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.

 

[CreamCloud0]

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.

if there was a pet class i still wouldn't see it as limiting useful pets solely to that class, if there was a pet class that wouldn't mean a drakewarden is any less powerful, it just offers a different distribution of power between character and pet, the pets of the dedicated class would be stronger but it comes at the cost of draining the power from the tamer, and some people wouldn't want to invest everything into their pet and still pick drakewarden.

 

[Mournblade94]

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



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

Seriously just do this. Make your challenges accordingly.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

if there was a pet class i still wouldn't see it as limiting useful pets solely to that class, if there was a pet class that wouldn't mean a drakewarden is any less powerful, it just offers a different distribution of power between character and pet, the pets of the dedicated class would be stronger but it comes at the cost of draining the power from the tamer, and some people wouldn't want to invest everything into their pet and still pick drakewarden.

That's not how it works. The dedicated pets are not stronger, often they are weaker. Such class invests a huge chunk of their "power budget" into the pet, whereas a petless class uses all of that budget for the character. So now if you let a petless class get an NPC pet, power of that pet is all just extra and the combined power is obviously greater than that of the pet class.

So no, you cannot really have pet classes and let other characters get useful NPC pets if you care for balance.

 

[mellored]

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

It an issue of the pet can’t overshadow the master.

I disagree.

A subclass shouldn't overshadow a class.

But if you made a full pet class, then the pet would have much more power budget and be able to overshadow the master.

 

[CreamCloud0]

That's not how it works. The dedicated pets are not stronger, often they are weaker. Such class invests a huge chunk of their "power budget" into the pet, whereas a petless class uses all of that budget for the character. So now if you let a petless class get an NPC pet, power of that pet is all just extra and the combined power is obviously greater than that of the pet class.

So no, you cannot really have pet classes and let other characters get useful NPC pets if you care for balance.

why would the pet of a dedicated pet class be weaker than a pet subclass pet of a normally petless class? the pet class dedicates more of it's budget into making the pet itself stronger, they both have the same total budget for power.

a pet subclass pet will be weaker than the dedicated pet class pet, but that doesn't mean it's going to be a useless pet.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

why would the pet of a dedicated pet class be weaker than a pet subclass pet of a normally petless class? the pet class dedicates more of it's budget into making the pet itself stronger, they both have the same total budget for power.

a pet subclass pet will be weaker than the dedicated pet class pet, but that doesn't mean it's going to be a useless pet.

Yes, but that is not what I am talking about. I am talking about, say, a totem warrior barbarian taming a wyvern and having it as a pet.

Once you have build in pets as part of the power budget of some classes and subclasses, you cannot really do that any more.

 

[Valetudo]

Yo Morris aren't you doing a book on pets. Did you go the subclass route or the leveling upcoming pet route?

 

[CreamCloud0]

Yes, but that is not what I am talking about. I am talking about, say, a totem warrior barbarian taming a wyvern and having it as a pet.

Once you have build in pets as part of the power budget of some classes and subclasses, you cannot really do that any more.

oh i see where you're coming from now.

i can't say i really care for allowing that kind of scenario, but if i had to it would at least be a party boon than tied to a specific character.

 

[Misanthrope Prime]

Drakewardens exist!

A small update for 2024 is all that's needed (and not really needed at all)

Not only does the Drakewarden exist but the paladin also has more mechanical support for a class that Simmons a mount than the fighter. If you wanted to make a "dragon knight" subclass separate from the Drakewarden a paladin would be better than a fighter.

 

[I'm A Banana]

You can just ride proper dragons and then everyone is not forced to play the same subclass to do so!

I really wish the advice on having monster friends adventure alongside the party was better (or, y'know, extant). Riding dragons and griffons and dinosaurs, befriending unicorns, fighting alongside celestials, dealing with fiends, even recruiting guards and knights and veterans and spies...you don't need to be a particular class (though certainly you might have classes who are better at certain friends), but the game really could use a better system for handling this than "IDK, just increase the challenge of the encounters, I guess, good luck!".

Treating them as something like a magic item makes some sense mechanically. They aren't tools you're guaranteed to have access to, you don't have to pay for them with a power budget, they might get lost or destroyed or abandoned, but they're always going to be an advantage, even if they're just "common" or "uncommon."

There's always that conflict between "designed to be interesting over multiple adventures" and "designed to be interesting for 3 rounds" that has to be navigated....