So I was wondering if anyone else had the same issue I have had playing the Knight.
I played with it up to seventh level before asking my DM to let me change.
I like the look and feel of the Knight but mechanically I found it just didn't work. I would mark the enemy and pull aggro nicely but then they would hit me until I died leaving my pals to fight and try to keep me alive. Not once did I get to use my reaction at all to hit anything and gain the benefit of marking them. No really, not once. My DM said they know they would be at a disadvantage to try and hit something else so why would they not hit you? Frankly, I had to agree.
I haven't tried playing it, but I figured that is the whole point of how it is supposed to work?
It looked to me like the archetype was designed by someone who had played a lot of World of Warcraft and was trying to create a taunt/threat mechanic, so that bosses hit the knight and the knight gets healed.
Did you have a cleric in the party who was healing you during fights?
I haven't tried playing it, but I figured that is the whole point of how it is supposed to work?
It looked to me like the archetype was designed by someone who had played a lot of World of Warcraft and was trying to create a taunt/threat mechanic, so that bosses hit the knight and the knight gets healed.
Did you have a cleric in the party who was healing you during fights?
Hello Stormknight,
You are somewhat correct in your assessment. However, as this class has not been adjusted fully to be effective, it does have some problems.
1. The first problem with this archetype is that most of its abilities come from opportunity attacks and the like. If your DM is not very advanced/professional, you will not usually have the opportunity (pun intended) to actually use the abilities of this archetype.
2. The second problem is that yes, this archetype looks like it was meant to be taunt/threat type character, and yet does not have the abilities to do so. The mark ability causes the enemy to focus their attacks on you. The problem is that the AC of a knight is actually not that high. If you are a tank character you want a very high AC. However, for some reason, there is no support for AC, hp, damage reduction or anything that would help the actually knight survive. Yes, as you pointed out, it is possible to have a cleric or maybe a paladin to heal your character. The reason this does not work is 1) at low levels the heal is not large enough to heal the incoming damage effectively 2) you would need several healers in one team for each knight. This means that you would have the knight taking the damage, and dealing it, with the rest of the team healing the knight. This does not work out very well.
3. The knight archetype has many things to do with mounted combat. Yet, there is no real instructions on mounts or mounted combat that is available. The knight archetype seems like it was supposed to be some kind of cavalry/tank hybrid and yet did not gain a real explanation of the cavalry aspect and did not get any defense buff either. Remember that monks have a very similar AC without even wearing armor.
I actually looked it over and thought it was mechanically unsound just by looking at it.
I actually did some of my own adjustments (which i'll link below) but now that you mention ac I think adding something to better allow the knight to take attacks (ac increase, impose disadvantage, or maybe take half damage from marked creatures) would be something to add.
Also I found that the mounted combat just isnt something thats a fun class to play and hinestly that was the only thing separating it from the Samurai.
I wholeheartedly agree that the knight as it is written is not a fun class. I'd really like to know any thoughts on my adjustments to it if you're up for a quick read. Also thanks for voicing this it's gpimg to help me brainstorm a little more.
I actually looked it over and thought it was mechanically unsound just by looking at it.
I actually did some of my own adjustments (which i'll link below) but now that you mention ac I think adding something to better allow the knight to take attacks (ac increase, impose disadvantage, or maybe take half damage from marked creatures) would be something to add.
Also I found that the mounted combat just isnt something thats a fun class to play and hinestly that was the only thing separating it from the Samurai.
I wholeheartedly agree that the knight as it is written is not a fun class. I'd really like to know any thoughts on my adjustments to it if you're up for a quick read. Also thanks for voicing this it's gpimg to help me brainstorm a little more.
Try this out instead of the knight options (can easily be translated into a knight). It's a more tanky build that STILL helps nearby allies.
Legionnaire
The Legionnaire is a lance wielding warrior known for leading armies into battle. Often the first line of defense against an oncoming horde, the Legionnaire is a warrior who uses tactics and sheer willpower to prevent the onslaught of forces from attacking those he or she defends.
Phalanx Beginning at 3rd Level, your ability to defend your allies improves. As long as you are wearing a shield, any ally within 5 feet of you can add your shield’s AC bonus against attacks from enemies within your reach.
