Talk:Anti-Paladin (3.5e Class)

From D&D Wiki

Jump to: navigation, search

Class Needs Work[edit]

The class is still not quite up to snuff as far as balance and playability are concerned. The fourth-level spell list needs to be added, and details about Ex-Anti-Paladins as well as Epic Anti-Paladins still need to be added. I might take a crack at that at a later date, but I don't mean to discourage anyone else. --Rakankou 19:28, 7 March 2007 (MST)

Weapons need work as well... I find the weapon's selection is also lacking. It would seem that farmers have all of the sudden become anti-paladin's. Most of those weapons(hand axe, Scythe, sicle) can be found on a farm. Logic dictates that an Anti-paladin would use any weapon at His/her disposal. Also what sense do is make to be able to use a Falcion but not a longsword or greatsword? I know they have different fighting style but I don't think it would make any sense considering that Paladins get Proficiency with all simple and martial weapons. --Da Hoopindexter 20:31, 7 March 2007 (MST)
What we need in this case is someone that would be willing to adopt this class and improve on it. It is lacking in most cases, and I am sure in balance as well. Would anyone be willing to adopt this class and make it as good as SRD classes? --Green Dragon 20:57, 7 March 2007 (MST)
I've already taken care of many of the things that needed to be addressed, and I'm looking in to how best to handle the remainder. As it stands, there seem to be a few balance issues still requiring attention, but it is much closer to a working class than it was before.--Rakankou 19:51, 8 March 2007 (MST)
Agreed, it is much better than before. However, it still needs work... It is missing an intro (the thing with Adventure, Characteristics, Alignment, etc) however I must say it is really looking more like a class from WotC than what it looked like before. --Green Dragon 22:30, 12 March 2007 (MDT)
Well, that's probably because it pretty much is, but I plan to get some flavor text on top of it within a week. --Rakankou 20:15, 13 March 2007 (MDT)

Rating - 9/10[edit]

I Give This a Class a 9/10 for the following Reasons: It is almost the polar opposite to the paladin, there are a few issues, but are only fairly minor so not much to be concerned with. The ability to Afflict dieses in my opinion is weaker then healing it due to the low save DC's of poisons and well as the fact the Paladin's ability won't havethat high of an initial save DC, have to pick targets well with that ability. The ability to harm people with the Lay on hands doesn't seem much like of an issue, although it might annoy a DM that a highlevel paladin with maxed out charisma can once a day go BAM 160 damage, but like I said it would only be once aday so it doesn't seem like a major issue.

Intimidating in combat as a move action, no issue with that ability, I rarely see someone use intimidate in combat so it might increase use of intimidate. Aura of cowardice is the biggest concern, although not big enough for any real concern, a -4 to my enemies is more powerful then a + 4 for my friends (In my opinion) but this is balanced out by the loss of healing diesese and instead giving diesese. On a side note if an anti-paladin and a necromancer are in the same party, those two could have some fun —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Linkrulesx10 (talkcontribs) 16:41, 9 April 2007 (MDT). Please sign your posts.

Uhmm, I tried to add the rating, until I realized that's the Admins job XD. Well, at least I added the rating to the front page. BTW, I'm not the one who rated this class (just clarifying) -- (Ronjun 17:49, 9 April 2007 (MDT))
Actually, it is not an Admins job. All you have to do is edit the actual page (so Anti-Paladin (DnD Class) for this rating) and then on the very top change {{Balance}} around so it has a pipe (|) after the Balance then the new rating. For example on this class it would be {{Balance|9}}. Also you have to change around the dlpc (which you did correctly for this class). Doing those two things will change the balance. --Green Dragon 18:29, 10 April 2007 (MDT)
This rating has been nullified with the implementation of the new Rating System. --Green Dragon 23:48, 20 February 2008 (MST)


If the Anti-Paladin is the opposite of a norm pally, shouldn't his alignment be chaotic evil. -Pig Knight 18:37, 18 April 2007

