Talk:Noble Warrior (3.5e Class)

From D&D Wiki

Jump to: navigation, search

Base Attack/Skills/Stuff[edit]

The current base-attack progression you're using is wrong (You have to use either Poor, Average or Good progresion). Next to that, I'd strip some of the skills and simply give it Average (or maybe even Good) attack progression... It's a warrior, anyway. Pharen 06:32, 1 May 2009 (MDT)

It's a skilled warrior, it's essentially a rogue with none of the trap-finding and the magic item use, and more built towards resolving situations through speech and diplomacy. I didn't -build- it to be Fighter, and I'm not going to do so, though I knew the BAB was iffy. (Starting it off at 0, then 1/2, then 1 isn't one of the progressions, though?) --Avlindrel FallenTree 13:54, 1 May 2009 (MDT) Avlindrel 2:54 May 1st, 2009 (CST)
Well, I'd go for the rogue if I was a PC then. I'd put my high roll 18 in Charisma and be good at diplomacy/intimidate etc, and I'd have an Average attack progression and the beautifull sneak attack. Anyway, the 3 progressions are Poor (BAB = Level/2, rounded down), Average (BAB = Level*0.75, rounded down), or Good (BAB = Level), and I'd really go for at least Average BAB, since it's somewhat a combo of rogue (Average), paladin (Good) and Cleric (Good). I agree that a Good attack progression is over the top (The Cleric ís overpowered, after all), but if you go with poor, than this guy is a paladin/cleric without smashpower or a weak rogue without sneak attack. Pharen 00:45, 2 May 2009 (MDT)
I did edit the BAB, so for now I think it's fairly balanced amidst other classes. And, of course you'd pick Rogue for a more combat-styled class, as it's been defined as such, and given abilities that let it excel if you specialize in it. This class has a different way of excelling in combat which you pointed out yourself (In regards to the combo thing). It's an alternative, though, and I feel safe in the knowledge that it's got a good rep for itself. --Avlindrel FallenTree 02:37, 2 May 2009 (MDT)
Hmm, Well I'm not going to edit the class into having an average base attack bonus, but as I quote from the intro: "who doesn't slack for combat either.". As for the different way of excelling, it makes use of paladin and cleric attacks, true, but those classes do have the benefit from spellcasting, which this class lacks. Any character active in melee should not be drawn back by a wizard-bab, Imho. Would you mind showing an example in which you balance out this class against a core class, maybe? Pharen 12:27, 2 May 2009 (MDT)
It doesn't have a Wizard's BAB anymore... --Avlindrel FallenTree 14:48, 2 May 2009 (MDT)
Umm... It does... here anyway, its showing a progression equal to level/2, which is the wizard bab. Either that or my cache is haunted. Pharen 04:06, 3 May 2009 (MDT)

To Pharen[edit]

Read the article, do not edit without my permission. --Avlindrel FallenTree 14:24, 3 May 2009 (MDT)

Oi, I saw that there was a little mistake in the table which you didn't intend to be there. Didn't change anything to your class whatsoever. If you don't want people to help you, don't post stuff on a wiki... Sorry Mate Pharen 00:24, 4 May 2009 (MDT)
This isn't your article, you are -not- free to edit it as you please. You ask someone before using their book, don't you? I do, and I'd like that same courtesy. I thank you -for- the edit, but please ask me next time. --Avlindrel FallenTree 00:26, 4 May 2009 (MDT)
You might try saying "thank you" to thank me next time, instead of placing angry notes on a discussion page. As I said, this is a wiki. I can understand you don't want everyone skipping around on your pages, but correcting an obvious mistake is something different than adding a class ability, for example. I'm not going to ask you anything, because there is not going to be a next time I will help improving this article. Good day. Pharen 00:52, 4 May 2009 (MDT)

Noble Aura[edit]