Also, anytime an ally within 5 feet of you is targeted by a spell or attack that requires a ranged attack roll that doesn’t include you, you may use your reaction to become the target of that attack instead. The attacking creature gains advantage for that attack. You must use this ability before the attack roll is made.
Hold the Line
Beginning at 7th Level, you can add half your proficiency bonus (rounded up) to any Strength, Dexterity, or Constitution check you make that doesn’t already use your proficiency bonus.
In addition, when you are subjected to an effect that would move you, knock you prone, or both, you can use your reaction to be neither moved nor knocked prone.
Strategos At 11th level, your ability to lead from the frontlines emboldens your allies. Whenever you use your action to use either the Dodge or Help action, you can use your bonus action allow an ally to attack. When you do so, choose a friendly creature that can see or hear you and that creature can use its reaction to make one weapon attack. That creature has advantage for the attack.
Final Bastion Starting at 15th level, when you are reduced to 0 hit points and are not killed outright, you can choose to drop to 1 hit point instead. Once you use this ability, you can’t use it again until you finish a long rest.
Since this was actually built for another class, you'll have to fudge the numbers as far as what level you get specific abilities: Phalanx at 3, Hold The Line at 7, Strategos at 10, and Final Bastion at 18. You could add the following abillity:
Healing Surge Starting at 15th level, your desire to protect the things you hold dear allows you to push yourself even further than you normally can. You can use the Second Wind action twice before a rest, but only once on the same turn. Also, whenever you use Action Surge to take an additional action you can use Second Wind as a part of the additional action.
So, basically you get another use of Second Wind and you can use one of them as a free action whenever you use the Action Surge ability. This has good synergy with Action Surge at level 17 when you can do it twice. The idea behind this ability is that you aren't wasting your bonus action to heal yourself when you can be either attacking or using the Help/Dodge action to help your party members or protect yourself.
The idea behind this archetype is a cross between a Roman Legionnaire and the 4e Warlord class, where you are more concerned with protecting and aiding your allies than you are attacking yourself. Use the Help action to give your ally advantage on their next attack AND give them a free attack with your bonus action. This is super useful for characters like Rogues (sneak attack)/Paladins (divine smite) who can put all of their eggs into one super powerful basket. Granted, you might not deal as much damage (though by proxy you might), but your party is going to be safer so long as you are near; which is kinda the whole point of a Knight too.
“It is a better world. A place where we are responsible for our actions, where we can be kind to one another because we want to and because it is the right thing to do instead of being frightened into behaving by the threat of divine punishment.” ― Oramis, Eldest by Christopher Paolini.
So I was wondering if anyone else had the same issue I have had playing the Knight.
I played with it up to seventh level before asking my DM to let me change.
I like the look and feel of the Knight but mechanically I found it just didn't work. I would mark the enemy and pull aggro nicely but then they would hit me until I died leaving my pals to fight and try to keep me alive. Not once did I get to use my reaction at all to hit anything and gain the benefit of marking them. No really, not once. My DM said they know they would be at a disadvantage to try and hit something else so why would they not hit you? Frankly, I had to agree.
Is that the uniform experience?
Phillip,
I think one big disadvantage you had was a DM who allowed the opposition to know they had been marked. I will go reread things but I never got the impression that being marked was something that was discernible by the target. Of course, the whole being marked thing is something I have some issue with but that is for another forum and another time. I have a player in one of my games who is playing the UA Knight as written and has had some success with it but that may be due to the fact that I don't change how the opponents target the PCs just because they are marked. However, I did find that the Born to the Saddle feature did cause me to have to add quite a few house rules regarding mounted combat. Luckily for me most of my sessions are ran above ground so we have had a couple of mounted combats. In those sequences the Knight really shined, but I could see where DMs that focus on underground, deep forest, and interior adventure locales would limit the Knight's effectiveness.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
As for me, I choose to believe that an extinct thunder lizard is running a game of Dungeons & Dragons via Twitter!
See, I disagree that the opposition wouldn't know they are marked, simply because if a creature is immune to being frightened, they are immune to the mark ability.