If I had taken a mirror to the paladin class, and just made everything opposite, yes, but looking at that, it would have made a rather poor character. An anti-paladin needs more substance than that mirror-opposite would have.
It's also important to recognize that a character isn't going to go out into the wilderness and come back with abilities resembling those of a blackguard. Anti-Paladins would definitely need some kind of training or rigorous conditioning to bear the title of Champion for a deity. Chaotic characters, by their very nature, do not submit well to ordered training. It is important to make the distinction between order and disorder; an anti-paladin works to spread the dogma of his deity, which is an imposition of will upon others. I feel that the elements of an anti-paladin are best exemplified by a Lawful Evil alignment rather than Chaotic Evil for these reasons (and probably a few more that escape me at the moment).
--Rakankou 14:59, 19 April 2007 (MDT)

Great idea[edit]

I'd like to commend the creator of this class for putting something that keeps evil a viable option. However, I don't personally believe there's a necessity for an Anti-Paladin because a Paladin shouldn't necessarily have a restricted alignment with regard to morality.

On the other hand, if we're going to assume there is a need for an Anti-Paladin, I think instead of just Cause Disease an Anti-Paladin should have the option to cure. Also, there should be a feature like a geas. Basically a nefarious agreement. I don't think Anti-Paladins should necessarily have a zealot's faith. An Anti-Paladin only demonstrates this kind of allegiance because of the power he receives, while a Paladin would have the reverse. So if an Anti-Paladin offers healing, she'll have the ability to initiate an agreement the recipient will be compelled to obey. The only limitation would be the required task can't directly force the subject to harm himself. (Granted, if the subject in question is incidentally harmed during the course of fulfilling his end of the agreement, it's not the Anti-Paladin's fault, is it?) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Srgonzo (talkcontribs) 07:27, 30 April 2007 (MDT). Please sign your posts.

An Anti-Paladin is a Blackguard there is not real difference they have to be Chaotic Evil there is no way to get around it they are the exact opposite of a Paladin.

How do you fail to be lawful evil?[edit]

Ok, so this is the evil mirror of the Paladin. Mhh. As somebody already said, this is not a true "Anti-Paladin", as a true Anti-Paladin would be Chaotic Evil. In a way, it is still a Paladin in the core sense of the word, a "champion of a cause". But I don't want to be too picky.

What I find kind of strange is that the Anti-Paladin can lose his status by committing good acts.

"Bruce, you've been giving to the orphans again!" - "But Sir, I have to keep up my public image while I corrupt this nation on the inside!" - "I don't care! You are lawful evil, remember! We are not allowed to do good acts! I hereby renounce your Anti-Paladinhood!" - "But Sir, I joined the evil side because it promised to be more fun!" - "I don't care! Away with you, dirt under my shoes."

Does that sound like the Forces of Evil? Nah.

This is the main issue why Anti-Paladins don't work without some extra though. You can fall from good towards evil, but there is no bouncing in the other direction. Staying good takes effort, staying evil happens by itself once you've got the hang of it.

In the same way, why can't the Anti-Paladin heal? At least, he should be able to heal himself. It is also kind of difficult to enter a Paladin order as a mole if you can't emulate their abilities.

Third point, the Aura of Evil: That ability doesn't help much. Radiating an Aura of Good, that's always great to impress people. But radiating evil? That can be pretty impractical. You can't draw Paladins to your side if they detect your true nature in the blink of an eye. More important would be the ability to mask your alignment from the forces of good.