If it doesn't work in an antimagic field, it's probably a spell-like ability. Also, you may want to re-order the auras considering most players would prefer a +2 to attack over +2 AC (Difference between a +2 weapon and a +2 ring of protection), and no class gets DR 15 at non-epic levels. Other than that, this class is starting to look unique and fun to play. Good job. --Mrwest13 05:28, 4 May 2009 (MDT)

Heirloom Sword comes first, so that's already been corrected... The antimagic field thing is more to balance it out, as you don't want people to have many advantages inside such situations (I've never seen a anti-magic field used without the DM wanting the people almost helpless) And, the DR is versus an easy to bypass attack type, it's not as if they gain it versus something that doesn't occur every so often. And, it's not even the best choice defensively as an aura, it's just real nice if you are encountering a group of creatures/enemy NPCs who don't use Good/Evil-aligned spells alot. I personally would rather have the immunity, or the AC aura in effect. But, all in all, thanks for the critique. --Avlindrel FallenTree 14:00, 4 May 2009 (MDT) P.S. I did lower the DR to 10, though, thinking it is a little bit high for 16.
DR 10 is much better (comparable to Monk). Also, you may want to scale the AB and AC aura so they're still usable at higher levels (a +1 bonus at level 15 and 20 might help in that regard). Also, I would recommend you change the auras to supernatural. Here's the entry on supernatural: "By default, supernatural abilities are magical and go away in an antimagic field. However, some creatures have psionic abilities that are considered supernatural. Psionic feats are also supernatural abilities. These abilities do not function in areas where psionics is suppressed. Supernatural abilities of either type are not subject to spell resistance nor power resistance. Supernatural abilities cannot be dispelled and are not subject to counterspells. Using a supernatural ability is a standard action unless noted otherwise. Supernatural abilities may have a use limit or be usable at will, just like spell-like abilities. However, supernatural abilities do not provoke attacks of opportunity and never require Concentration checks. Unless otherwise noted, a supernatural ability has an effective caster level equal to the creature’s Hit Dice. The saving throw (if any) against a supernatural ability is 10 + 1/2 the creature’s HD + the creature’s ability modifier (usually Charisma)." --Mrwest13 20:27, 6 May 2009 (MDT)
I scaled them, and made the auras Supernatural. --Avlindrel FallenTree 23:10, 6 May 2009 (MDT)

Royal Aura: Fire / Cold[edit]

This currently has no range, and thus effects only the NW. --Mrwest13 05:35, 5 May 2009 (MDT)

Inspiration[edit]

Hmm. Interesting. Can I ask, what inspired you to make this class? It seems very interesting... though I will admit, I do prefer my PrC to it. I tend to prefer the heavily-armored warriors that everyone takes for granted to the boastful, half-naked ones who steal the spotlight, heh. -- Cronocke 02:55, 21 May 2009 (MDT)

Yes, well, he'd just be another Paladin, or Knight variant if he were able to wear Armor. --Avlindrel FallenTree 14:16, 21 May 2009 (MDT)

  (i.e. the "nowiki" tag) -->

Rating[edit]

Power - <<<4>>>/5 I give this class a <<<4>>> out of 5 because <<<because with his ac bonus can some times make him to hard to hit next to that he seams perfectly balanced >>> --142.162.183.94 16:43, 28 February 2013 (MST)

Wording - <<<5>>>/5 I give this class a <<<5>>> out of 5 because <<<insert why you gave the rating and how to improve it>>> --142.162.183.94 16:43, 28 February 2013 (MST)

Formatting - <<<5>>>/5 I give this class a <<<5>>> out of 5 because <<<insert why you gave the rating and how to improve it>>> --142.162.183.94 16:43, 28 February 2013 (MST)

Flavor - <<<5>>>/5 I give this class a <<<5>>> out of 5 because <<<nice to have a rich boy in the game>>> --142.162.183.94 16:43, 28 February 2013 (MST)

Home of user-generated,
homebrew pages!