Think about how the mechanic works, the target is marked if they are hit by an attack. Meaning they have just suffered damage, and are now affected by an ability that only affects those who can be frightened. That sounds to me like your attack was so menacing (they actually used that word in the description) that the opponent has no other option but to focus on you, because after the attack, you are seen as its biggest threat. Now, they might not necessarily know that "if I attack it will be with disadvantage" or "if I move I will be attacked and the Knight will deal extra damage". But it's entirely plausible that the enemy thought, "I need to focus on him, because if I don't there's no telling what this guy is able to do." An intelligent creature might be able to think: "Yeah he's scary, but I really need to get rid of that spellcaster or he's going to destroy me," and might choose to take the risk (suffering disadvantage and/or the opportunity attack), but something with little intelligence (like a beast) or an honor/glory-bound race (like an orc) would simply attack what it perceives as the biggest threat.
That's where I think the DM in question could have made a mistake. I'm assuming there were instances where a more tactical mind (say a cunning bandit or enemy spellcaster) would have assessed the risk and decided that targeting someone else would be more beneficial, regardless of the possible negative outcome from the Knight's mark. But, for the most part, that's the purpose of marking: to make the enemy focus on the one doing the marking. To put it in MMO terms, this is the equivalent of a taunt. You are mentally provoking the enemy to attack you, so that your allies are safe (after all you are wearing heavy armor, have a shield, and likely have the most hit points on the team (except for any barbarians of course).
Now as for the Knight class itself. I feel it's all about how you build it. You should aim to be the best possible tank you can. Since you are a fighter you start off with heavy armor AND shield proficiency. You should probably take the Defense fighting style, as going protection just seems kind of redundant with Implacable Mark and Extra Attack (marking two targets per round seems like enough - four with Action surge if you REALLY want to).
So, 16 AC with chainmail (starting package) + 2 with shield +1 from Defense fighting style: That's 19 AC at 1st level. Make Constitution your highest ability (or second highest since you want to be able to hit) and you're looking at ~12 hit points at first level. If you are human (variant) you can take Heavy Armor Master as your feat to get damage reduction against most melee attacks, Shield Master (to give yourself breathing room by shoving with your shield and give yourself a better saving throw + evasion against Dexterity saving throw attacks, like Fireball or a dragon's breath weapon), or Tough (to give yourself extra Hit Points). Another option would be Defensive Duelist and wield a rapier (which is still a d8 damage like a longsword and you don't HAVE to use Dexterity for a Finesse weapon if you don't want to). So if they attack someone else or move you can attack them them OR if they attack you, you can add your proficiency bonus to your already high AC, becaause 21 AC at first level is pretty stupid good.
“It is a better world. A place where we are responsible for our actions, where we can be kind to one another because we want to and because it is the right thing to do instead of being frightened into behaving by the threat of divine punishment.” ― Oramis, Eldest by Christopher Paolini.
So OP, what was your level, AC, and Max HP? All of these things are important factors in setting the knight up properly to actually tank. In the 4e tradition the Knight is a defender who tries to set up catch-22's to force the enemy to choose between two bad options. If they attack allies, they have disadvantage, if they attack you, the attack should have a good chance of being a waste. You want at least 18 AC, and to get it as high as you can- a shield is mandatory unless you have plate armor in which case it's at least still a very good idea (the higher your AC is, the more valuable the next point of it is). You also want a bit of HP, so you should probably keep Con and your attack stat (str) both high, maybe even maxing out CON first (unless your dex happens to contribute to your AC).
When building a tank you need to ask yourself the following: what bad thing happens to my foes when they ignore me? and, what bad things happen to them when they don't? The archetype itself covers the first part with disadvantage (and the usual of opportunity attacks), so you need to cover the second- any attack that bounces off your stupendous (around 20) AC is a wasted action for the enemies, and high HP is another tool for the same purpose, maybe they could 2 or 3 shot your squishy wizard and take them out of the fight, but if you have a bunch of HP they should be taking a bunch of actions to drop you- allowing you to absorb many of the blows that would drop your friends- but you'll still melt without a high AC.
You need either Plate (strength build) or Studded Leather (dex build) and either a Shield+Longsword or Shield+Rapier respectively for the right amount of protection, 18 AC is your target minimum- with that you COULD go two-handed, but i still don't suggest it.
in my mind a normal fighter champion or maybe battlemaster with the noble background is a knight
some of those abilities looks alot more like something a dwarven defender style character would have
historically knight wasnt marched up shoulders to shoulder to hold the line, they were heavy shock troops
Sure, a noble fighter of any build could be the IRL version of a knight. But this is a fantasy setting, where there are mages flinging spells and thieves hiding in shadows (sometimes literally).
