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.

 

[ECMO3]

However, you know what? There are already multiple pieces of Cormyr/PDK art portraying Amethyst Dragon silhouettes (obvious floating amethyst crystal shards) on the heraldry. You can't ignore the change in a nation's heraldry. I think it's too late to change whatever lore they planned for this. We are going to see something change, and if the forums are any indication, not everyone is going to be happy.

Well it is unlikely it was changed now, if it was changed that decision was made months ago. I don't even think it is too late to change the art and I will point out there are no such floating crystals on the clasp with the Dragon motif at the start of this thread.

 

[ECMO3]

I want to point out that in a recent interview McKenzie (sp?) stated that they got a lot of feedback on the banneret and took what people liked most about the old subclass and what they liked most about the new subclass and combined them into the new Banneret.

So unless she is lying, it is that they actually read the feedback and made changes to the subclass based on the feedback about the subclass, which is contrary to what some think happened.

 

[Valetudo]

I don't think 4e failed because of points of light. Honestly pol felt like a scrubbed clean greyhawk(i think it even used a variant of the greyhawk pantheon).

 

[Demetrios1453]

You are addressing a straw man here. The PDK Dragonrider isn't even vaguely close to the situation. Besides the Voyages of the Princess Arc there was not much to develop. I'm not talking about development conflicts I'm talking about the Jerry Crawford " no old lore matters". Completely different. You're making arguments against something else.

Ed Greenwood on his patreon is giving exclusively 5e FR lore. He is still under WOTC NDA, but the lore makes sense and it is rich. Ed Greenwood has virtually ordained fans as the authority on particular areas. So WOTC could do whatever they want with the lore. There's a better more accurate lore source, that is prolific.



If they botch the lore of Forgotten Realms bad I will not move to a new system but I have everything I need for this one. I moved to a new system from 4e when they decimated the Lore. Dropped 4e instantly. 5e didn't really fix the mistake that well. It was about as effective Rise of Skywalker was at fixing the Last Jedi Nonsense. Difference here is I LIKE the 5e rules, I'm not going to abandon 5e2024 because I use it to great effect mixed with 5e2014. But if the FR books botch the lore I will not buy products further down the line. They lost alot of the "whales" with 4e. To this day even Developers at the time say the worst mistake they made with 4e was drastically changing the lore. If anything WOTC has a PF like competitor now with Daggerheart. No way I will adopt Daggerheart though.

I am a DM so I can very much disallow Orcs, keep Half Elves, and restrict other races. I have rules mastery of this system. The only thing I need WOTC for is the time I don't have to make subclasses. If I can deal with art like Sandle wearing man bun muffin dwarves bringing his kitty cat to the forge, or prickly pear harvesting orcs in the players handbook racial art I can deal with other people I don't play with making Orcs playable. There is nothing saying I have to allow it.

I teach 11 year olds how to play. They have no problem understanding my race restrictions and the role humanoid monsters play in the world. In a world where good and evil is tangible you are going to have inherently evil races. If you don't want them you're welcome to go along with the rules. If I can deal with art like Sandle wearing man bun muffin dwarves bringing his kitty cat to the forge, or prickly pear harvesting orcs in the players handbook racial art I can deal with a gaff like making Orcs playable. There is nothing saying I have to allow it.


They probably don't play D&D though.



Or due to their nature, they would because it is in their nature. The entire modern field of sociogenomics are showing how the Nature vs Nurture argument is complicated. They work hand in hand and the evidence is very strong that the genes influence the environment an organism gets nurtured in. If you're Ok with Cormyr enslaving Dragons against their nature that is a perfectly fine trope to use. I tend to find Dragons don't LIKE being enslaved whether they are inherently Lawful or Chaotic.


That is ONE of the possibilities of Neutral alignment amid a myriad of others. Some neutral people won't take sides. Some Neutral People like Mordenkainen will take the side of good or evil depending on what one is the most threat. Mordenkainen aids the City of Greyhawk because Iuz is shifting the balance towards evil.

Some neutrals don't give a crap. Some neutrals take the side that benefits them the most. Mordenkainen indeed DOES stick to a strict code but he sides with who ever is needed to preserve the balance.

Alignment has never been restrictive in that there is a huge spectrum of how to play Lawful good and even Chaotic Evil. Good roleplayers can manage this. Alignment was always cosmological.

I have world building explanations for inherently evil orcs, and how they differ from the evil corruption of the Drow. I use and explain alignment to even young new players and they can operate within it with no problem. I had an entire tragic campaign that took two years to complete of a players trying to raise a Red Dragon to be good. It started out with the dragon trying to be good, but sometimes you just can't escape the compulsion of Cosmic Alignment. She never hurt her friends though. Just others.