In the same way, what is "Detect Good" for? Detect Evil, that's handy, as evil tends to come sneaking through your back door. But Detect Good? Once the Paladins come smashing through your front door, you'll know they're here anyway, no need for a detect spell. --Mkill 03:23, 14 June 2007 (MDT)

I was thinking about what you said about the Aura of Evil and I think that, to balance out that evil aura, that you should instead install a class feature that invokes the benefits of Nondetection. If not that, then add the spell to the Anti-Paladin's repertoire and that should cover that. Maybe a 2nd or 3rd level spell or something. Also, to point out, apparently one has not read up on what a aura of good/evil can do. Basically, if one is high enough level, they can stun a person. So in order to get the peons in order and those good clerics, they just cast the spell and they can just cower before your evilness.
The alignment spout shows you may not know alignments very well or that you have a different set of beliefs about them. Only the gods can determine whether or not one will is breaking alignment. One's actions hardly dictate what one actually feels, you know. It's all about the mind and the intention. Besides, it's just as easy for a person to go Chaotic as well you know. Besides, Paladins are more on the lawful spectrum anyway, despite what any SRD variants want to say.:-P
As for the "Anti-Paladians can't heal" thing, I will agree with you on that. Perhaps, in lieu of things changing at 3rd level, why not, when the Anti-Paladin prays for spells, let him decide if he's going to be sending positive or negative energy that day. Maybe throw in a descriptor of, if a good person is healed by a Anti-Paladin, that they feel like a shiver or something, like a sense of wrongness.
That's all I got, for now. -- Flession 06:44, 14 June 2007 (MDT)
For the "evil Paladin can't heal" problem, simply state that the Paladin can choose whether to create negative or positive energy with this Lay on Hands, at the moment when he uses it.
About the alignments question, well, poor Bruce was talking to his deity (exaggerated for comic effect). Your class clearly states: "An anti-paladin who ... willfully commits an act that is severely out of step with his alignment ... loses all anti-paladin spells and abilities". Give money to orphans and you're out! But that's stupid. Being evil means you don't have to care about moral issues and the consequences of your actions. Why would an evil Paladin have to care about whether what he does is good or evil?
Oh, and I just saw that all Paladins get the "Undetectable Alignment" spell. I don't know what a lawful good Paladin wants to do with the spell, but it works great for the Anti-Paladin. --Mkill 07:44, 14 June 2007 (MDT)
I know what a good paladin could do with undetectable alignment, they could pretend to be an evil person or... An ANTIPALADIN!!! Du dudu daaaaaa!
I must confess that I agree the class is not perfect (far from it). I will, however, have to remain inflexible on the points of alignment. I'll try to address each of your points in turn.
The original author of this class listed Anti-Paladins as Chaotic Evil, but I changed it and defended my decision in the above "Question" thread. However, since it still seems that some people don't agree, I'll provide some more considerations. Using the same example of Bruce speaking with his deity, let's examine first why he was giving to the orphans. Evidently, Bruce felt that publicly appearing to be a person of high moral fibre was more helpful to his plan than detrimental. We can logically assume that Bruce's mission for the greater evil requires some bit of deception. Perhaps he plans to later brainwash the children or sacrifice them to his evil patron. Just because an act is good on the surface does not mean that it is a good act. If you're having some difficulty grasping that, look at the alignment scale from the opposite direction; in stead of good being the desireable social alignment, think of evil as the norm. With this new perspective, assume Wayne is a Paladin (not an Anti-Paladin) working to subvert the local government to pave the way for a better tomorrow. He does this in secret, obviously, and may need to do some evil acts to keep his cover. Just because Wayne turns an innocent man into the authorities (which leads to the man's death) does not necessarily mean he has violated his alignment if, in the end, he serves the greater good by sacrificing one for the benefit of many. So, in stead of Bruce's evil deity spitefully saying "Bruce, you gave to the poor. Turn in your banner on the way out," the response would be "Bruce, what purpose did giving to those beggars serve?" This difference is subtle, but important.
Moving along, the only reason I left healing out of the Anti-Paladin's arsenal was because Paladins are never observed to channel negative energy through inflict spells. If there is a concensus in favor of Anti-Paladins being healing-capable, I will reword the entries that restrict this ability.
Concerning the Aura of Evil, I think Flession put things rather succinctly. However, when I redesigned this build, I did not envision Anti-Paladins as consummate deceivers; moreover, as a DM, I usually leave the deception strictly up to the players who more often than not work out surprisingly complex deceits and keep NPCs fooled with whatever is at their disposal. I will concede that my oversight left the Anti-Paladin less capable of deception on its own than many may have imagined.
At any rate, what I attempted to create with my redesign was an archetypal face character for an evil adventuring party. The previous incarnation of this class more resembled a spineless thug with some oddball weapon proficiencies than anything capable of wreaking havoc throughout the land. At the same time, I realise that even though I've labeled it complete, the class is far from being truly complete. Personally, I've never really found a class that I felt worked well and was truly not improvable in some fashion. --Rakankou 16:56, 14 June 2007 (MDT)