I mean, technically a fighter could be considered a paladin, a samurai, a rogue, a swashbuckler, a ninja, etc.. given the right background. Paladin = Acolyte Str-based Fighter, Samurai = Soldier Str-based Fighter, Rogue = Charlatan/Criminal Dex-based Fighter, Swashbuckler = Entertainer/Sailor Dex-based Fighter, Ninja = Criminal Dex-based Fighter... But, as far as D&D is concerned, these classes should be different mechanically and might be better serviced as another class entirely (obv the paladin and rogue) or another subclass (for example: the ninja works better as a shadow monk or assassin rogue - or UA/DM's Guild options).
The Knight is still a Fighter in this case, but more specialized for the task. Though I'd argue the Paladin already fits the archetypal fantasy Knight/Samurai, you just have to make your Oath to a Lord/Lady/King/Emperor/etc... instead of a cause. To break your Oath is a cause of dishonor for Knights and Samurai alike (and in this case it works really well for Samurai, since an Oathbreaker Paladin would basically be a Ronin).
So, why Knight is a Fighter at all and not simply another Paladin Oath (or an adaption of the Devotion Aura), I don't know.
“It is a better world. A place where we are responsible for our actions, where we can be kind to one another because we want to and because it is the right thing to do instead of being frightened into behaving by the threat of divine punishment.” ― Oramis, Eldest by Christopher Paolini.
to me paladins have always been more than a knight
That's because you are thinking of Knights in real life and not Knights in a fantasy setting, as indicated by your use of the term "historically" when referencing their fighting style.
“It is a better world. A place where we are responsible for our actions, where we can be kind to one another because we want to and because it is the right thing to do instead of being frightened into behaving by the threat of divine punishment.” ― Oramis, Eldest by Christopher Paolini.
in my mind a normal fighter champion or maybe battlemaster with the noble background is a knight
some of those abilities looks alot more like something a dwarven defender style character would have
historically knight wasnt marched up shoulders to shoulder to hold the line, they were heavy shock troops
Sure, a noble fighter of any build could be the IRL version of a knight. But this is a fantasy setting, where there are mages flinging spells and thieves hiding in shadows (sometimes literally).
I mean, technically a fighter could be considered a paladin, a samurai, a rogue, a swashbuckler, a ninja, etc.. given the right background. Paladin = Acolyte Str-based Fighter, Samurai = Soldier Str-based Fighter, Rogue = Charlatan/Criminal Dex-based Fighter, Swashbuckler = Entertainer/Sailor Dex-based Fighter, Ninja = Criminal Dex-based Fighter... But, as far as D&D is concerned, these classes should be different mechanically and might be better serviced as another class entirely (obv the paladin and rogue) or another subclass (for example: the ninja works better as a shadow monk or assassin rogue - or UA/DM's Guild options).
The Knight is still a Fighter in this case, but more specialized for the task. Though I'd argue the Paladin already fits the archetypal fantasy Knight/Samurai, you just have to make your Oath to a Lord/Lady/King/Emperor/etc... instead of a cause. To break your Oath is a cause of dishonor for Knights and Samurai alike (and in this case it works really well for Samurai, since an Oathbreaker Paladin would basically be a Ronin).
So, why Knight is a Fighter at all and not simply another Paladin Oath (or an adaption of the Devotion Aura), I don't know.
Don't know, haven't seen SCAG. Thought about buying it, but ended up buying another damn adventure book (there's so many and they are all filled with fun encounters/dungeons).
“It is a better world. A place where we are responsible for our actions, where we can be kind to one another because we want to and because it is the right thing to do instead of being frightened into behaving by the threat of divine punishment.” ― Oramis, Eldest by Christopher Paolini.
i think of it this way... alot of people try to be the paragon of what ever but only a few succeed or get the favor of the gods etc.
same with clerics, you can be a priest but never be granted any cleric powers
Yeah, but you're an adventurer. You're supposed to have been called for a much bigger purpose. You've already been chosen by the gods. You already ARE a paragon compared to others. A typical band soldiers/guards can die to a group of goblins. At level one, you delve into their lair without a thought.
