wager, based on a lot of comments here and elsewhere, the two most common pieces of feedback they got was "Purple Dragon Knights shouldn't have dragon pets" and "PDK is too specific a concept for a subclass." (The latter being people who want to use it for non-Realms games). So WotC probably combined that feedback into "they want a knight sub, but with the Purple Dragon name and without the purple dragon." Hence they did their best to save the old class and use the more generic name."

This is the second time I've seen a perfectly good subclass idea die in UA to people who didn't understand the lore behind it (because the book wasn't out yet). The Izzet wizard for Ravnica being the other. I'm beginning to think WotC needs to put lore sidebars that give the game away because too many people react without acknowledging we are only seeing part of the picture.

In this discussion about lore on the PDK - To me this does not seem like a subclass driven by a change in Lore at all.

Here is what I think happened in the original subclass:

1. People don't like the the 2014 PDK
2. Why don't we have them ride dragons, people will love that
3. Ok let's make it amethyst dragons since they are purple
4. Now we have to make up a flimsy venir of story to support this.

That is not the same as the Lore changing and then changing the subclass to match it, that is making new stuff up to support a subclass change and doing it in a very flimsy and unrealistic fashion in a manner that is not consistent with the story in the world you are publishing.

 

[ECMO3]

Deep dragons being called purple dragons was a 4E thing and pretty blatantly not applicable to their 5E versions who aren't, y'know. Purple, instead going for more of a cave dwelling salamander look. Also, you'd know there's another purple dragon, from Dragon Magazine, the ol' laser breath one

I don't know what a deep Dragon is, but I believe the Purple Dragon Knights predate 4E by about 40 years, and were part of the original lore created by Ed Greenwood before TSR. They were certainly written about by the mid 80s.

A purple dragon should be a Chromatic Dragon though, not a gem dragon. Still doesn't make sense for The PDKs.

 

[Weiley31]

We are talking about a bunch of cut-rate paladins (Because, let's be brutally honest, the game already had a knightly class, its the paladin)

Odyssey of the Dragonlords has a legit subclass option for Paladins to get a Dragon buddy. So, there your refluffed PDK with an Amethyst Dragon mount proxy.