Dear Rakankou, I hope I didn't sound too harsh with my criticism. I tend to use ironic exaggeration a lot to drive a point home, but that does not work well with everybody. And of course, even if something might be complete, there is always room for debate and improvement, but that's the fun part of game design.
As for the alignment debate, it boils down to a deeply philosophic decision: Is an act good or evil because of its consequences or because of its intentions?
Can Wayne the Paladin really accept that his intended goal, to undermine and overthrow the evil local government, demands him to commit acts which are evil in deed, such as sentencing an innocent man to death? Is he not rather acting in the delusion that his ultimate goal will be good and that it is enough to justify any means? If any means are justified, where is the difference between good and evil?
As I see it, any PC of good alignment, and especially a Paladin, will face situations where there is no solution that causes no harm to anyone, and he has to compromise. But just claiming that the ultimate goal is not enough, every step over the line and every sacrifice for the greater good has to be carefully weighed.
On the other hand, the evil side has no such trifles. Being evil means that you don't care about the consequences of your actions, only about your own good. Being evil means you don't have to care about stepping over the line, or worry about using means that are not justified by the cause. Being evil means the only compass of your morality are your own desires and compassions.
That is why it doesn't work if you just mirror the limitations of good on evil. An evil deity does not check on the actions of its followers. As an evil deity, you know that your followers will commit enough evil acts out of their own selfishness. Your worry is rather whether they go to far and cause your own downfall by infighting and making to many outside foes. The church is ruined if everybody is too evil, not too good.
If I was an evil deity, I would set limits on how much my Paladins can steal from the church, prohibit slaying of loyal followers and limit infighting to formal, non-lethal duels, because these are the actions that weaken my church. --Mkill 12:26, 15 June 2007 (MDT)
Not too harsh at all; if it's constructive, a harsh review is usually the best kind. At any rate, I think this issue is probably just our different views of the alignment system. Any DM incorporating something into a game should obviously mold things to fit his or her own views of things, but if you would just spend another moment on my thought here. The alignment system is, at best, a method for delivering a magical identification of each individual in a game. At worst, the alignment system is a method for crafty players to bend the rules in particularly abominal ways. But, relating this to the Anti-Paladin...
The archetypal anti-paladin and the archetypal paladin are a devout practitioners of some system who seek to rid the multiverse of anything counter to their deity's dogma. The only separating factor are their methods. Most people are willing to cede that Inquisitors are paragons of Law, and typically Good-aligned because of their church, yet these inquisitors often employ methods of evil such as torture and brainwashing. Still, inquisitors, no matter how malicious they are, usually never get branded as evil. Why is this? Because inquisitors do not care one way or the other about the sacrifices they must make in the name of the greater good --in other words, they are above squabbling at mores. You have intoned that you feel evil is precisely this way; if you accept that inquisitors of a good deity must be good-aligned to receive their spells, etc, then you must also accept that the alignment system is transparent, and anything that can be applied to one extreme must, logically, be applicable to its opposite.
In a nutshell, I feel that any individual with enough devotion is more or less morally unrestricted, regardless of his or her position on the good/evil alignment axis. --Rakankou 20:41, 15 June 2007 (MDT)
The way I see it, the Anti-Paladin is the Face of Evil. If you look at the class's background, it looks to me as if they are the overt side of evil- to use a Star Wars metaphor, more Darth Vader or Darth Maul (Look at me! I'm obviously out to massacre you all!) than Darth Sidious (I'm a nice Senator, honest). That's just my interpretation, of course. MorkaisChosen 09:06, 6 December 2007 (MST)
Not to be annoying and necro a dead thread or anything, but the idea behind being a Paladin vs. an Anti-Paladin is upholding the rules, right? As a Lawful Good Paladin, your rules are "help the people, don't use poison, no being deceitful at all". Breaking those rules means you lose your status. But think about it -- why would a Paladin not help people? Probably because he's going for helping the greater good, and realizes that killing these people is worth saving the world or something (or he's saving his own skin). Why would he be decietful? Same reasons. So either the Paladin is acting in the benefit of the greater good (Chaos) or he's helping himself (Neutrality).
The same concepts apply to the Anti-Paladin. If the Anti-Paladin doesn't uphold the rules of evil ("Kill one baby every day, kill supporters of good, etc.", he loses his power. So why wouldn't an Anti-paladin kill people? Either because he's planning an even greater genocide (Chaos), or he'd like to save his own skin (Neutrality). Wow... those are the exact same reasons!! So the Anti-Paladin will lose favor of his Deity if he goes too far into a killing spree, where he begins to disregard the laws of respectful combat (remember, he's Evil) or if he decides to shift to Neutral and save his own ass. So Bruce doesn't need to give to the orphans. If he just stops killing them (as part of his daily tribute) because they recently got a group of 4 CR 20 Gold Dragons to guard them, then he'll lose his Anti-Paladinship anyway. --For Valor 00:18, 17 June 2009 (MDT)

