D&D 5E (2014) Purple Dragon Knight

Einlanzer0

Adventurer
Does anyone else think this is too specific a concept for a subclass? Wouldn't it have made more sense as a prestige class, like those from the recent UA article? Has anyone repurposed it for something a bit more generalized?
 

log in or register to remove this ad

If you mean the name, the SCAG actually says "Banneret serves as the generic name for this archetype if you use it in other campaign settings or to model warlords other than Purple Dragon knights."
 

Does anyone else think this is too specific a concept for a subclass? Wouldn't it have made more sense as a prestige class, like those from the recent UA article?
Yes & Yes. It's setting- and culture- specific, and it'd be easy to see it requiring some RP preq to 'get in.'
Has anyone repurposed it for something a bit more generalized?
WotC, via the simple expedient of optionally re-naming it the 'Bannerette.'
 
Last edited:





My main issue with the subclass is that it relies upon already limited resources; but provides no new ones for the fighter - unlike battlemaster (superiority dice) or eldritch knight (spell slots).
 

It's something I want to look at.

Its biggest conceit is that unlike most subclasses, it's backloaded rather than front loaded. A lot of the things that would draw you to the Banneret is 10th level or later, whereas every other subclass has something that makes you look at it and immediately want to use it, even the beastmaster does this.
 

While I definitely understand the idea of the subclass being backloaded, isn't it largely because Fighters are front loaded enough that this is inconsequential? Between Action Surge, Second Wind, plus 3 ASI and extra attack make the class alone worth playing early levels. So the Purple Dragon Knights best features kicking in late is just gravy on top to me.
 

Remove ads

Top