That's the difference between D&D and historical facts. Jason, Capt. Kirk, Aragorn, etc... These are all adventurers. The idiot solders/red shirts/guards getting killed simply doesn't happen to you. Hell even sub-characters like Boromir (a low level adventurer) dying is because they were willing to do what was needed. And when your death does come, it's because you fought something that the typical town guard could never hope to stand up to, and chances are, your death actually meant something to the world.
“It is a better world. A place where we are responsible for our actions, where we can be kind to one another because we want to and because it is the right thing to do instead of being frightened into behaving by the threat of divine punishment.” ― Oramis, Eldest by Christopher Paolini.
yeah im just saying if you want to play a "knight" that is more like a background thing more than it is a subclass you can approach it thorugh the fighter or paladin alike
“It is a better world. A place where we are responsible for our actions, where we can be kind to one another because we want to and because it is the right thing to do instead of being frightened into behaving by the threat of divine punishment.” ― Oramis, Eldest by Christopher Paolini.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
So I was wondering if anyone else had the same issue I have had playing the Knight.
I played with it up to seventh level before asking my DM to let me change.
I like the look and feel of the Knight but mechanically I found it just didn't work. I would mark the enemy and pull aggro nicely but then they would hit me until I died leaving my pals to fight and try to keep me alive. Not once did I get to use my reaction at all to hit anything and gain the benefit of marking them. No really, not once. My DM said they know they would be at a disadvantage to try and hit something else so why would they not hit you? Frankly, I had to agree.
Is that the uniform experience?
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
D&D Beyond FoundersI haven't tried playing it, but I figured that is the whole point of how it is supposed to work?
It looked to me like the archetype was designed by someone who had played a lot of World of Warcraft and was trying to create a taunt/threat mechanic, so that bosses hit the knight and the knight gets healed.
Did you have a cleric in the party who was healing you during fights?
Pun-loving nerd | Faith Elisabeth Lilley | She/Her/Hers | Profile art by Becca Golins
If you need help with homebrew, please post on the homebrew forums, where multiple staff and moderators can read your post and help you!
"We got this, no problem! I'll take the twenty on the left - you guys handle the one on the right!"🔊
I actually looked it over and thought it was mechanically unsound just by looking at it.
I actually did some of my own adjustments (which i'll link below) but now that you mention ac I think adding something to better allow the knight to take attacks (ac increase, impose disadvantage, or maybe take half damage from marked creatures) would be something to add.
Also I found that the mounted combat just isnt something thats a fun class to play and hinestly that was the only thing separating it from the Samurai.
I wholeheartedly agree that the knight as it is written is not a fun class. I'd really like to know any thoughts on my adjustments to it if you're up for a quick read. Also thanks for voicing this it's gpimg to help me brainstorm a little more.
Here's my rendition of the night: https://www.dndbeyond.com/forums/dungeons-dragons-discussion/unearthed-arcana/2380-thoughts-on-the-knight
Try this out instead of the knight options (can easily be translated into a knight). It's a more tanky build that STILL helps nearby allies.
Legionnaire
The Legionnaire is a lance wielding warrior known for leading armies into battle. Often the first line of defense against an oncoming horde, the Legionnaire is a warrior who uses tactics and sheer willpower to prevent the onslaught of forces from attacking those he or she defends.
Phalanx
Beginning at 3rd Level, your ability to defend your allies improves. As long as you are wearing a shield, any ally within 5 feet of you can add your shield’s AC bonus against attacks from enemies within your reach.
Also, anytime an ally within 5 feet of you is targeted by a spell or attack that requires a ranged attack roll that doesn’t include you, you may use your reaction to become the target of that attack instead. The attacking creature gains advantage for that attack. You must use this ability before the attack roll is made.
Hold the Line
Beginning at 7th Level, you can add half your proficiency bonus (rounded up) to any Strength, Dexterity, or Constitution check you make that doesn’t already use your proficiency bonus.
In addition, when you are subjected to an effect that would move you, knock you prone, or both, you can use your reaction to be neither moved nor knocked prone.
