Talk:Mercenary (3.5e Class)

Multiple mercenary classes causing linking issues from originals. Looks like a Bot redirected the original one to a new 3.5e one that another user had created thus being overwritten. - Sleaker 05:59, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Sorry About That

Sorry about that didn't see your class when i started work on mine--Stryker-Fyre 02:09, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

[edit] Rating

Power - 1/5 I give this class a 1 out of 5 because it renders the fighter completely worthless, with the same BAB, saves and feats, yet a dozen other abilites. The dirty fighting itself is even stronger than the rogue's sneak attack, which is I believe central to the class. Adaptive fighter is interesting, but it would allow the character to get way too much AC way too quickly. Even more, it gets twice the fighter's skill points. In short, it's almost as if you gave the best fighting abilities of the rogue and the ranger and gave them to the fighter. It's simply OP. --173.245.55.104 11:02, 20 July 2011 (MDT)

Wording - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because I have seen no mistakes in the wording. Everything seems pristine, really. --173.245.55.104 11:02, 20 July 2011 (MDT)

Formatting - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because as far as I know, it respects all the formatting criterias. --173.245.55.104 11:02, 20 July 2011 (MDT)

Flavor - 3/5 I give this class a 3 out of 5 because at first, I could see the idea behind it: a specialised warrior that isn't only brawn but also brain. Yet it seems like too many abilities are simply but together to make a munchkin, I happen not to be so sure as to what the aim was after having read the whole of it. If it's supposed to be an armsmaster or intelligent fighter, cut out the abilities that to not add to that role. --173.245.55.104 11:02, 20 July 2011 (MDT)