Talk:Soulbinder (DnD Prestige Class)
From D&D Wiki
| This article is a current featured article nominee (discuss). A featured article should exemplify D&D Wiki's very best work, and is therefore expected to meet the featured article criteria. Please feel free to leave comments. |
Contents |
[edit] Image and Feedback
ummm... can someone help me fit the image right, and feedback if you want to would be cool. --Summerscythe 22:48, 5 July 2008 (MDT)
- I got the image for you, all you had to do was add it to the top template and specify the size. And, two things of advice, this still needs an example NPC, and the class features should not be bulleted. --Green Dragon 11:42, 6 July 2008 (MDT)
- Thank you kind sir, um... what should they be instead of bullets than? and I'm working on a sample NPC as we speak. Summerscythe 11:51, 6 July 2008 (MDT)
- They should be italics (as is standard by WotC). I have changed the first one. --Green Dragon 12:28, 6 July 2008 (MDT)
- Thanks again, i'll do the rest when im done with my NPC. --Summerscythe 12:30, 6 July 2008 (MDT)
- Once you have an example NPC present please feel free to remove Template:Prestige Class Description Needed. And once you have removed the bullets from the class features, linked to the class features from the table, added links to the SRD throughout, added a space before the Su's, Ex's, etc, added a space before the abilities in "Soul Blend", and removed extra blank lines, feel free to remove Template:Prestige Class Wikify. --Green Dragon 12:48, 6 July 2008 (MDT)
- The example NPC should be on it's own page and be an inclusion here. For example please refer to the Spider Rider. --Green Dragon 14:47, 6 July 2008 (MDT)
- I've been working on it all day, i think i got most of it out of the way, anything i missed? --Summerscythe 20:16, 7 July 2008 (MDT)
[edit] Rating
Power - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because the power seemed balanced and neither overpower or underpower the class, or in comparision to other class of the same type. --Lord Dhazriel 20:29, 6 July 2008 (MDT)
Wording - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because the class is well explained and the words are well chosen. --Lord Dhazriel 20:29, 6 July 2008 (MDT)
Formatting - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because the class seem very well formated (except for the easily fixed little box, I trust the correction will be swift). --Lord Dhazriel 20:29, 6 July 2008 (MDT)
Flavor - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because I really like the flavour, it original and the concept is new and young. I really like how the soul binder was built. --Lord Dhazriel 20:29, 6 July 2008 (MDT)
Overall: Bravo! --Lord Dhazriel 20:29, 6 July 2008 (MDT)
[edit] Featured Article
Support — I nominate this article for it good taste and great concept, now let start the discussion.--Lord Dhazriel 20:34, 6 July 2008 (MDT)
Support — I support this article because it is well balanced and has a unique role in the campaign. It is also aloud to be made to role-play as a unique character, the class characters aren't all the same. --Sabre070 23:17, 6 July 2008 (MDT)
Comment — The example NPC needs to be on it's own separate page, something like Rafael Moncrieff (DnD NPC), and be an inclusion onto this page. For an example please refer to the Spider Rider. --Green Dragon 17:08, 7 July 2008 (MDT)
- Good work, looks good. Thanks for doing that. --Green Dragon 17:57, 7 July 2008 (MDT)
Comment — More links to the SRD need to be present. --Green Dragon 17:10, 7 July 2008 (MDT)
- I believe this has been met, please let me know.Summerscythe 10:53, 17 July 2008 (MDT)
- One thing I just noticed. All the links need to not redirect. This means that instead of Dex the link should be piped to the actual page but still read as Dex. Also, all the class skills' abilities are not linked too. Finally, I feel that a few more links could be added throughout. --Green Dragon 18:08, 22 July 2008 (MDT)
Comment — This needs to strictly adhere to the When to Italicize and Capitalize (DnD Guideline) rules. --Green Dragon 17:13, 7 July 2008 (MDT)
- I believe this has been met, please let me know.Summerscythe 10:53, 17 July 2008 (MDT)
Support — I support this article because I think it's damn cool.-Risek 17:29, 7 July 2008 (MDT)
Comment — No HTML formatting should be used, it should all be wiki-syntax. For exmaple <i> and </i> should be '' on each side. --Green Dragon 18:02, 7 July 2008 (MDT)
- I believe this has been met, please let me know. Summerscythe 10:53, 17 July 2008 (MDT)
- Looks good, thanks for doing that. --Green Dragon 18:06, 22 July 2008 (MDT)
Support — I support this article because of its original idea and in depth description. --Palantini 20:41, 7 July 2008 (MDT)
Support — Yes, I'd like to say that a lot of friendly wiki community support went into making this class good, and showing it off would be a benefit to the site. Also, I likes it. --Ganteka 21:22, 14 July 2008 (MDT)
Support — very interesting awesome and useful class. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Blarbinator (talk • contribs) . Please sign your posts!
