Rogue Mastermind Archetype Up, Courtesy of Extra Life

They stole my my help as a bonus action idea...

 

[Sword of Spirit]

Oath of the Crown is the new paladin subclass. Purple Dragon Knight is the new fighter subclass.

Ah, interesting. I had assumed that Purple Dragon Knight would be a FR example of the Oath of the Crown. Now I'm wondering what it's going to look like. Mike Mearls talked about making a "Devoted Defender" type of fighter subclass that seemed like it would cover both knight and samurai archetypes (assuming you don't use Battle Master for your samurai--which you should, because it's cool)--which would seem to create a lot of overlap with a fighter Purple Dragon Knight. Is the Purple Dragon Knight going to be one of the few subclasses in the book that is heavily FR-embedded? I guess we'll find out. Personally, I hope they manage to keep them all from being heavily embedded.

 

[I'm A Banana]

Ah, interesting. I had assumed that Purple Dragon Knight would be a FR example of the Oath of the Crown. Now I'm wondering what it's going to look like. Mike Mearls talked about making a "Devoted Defender" type of fighter subclass that seemed like it would cover both knight and samurai archetypes (assuming you don't use Battle Master for your samurai--which you should, because it's cool)--which would seem to create a lot of overlap with a fighter Purple Dragon Knight. Is the Purple Dragon Knight going to be one of the few subclasses in the book that is heavily FR-embedded? I guess we'll find out. Personally, I hope they manage to keep them all from being heavily embedded.

If prior incarnations are any indication, PDKs will be inspirational leader-types, who leap to the front of battle wave the standard and cheer everyone up with their battlecries.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

If prior incarnations are any indication, PDKs will be inspirational leader-types, who leap to the front of battle wave the standard and cheer everyone up with their battlecries.

if my warlord is made but totally fluffed for the realms I will be both happy (that we have a martial leader) and pissed (why put it int he realms book)

 

[Sword of Spirit]

Well, at least there are those sections telling us how to use the material in other campaign settings. If they at least say something like "in Greyhawk, Purple Dragon Knights are known as <lore I do not know>, and serve as <more lore I do not know>," that would be a pretty cool way of expanding usability of such classes. Ideally though, I'd prefer they have given it a generic name and then just said "in the kingdom of Corymr, <generic name> are known as Purple Dragon Knights..."

 

[pukunui]

Ah, interesting. I had assumed that Purple Dragon Knight would be a FR example of the Oath of the Crown.

Eh, you may be right. I may have been making assumptions of my own.

 

[I'm A Banana]

Well, at least there are those sections telling us how to use the material in other campaign settings. If they at least say something like "in Greyhawk, Purple Dragon Knights are known as <lore I do not know>, and serve as <more lore I do not know>," that would be a pretty cool way of expanding usability of such classes. Ideally though, I'd prefer they have given it a generic name and then just said "in the kingdom of Corymr, <generic name> are known as Purple Dragon Knights..."

I kind of like the specificity better, especially in something that reads a lot like a campaign setting. I tend to prefer flavorful specificity to generic adaptability, in general, though a few nods at adaptability are always nice.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

I kind of like the specificity better, especially in something that reads a lot like a campaign setting. I tend to prefer flavorful specificity to generic adaptability, in general, though a few nods at adaptability are always nice.

I'm kind of of two minds on it. On the one hand, I really like a lot of world-specific lore. For instance, I like that you have Knights of Solamnia and Wizards of High Sorcery as a Dragonlance thing rather than an everywhere thing. On the other hand, we know they are trying to avoid pumping out a lot of crunch (and I agree with that decision), and in order to that they may have to keep things a bit more general and then tell us how to represent those characters using the same rules--kind of like how the races are presented in the PHB (which I really like).

I guess it comes down to what works for the edition. In 3e I actually disallowed most prestige classes except for the world-specific ones. I like 5e a lot, and in 5e I think it works better to keep it more broadly applicable, rather than to make a lot of overlapping, barely distinct, or narrowly specific subclasses. It just isn't right for the philosophy of the edition.

Eh, you may be right. I may have been making assumptions of my own.

At least we won't have long to wait to find out.

 

[Psikerlord#]

Bonus action help up to 30'? So give someone in the party adv on an attack every round? Hmmm. That's borderline OP in my book.

Splatbooks and power creep is alive and well it seems. A shame.

Also - of course - if they were going to give anyone a bonus action help, it should have been a warlord like fighter subclass, the FR Knight or whatever it's called. Jeez.

 

[pukunui]

Bonus action help up to 30'? So give someone in the party adv on an attack every round? Hmmm. That's borderline OP in my book.

That's assuming that the rogue hasn't got something better to do with his bonus action.

 

[Psikerlord#]

That's assuming that the rogue hasn't got something better to do with his bonus action.

Well I dont allow hiding in combat, mostly, and we dont use the disengage action either (too easy mode, we just use dodge). So, in a more difficult game, this is pretty OP.