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.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Wouldn't that be better as a feat (chain) then?

It’s a bit too powerful for a feat chain.

 

[mellored]

It’s a bit too powerful for a feat chain.

Depends on how strong the dragon is.

But alternatively, dragons could be "magic items".

Uncommon: Wyrmling
Rare: Juvenile
Very Rare: Adult
Legendary: Ancient

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Depends on how strong the dragon is.

But alternatively, dragons could be "magic items".

Uncommon: Wyrmling
Rare: Juvenile
Very Rare: Adult
Legendary: Ancient

The advantage of the way the PDK did it was it was weak enough that it wouldn’t overshadow the characters, and it automatically progressed with character level. You wouldn’t want to use actual dragon stat blocks or aged based growth.

 

[mellored]

The advantage of the way the PDK did it was it was weak enough that it wouldn’t overshadow the characters, and it automatically progressed with character level. You wouldn’t want to use actual dragon stat blocks or aged based growth.

There are several feats that grow with level.

Like Inspiring Leader or indirectly like Heavy Armor Master.

I see no reason why a dragon feat could do it that way (i.e. HP is equal to 3*your level).

 

[Crimson Longinus]

The advantage of the way the PDK did it was it was weak enough that it wouldn’t overshadow the characters, and it automatically progressed with character level. You wouldn’t want to use actual dragon stat blocks or aged based growth.

No I would want to use that as that's what dragons are.

As you cannot include a proper dragon into a class' power budget, you shouldn't do "dragon as pet" class.

And ultimately I think that "pet classes" are not a good design idea, as it then effectively limits having an useful pet to those builds. Pets and henchmen should just be NPCs that anyone can have in the right circumstances.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

As you cannot include a proper dragon into a class' power budget, you shouldn't do "dragon as pet" class

It’s not just an issue of “power budget”. It an issue of the pet can’t overshadow the master. And I don’t care about “proper” dragon. Lore must be the servant of the game, not the master. Just as an NPC veteran does not need to be the same as a PC fighter, a pet dragon does not need to be the same as an NPC monster.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

It’s not just an issue of “power budget”. It an issue of the pet can’t overshadow the master.

Then don't have a dragon as a pet! Dragons are known for being among the most powerful creatures around.

And I don’t care about “proper” dragon. Lore must be the servant of the game, not the master.

Yeah, that's how things go wrong. The purpose of the rules is to mechanically represent the lore, and once they stop doing that they serve no purpose.

Just as an NPC veteran does not need to be the same as a PC fighter, a pet dragon does not need to be the same as an NPC monster.

But it would at least be roughly similar and feel the same and it doesn't.

And of course once you have a class like this, then it means to befriend a dragon, a player must play this class to do it. I rather have proper dragons any character can ally with.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Then don't have a dragon as a pet! Dragons are known for being among the most powerful creatures around.

Aside from heroes, who regularly kick dragon butt.

But the point is to emulate currently popular fiction, something D&D has always tried to do. And you can’t do a dragon rider campaign if you can’t do dragons. So you need weaker dragons.

 

[Necropolitan]

Alongside the other issues the Purple Dragon Knights are using child soldiers.

Wyrmlings are the Dragon equivalent of under 12 years old for a human.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Aside from heroes, who regularly kick dragon butt.

And as they can do that to proper dragons, they obviously aren't overshadowed by them.

But the point is to emulate currently popular fiction, something D&D has always tried to do. And you can’t do a dragon rider campaign if you can’t do dragons. So you need weaker dragons.

No. You can just ride proper dragons and then everyone is not forced to play the same subclass to do so!