Someone who is Lawful evil "methodically takes what he wants within the limits of his code of conduct without regard for whom it hurts. He cares about tradition, loyalty, and order but not about freedom, dignity, or life. He plays by the rules but without mercy or compassion. He is comfortable in a hierarchy and would like to rule, but is willing to serve. He condemns others not according to their actions but according to race, religion, homeland, or social rank. He is loath to break laws or promises. " So basically, they work towards their goal without breaking laws, and they may work of a hierarchy. Also, the whole "good deed" thing. In my opinion is if you do a good deed for the sake of doing a good deed. As you see, if the good deed is being done to deceive people into thinking of them as the good guy, they're still being evil by using good deeds as a shield from the public. Also, for more info on lawful evil, look at the page on it in this wiki. [signed Cataru]


I have a question about the spell list for the Anti-Paladin. I'm not sure this is the place to post this but here goes. I'm playing an Anti-paladin in a campaign right now and I'm getting closer to Lv.6 (ie 1rst Lv. spells). Some of the spells are obviously Clerical but there are some that I haven't havent been able to discern or find any information about. All examples I've found just of first level Anti-Paladin spells which have no description are

Anarchic Water, Clear Mind, Deafening Clang, Lesser Energized Shield, Golden Barding, Grave Strike, Know Greatest Enemy, Lionheart, Moment of Clarity, Lesser One Mind, Resist Planar Alignment, Rhino's Rush, Second Wind, Silverbeard, Sticky Saddle, Strategic Charge, Traveler's Mount, Vision of Glory, Warning Shout and Lesser Restoration.

Any help from anyone about these spells, the 2nd through 4th level spells which are also yet unidentified, would be greatly appreciated as I wish to use these spells as my Anti-paladin character develops.