Support — This is a very intresting and good class. I think this should really really be a featured article. It seems complete even though it isn't. :) --Jack Bread 22:00, 26 July 2008 (MDT)
Comment — Flavorful class, but extremely underwhelming. I'd be happy to add my support when the class became more viable for actual play. Surgo 00:17, 13 September 2008 (MDT)
[edit] Rating
Power - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because it seems balanced with the other classes. --Sabre070 23:13, 6 July 2008 (MDT)
Wording - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because the class has all descriptions of the stats and the abilities. --Sabre070 23:13, 6 July 2008 (MDT)
Formatting - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because it follows the guidelines of the template and has links and is sectioned well. --Sabre070 23:13, 6 July 2008 (MDT)
Flavor - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because this has a large amount of role-playing information and has details of how and where they would be seen. --Sabre070 23:13, 6 July 2008 (MDT)
[edit] Rating
Power - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because it seems to balanced well assuming it is a benchmark class. It definitely overpowers many published PrCs, but it is also less powerful than several. In the end, it is a combat class that loses BAB and gains some vulnerabilities in order to have some elemental defenses or attacks (both at the end). --Aarnott 12:48, 28 July 2008 (MDT)
Wording - 4/5 I give this class a 4 out of 5 because certain words are informal ('til for example) and "shock resistance" does not seem to be the right term.
Also, a grammar run through should be done. As I read this now, I noticed and corrected an incorrect use of "their" (it appears as "there").
Reword the line "he gains the opposite effecting alignment magical ability". It doesn't make sense.
The line "Someone with an extreme alignment gets both alignment effecting abilities, Example: A chaotic good soulbinder's weapon gets both the holy and the anarchic abilities." is also poorly worded.
How long does binding into items last? Can the items already have magic properties? --Aarnott 12:48, 28 July 2008 (MDT)
Formatting - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because it seems to be formatted according to the preload correctly. --Aarnott 12:48, 28 July 2008 (MDT)
Flavor - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because it fits a unique role as a PrC that can fit into any existing D&D world quite easily. --Aarnott 12:48, 28 July 2008 (MDT)
[edit] Non-formatted rating
Okay, your first level of this class is taken at level 8. That level you get some energy resistance. Whatever. That's pretty much a flavor ability at that point, and remains that way for almost all of the game. Not impressive so far.
Next level is level 9. Your class feature is to get a +2 weapon. Are you fucking kidding me? I thought we learned from the Soulknife that 'get an item as a class feature' was stupid and useless. Your class feature is seriously to get a weapon that's weaker than the one you should already have.
Level 10. You can see people in a 60' cone of yourself. Are you serious? How is this ability going to help you fight a Couatl, Nine-Headed Cryohydra, Formian Myrmarch, Guardian Naga, or Fire Giant (a sampling of CR 10 monsters)?
Level 11. X to AC is actually not a bad ability (provided you're a threat in combat yourself -- which you aren't), but why put the weakness on it? There's no need for that.
Level 12. Your detect magic goes out to a 120' cone, as per arcane sight. I'm not sure how this ability is going to help you fight a Leonal, Kraken, Roper, or Kolyarut (a sampling of CR 12 monsters). Probably because it won't.
Okay, I can't keep going. The first 5 levels of this class suck, and it doesn't look like it's going to get any better. I suggest you look at what monsters you have to fight at these levels and think to yourself: okay, what can my class do against them? If the answer is "nothing" (which it is here) you need to go back and rethink your class.
Surgo 00:08, 13 September 2008 (MDT)
- Im currently beta testing the class, Esphia is more then powerful enough to take down most of these monsters. The abilities are nice and useful even if it not a Ur Priest or Planar Shepherd I think that the class feature are useful.--Lord Dhazriel 02:15, 13 September 2008 (MDT)
- Is it Esphia taking down the class him/herself, or is it the Soulbinder running around and dinking it while the rest of the party does the heavy lifting? The real question isn't whether the party can take down the monsters, it's whether or not the Soulbound can go 50/50 with them (which is what CR means). Surgo 09:29, 13 September 2008 (MDT)
Also Surgo, CR is what a party of 4 characters of that level take to fight a monster and use up 20% of their resources on. Summerscythe 13:25, 13 September 2008 (MDT)
- I'm aware of this. However, it is also used as a separate, but equally correct, metric. A monster or character goes 50/50 with itself, and other monsters of CR X. A player character has a CR equal to their level; thus, they are supposed to go 50/50 with monsters of CR equal to their level. In actuality they can totally bone some monsters and some monsters totally bone them, so the 50/50 is really the overall win/loss ratio with the list of CR X monsters. If you don't believe me, the DMG actually supports this metric; albeit indirectly: see the part for parties that are larger than or smaller than 4 people. Surgo 13:32, 13 September 2008 (MDT)