Strategos
At 11th level, your ability to lead from the frontlines emboldens your allies. Whenever you use your action to use either the Dodge or Help action, you can use your bonus action allow an ally to attack. When you do so, choose a friendly creature that can see or hear you and that creature can use its reaction to make one weapon attack. That creature has advantage for the attack.
Final Bastion
Starting at 15th level, when you are reduced to 0 hit points and are not killed outright, you can choose to drop to 1 hit point instead. Once you use this ability, you can’t use it again until you finish a long rest.
Since this was actually built for another class, you'll have to fudge the numbers as far as what level you get specific abilities: Phalanx at 3, Hold The Line at 7, Strategos at 10, and Final Bastion at 18. You could add the following abillity:
Healing Surge
Starting at 15th level, your desire to protect the things you hold dear allows you to push yourself even further than you normally can. You can use the Second Wind action twice before a rest, but only once on the same turn. Also, whenever you use Action Surge to take an additional action you can use Second Wind as a part of the additional action.
So, basically you get another use of Second Wind and you can use one of them as a free action whenever you use the Action Surge ability. This has good synergy with Action Surge at level 17 when you can do it twice. The idea behind this ability is that you aren't wasting your bonus action to heal yourself when you can be either attacking or using the Help/Dodge action to help your party members or protect yourself.
The idea behind this archetype is a cross between a Roman Legionnaire and the 4e Warlord class, where you are more concerned with protecting and aiding your allies than you are attacking yourself. Use the Help action to give your ally advantage on their next attack AND give them a free attack with your bonus action. This is super useful for characters like Rogues (sneak attack)/Paladins (divine smite) who can put all of their eggs into one super powerful basket. Granted, you might not deal as much damage (though by proxy you might), but your party is going to be safer so long as you are near; which is kinda the whole point of a Knight too.
Click Here to Download my Lancer Class w/ Dragoon and Legionnaire Archetypes via DM's Guild - Pay What You Want
Click Here to Download the Mind Flayer: Thoon Hulk converted from 4e via DM's Guild
“It is a better world. A place where we are responsible for our actions, where we can be kind to one another because we want to and because it is the right thing to do instead of being frightened into behaving by the threat of divine punishment.” ― Oramis, Eldest by Christopher Paolini.
As for me, I choose to believe that an extinct thunder lizard is running a game of Dungeons & Dragons via Twitter!
See, I disagree that the opposition wouldn't know they are marked, simply because if a creature is immune to being frightened, they are immune to the mark ability.
Think about how the mechanic works, the target is marked if they are hit by an attack. Meaning they have just suffered damage, and are now affected by an ability that only affects those who can be frightened. That sounds to me like your attack was so menacing (they actually used that word in the description) that the opponent has no other option but to focus on you, because after the attack, you are seen as its biggest threat. Now, they might not necessarily know that "if I attack it will be with disadvantage" or "if I move I will be attacked and the Knight will deal extra damage". But it's entirely plausible that the enemy thought, "I need to focus on him, because if I don't there's no telling what this guy is able to do." An intelligent creature might be able to think: "Yeah he's scary, but I really need to get rid of that spellcaster or he's going to destroy me," and might choose to take the risk (suffering disadvantage and/or the opportunity attack), but something with little intelligence (like a beast) or an honor/glory-bound race (like an orc) would simply attack what it perceives as the biggest threat.
That's where I think the DM in question could have made a mistake. I'm assuming there were instances where a more tactical mind (say a cunning bandit or enemy spellcaster) would have assessed the risk and decided that targeting someone else would be more beneficial, regardless of the possible negative outcome from the Knight's mark. But, for the most part, that's the purpose of marking: to make the enemy focus on the one doing the marking. To put it in MMO terms, this is the equivalent of a taunt. You are mentally provoking the enemy to attack you, so that your allies are safe (after all you are wearing heavy armor, have a shield, and likely have the most hit points on the team (except for any barbarians of course).
Now as for the Knight class itself. I feel it's all about how you build it. You should aim to be the best possible tank you can. Since you are a fighter you start off with heavy armor AND shield proficiency. You should probably take the Defense fighting style, as going protection just seems kind of redundant with Implacable Mark and Extra Attack (marking two targets per round seems like enough - four with Action surge if you REALLY want to).