Great thanks & Gratitude, --Nilandiælvlæntarafune 02:37, 10 September 2007

The spells that have no links in the article are not part of the SRD or D&DWiki; most of these spells are from the Spell Compendium, though the list itself is an amalgamation of both the Paladin and Blackguard spell lists. If your group has no Spell Compendium, then you should work with your DM to create a spell list out of the spells available to you. Almost any Blackguard or Paladin spell will do, you just need to make sure that it fits with both the class and your character.
Hope that helps some, --Rakankou 20:50, 10 September 2007 (MDT)
Additionally, lesser restoration is in the SRD/PHB. —Sledged (talk) 11:44, 11 September 2007 (MDT)

Changing Alignment[edit]

I suggest adding a section at the end that basically says that an Anti-Paladin who becomes Good can switch all his class levels to Paladin i he receives an Atonement spell (with the standard XP cost), and vice-versa. I think it'd be good to represent tempting Paladins to evil and Anti-Paladins getting a conscience. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by MorkaisChosen (talkcontribs) 12:51, 5 December 2007 (MDT). Please sign your posts.

Sounds good. Feel free to add it. --Green Dragon 15:27, 5 December 2007 (MST)

Divine grace[edit]

what happened with adding this? I thought all Paladins got their CHA modifier to their saves. Will you add this to this class too? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talkcontribs) 05:25, 6 February 2008 (MST). Please sign your posts.


Nice, i made a similar thing on paper, but different, I love some of the different specials, I have some other cool ideas for this sort of thing, if your interested just ask :D

okay my idea is instead of divine health they are immune to poison lets call it "Fiendish blood" and instead of lay on hand "give the pain" they can give there wounds to enemy's a certain amount a day, equal to lay on hands, and enemy's get a fort save (half class level +cha modifier).

just some idea's I have, fell free to use them, or ignore them, It's yours now, lol :D

and as for the mention that giving diseases is weaker than curing them, I agree, as such I propose that we make it a recurring disease, it keeps reoccuring until a "cure disease" like spell is cast, what do you think of that? --Zombiecow 02:33, 20 February 2008 (MST)


Formatting - 4/5: I give this a 4/5 on formatting because this uses an old style table, does not have enough links (mainly within the spell section), and uses incorrect header levels. --Green Dragon 13:39, 21 February 2008 (MST)


Power -

    4/5 I give this class a 4 out of 5 because It is well thought out it only needs some final polishings to make it something worthy of a hard bound book.-- 20:43, 12 April 2008 (MDT)

Wording - 3.5/5

    I give this class a 3.5 out of 5 because See Help:Standards and Formatting.  -- 20:43, 12 April 2008 (MDT)

Formatting - 4/5

    I give this class a 4 out of 5 because Pretty good here but I think it could be better aligned in both spells and descriptive formating of the abilities, spells and usages.  For example what is it that causes the harm touch like ability of the lay on hands of the anti-paladin, why is it such a difference from a normal paladin.  -- 20:43, 12 April 2008 (MDT)

Flavor - 3/5

    I give this class a 3 out of 5 because there was no material background or historic context added.  One of the base core classes with a shift should at the very least have some generic dieties that support paladins, orders and or societies that enlist them.  This will help player and DM alike when it comes time to play one as a PC or NPC.  -- 20:43, 12 April 2008 (MDT)


Power - 4/5 I give this class a 4 out of 5 because it seems weaker than the SRD paladin. Even though his ability to cause damage with the lay on hands is a good feature, he doesn't have the divine grace ability and intimidation specialization seems weaker than divine --ElfsMaster 01:08, 25 April 2008 (MDT)

Wording - 4/5 I give this class a 4 out of 5 because the writing is good. However, it's not perfect, with a few unecessary expressions and hard to understand statements. --ElfsMaster 01:08, 25 April 2008 (MDT)

Formatting - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because it seems to follow the formatting templates. --ElfsMaster 01:08, 25 April 2008 (MDT)

Flavor - 4/5 I give this class a 4 out of 5 because it fits perfectly the role of an evil paladin. It's well explained and well thought, only not perfect because of the lack of an exemple NPC --ElfsMaster 01:08, 25 April 2008 (MDT)

The SRD paladin is kinda weak though as-is, unless you're making an ubercharger... What does that say about this class? :-\ Ghostwheel 18:48, 8 July 2009 (MDT)