It would be really funny if Ed says something like "I really like the direction they've taken with the Purple Dragon Knights, so I'm officially endorsing the changes."

 

[Scribe]

It would be really funny if Ed says something like "I really like the direction they've taken with the Purple Dragon Knights, so I'm officially endorsing the changes."

When has he pushed back on anything other than 4e blowing it all to hell?

 

[Demetrios1453]

When has he pushed back on anything other than 4e blowing it all to hell?

I didn't speculate on the probability, just that it would be funny if he did.

 

[Necropolitan]

When has he pushed back on anything other than 4e blowing it all to hell?

He did a video where he talked about what the the Honor Among Thieves movie got wrong.

 

[Mecheon]

Um, pretty much all the knightly orders around today are way older than that. Do you think there were many set up after 1925?

Knightly orders around today sure aren't doing what they were doing over 100 years ago, acting like they should be nigh on identical and there can't be any change just leads FR to being stagnant, unchanging, and lacking any dynamics

I may have killed a boss in FFXIV about that exact thing last night

I am in no way a fan of orcs being playable. Inherently evil orcs are a thing thanks to gruumsh. Species can have different intelligence levels. I have no problem limiting orc intelligence.

Well, then you'd know the only edition that gave them a malus to int was 3E. They were normally either Dex or Charisma negatives, 3e changed it up

Regardless though, orcs uh. Been playable in every edition of this game so you're a little behind the curve on that one. Like, playable orcs aren't new. They've been playable longer than I've been alive. Orcs of Thar isn't a good book, but its official. We're also in a world were Warcraft exists and crushed D&D's multiple attempts to make an MMO

If they botch the lore of Forgotten Realms bad I will not move to a new system but I have everything I need for this one. I moved to a new system from 4e when they decimated the Lore. Dropped 4e instantly. 5e didn't really fix the mistake that well. It was about as effective Rise of Skywalker was at fixing the Last Jedi Nonsense. Difference here is I LIKE the 5e rules, I'm not going to abandon 5e2024 because I use it to great effect mixed with 5e2014. But if the FR books botch the lore I will not buy products further down the line. They lost alot of the "whales" with 4e. To this day even Developers at the time say the worst mistake they made with 4e was drastically changing the lore. If anything WOTC has a PF like competitor now with Daggerheart. No way I will adopt Daggerheart though.

Every single edition of this game has botched FR's lore. What, going into the future with 4E was your cutoff point rather than jamming "These literately do not fit in this world on a thematic perspective" places like Kara Tur or Maztica back in 2E?

I teach 11 year olds how to play. They have no problem understanding my race restrictions and the role humanoid monsters play in the world. In a world where good and evil is tangible you are going to have inherently evil races. If you don't want them you're welcome to go along with the rules. If I can deal with art like Sandle wearing man bun muffin dwarves bringing his kitty cat to the forge, or prickly pear harvesting orcs in the players handbook racial art I can deal with a gaff like making Orcs playable. There is nothing saying I have to allow it.

This is way, way off-topic for the thread but, you are, once again, arguing about a race that has been playable in this game for 37 years. Playable orcs aren't new. They've been playable every single edition. They're a legacy race at this point

Good and evil being tangible is stuff for Saturday morning cartoons, and even as cheesy as He-man could be it got that you can switch things up. Either way, no, you're not going to have 'inherently evil races' in any setting that takes itself seriously because that isn't realistic in the slightest and makes your world seem like... Oh, right, a Saturday morning cartoon.

 

[ECMO3]

Based on one of the new videos the PDKs absolutely made some kind of deal about protecting the multiverse with Amethyst Dragons (so they must have changed the Lore of Amethyst Dragons too). But it also sounds like the new class is completely divorced from that topic.

While I am not crazy about Amethyst Dragons and the PDKs, they were never a big part of any of my campaigns. I was more concerned about the subclass and it sounds like they took the Dragon pet out of it completely and made it a Warlord-type support martial.

So I will give this a B. Not what I would prefer, but at least we don't have a whacked subclass.

 

[Umbran]

If you can deal with something, you don't drop unhinged rant about it twice in span of two paragraphs.

Mod Note:
And, your own rants against how people posting....?

I already warned you before about how you were addressing people, but you continue to attack folks.

So, you're done in this discussion. I suggest you not follow this pattern in other discussions either - if you want to attack folks, do it in a venue that likes that kind of thing.