Side Note[edit]

Just need to say this has already been done in a sense. It would be the Dark Knight from "The Secret College of Necromancy" by Arcana on the D20 system. -- 09:24, 17 May 2008 (MDT)

The Death Knight class from the Secret College of Necromancy is a very focused Paladin variant; that is, the Death Knight is an evil Paladin as much as the Greenstar Adept from Complete Arcane is a very focused Fighter variant. The Death Knight is strongly attached to Undead, whereas this Anti-Paladin is a more generalized evil Paladin. I wanted a very flexible sort of evil, not another undead one. --Rakankou 20:41, 18 May 2008 (MDT)


Power - <<<Insert Your Rating Here>>>/5 I give this class a <<<5>>> out of 5 because <<<insert why you gave the rating and how to improve it>>> -- 23:06, 2 June 2009 (MDT)

Wording - <<<Insert Your Rating Here>>>/5 I give this class a <<<5>>> out of 5 because <<<insert why you gave the rating and how to improve it>>> -- 23:06, 2 June 2009 (MDT)

Formatting - <<<5>>>/5 I give this class a <<<Insert Your Rating Here>>> out of 5 because <<<insert why you gave the rating and how to improve it>>> -- 23:06, 2 June 2009 (MDT)

Flavor - <<<5>>>/5 I give this class a <<<Insert Your Rating Here>>> out of 5 because <<<insert why you gave the rating and how to improve it>>> -- 23:06, 2 June 2009 (MDT)

Rating nullified; no justifications give. -- Jota 11:18, 17 June 2009 (MDT)


Power - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because it's as powerful as it should be without being overpowered. --NoobcakeDM 15:35, 14 October 2009 (MDT)

Wording - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because i personally couldn't have worded it better, and it is set up like an actual base class in one of the books. --NoobcakeDM 15:35, 14 October 2009 (MDT)

Formatting - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because 5, because it was possibly the most user-friendly format i've seen yet. --NoobcakeDM 15:35, 14 October 2009 (MDT)

Flavor - 4/5 I give this class a 4 out of 5 because this, i found, was a little lacking because it was kind of repetative on the motivation of an anti-paladin. there are a host of reasons for an evil crusader to be motivated, i feel this only explored a few... a "tip of the iceberg" situation. --NoobcakeDM 15:35, 14 October 2009 (MDT)


'Power - 1/5' I give this class a 1 out of 5 because it is a weak, unoriginal mirror of the paladin.

'Wording - 3/5' I give this class a 3 out of 5 because although the grammar and layout were fine, it was a legitimately boring read.

'Standards and Formatting - 4/5' I give this class a 4 out of 5 because the formatting itself was fine, though really nothing out of the ordinary.

'Flavor - 1/5' I give this class a 1 out of 5 because the entire design hinges off a flawed idea of a character. A paladin works, because he is morally obligated to stick to a STRICT path of righteousness, which adds a level of difficulty, flavor, and interest to the class. Simply reversing everything about the class does not necessarily make for balanced, fun or interesting game play for the player or DM. This class exists on a minimum of two levels already, what with the Blackguard prestige from the DMG, and with the Unholy Warrior base class from the Unholy Warrior's Handbook (EASILY adopted to 3.5 or 4e).


Balance - X/5 I give this class a X out of 5 because --2601:8:8D80:5B3:646D:401D:EC1B:6592 17:17, 2 December 2013 (MST)

Wording - X/5 I give this class a X out of 5 because --2601:8:8D80:5B3:646D:401D:EC1B:6592 17:17, 2 December 2013 (MST)

Formatting - X/5 I give this class a X out of 5 because --2601:8:8D80:5B3:646D:401D:EC1B:6592 17:17, 2 December 2013 (MST)

Flavor - X/5 I give this class a X out of 5 because --2601:8:8D80:5B3:646D:401D:EC1B:6592 17:17, 2 December 2013 (MST)

Home of user-generated,
homebrew pages!