So, 16 AC with chainmail (starting package) + 2 with shield +1 from Defense fighting style: That's 19 AC at 1st level. Make Constitution your highest ability (or second highest since you want to be able to hit) and you're looking at ~12 hit points at first level. If you are human (variant) you can take Heavy Armor Master as your feat to get damage reduction against most melee attacks, Shield Master (to give yourself breathing room by shoving with your shield and give yourself a better saving throw + evasion against Dexterity saving throw attacks, like Fireball or a dragon's breath weapon), or Tough (to give yourself extra Hit Points). Another option would be Defensive Duelist and wield a rapier (which is still a d8 damage like a longsword and you don't HAVE to use Dexterity for a Finesse weapon if you don't want to). So if they attack someone else or move you can attack them them OR if they attack you, you can add your proficiency bonus to your already high AC, becaause 21 AC at first level is pretty stupid good.
Click Here to Download my Lancer Class w/ Dragoon and Legionnaire Archetypes via DM's Guild - Pay What You Want
Click Here to Download the Mind Flayer: Thoon Hulk converted from 4e via DM's Guild
“It is a better world. A place where we are responsible for our actions, where we can be kind to one another because we want to and because it is the right thing to do instead of being frightened into behaving by the threat of divine punishment.” ― Oramis, Eldest by Christopher Paolini.
So OP, what was your level, AC, and Max HP? All of these things are important factors in setting the knight up properly to actually tank. In the 4e tradition the Knight is a defender who tries to set up catch-22's to force the enemy to choose between two bad options. If they attack allies, they have disadvantage, if they attack you, the attack should have a good chance of being a waste. You want at least 18 AC, and to get it as high as you can- a shield is mandatory unless you have plate armor in which case it's at least still a very good idea (the higher your AC is, the more valuable the next point of it is). You also want a bit of HP, so you should probably keep Con and your attack stat (str) both high, maybe even maxing out CON first (unless your dex happens to contribute to your AC).
When building a tank you need to ask yourself the following: what bad thing happens to my foes when they ignore me? and, what bad things happen to them when they don't? The archetype itself covers the first part with disadvantage (and the usual of opportunity attacks), so you need to cover the second- any attack that bounces off your stupendous (around 20) AC is a wasted action for the enemies, and high HP is another tool for the same purpose, maybe they could 2 or 3 shot your squishy wizard and take them out of the fight, but if you have a bunch of HP they should be taking a bunch of actions to drop you- allowing you to absorb many of the blows that would drop your friends- but you'll still melt without a high AC.
You need either Plate (strength build) or Studded Leather (dex build) and either a Shield+Longsword or Shield+Rapier respectively for the right amount of protection, 18 AC is your target minimum- with that you COULD go two-handed, but i still don't suggest it.
The big problem with the knight is that the best knight is already a Fighter (Champion) with the Noble background.
in my mind a normal fighter champion or maybe battlemaster with the noble background is a knight
some of those abilities looks alot more like something a dwarven defender style character would have
historically knight wasnt marched up shoulders to shoulder to hold the line, they were heavy shock troops
I mean, technically a fighter could be considered a paladin, a samurai, a rogue, a swashbuckler, a ninja, etc.. given the right background. Paladin = Acolyte Str-based Fighter, Samurai = Soldier Str-based Fighter, Rogue = Charlatan/Criminal Dex-based Fighter, Swashbuckler = Entertainer/Sailor Dex-based Fighter, Ninja = Criminal Dex-based Fighter... But, as far as D&D is concerned, these classes should be different mechanically and might be better serviced as another class entirely (obv the paladin and rogue) or another subclass (for example: the ninja works better as a shadow monk or assassin rogue - or UA/DM's Guild options).
So, why Knight is a Fighter at all and not simply another Paladin Oath (or an adaption of the Devotion Aura), I don't know.
Click Here to Download my Lancer Class w/ Dragoon and Legionnaire Archetypes via DM's Guild - Pay What You Want
Click Here to Download the Mind Flayer: Thoon Hulk converted from 4e via DM's Guild
“It is a better world. A place where we are responsible for our actions, where we can be kind to one another because we want to and because it is the right thing to do instead of being frightened into behaving by the threat of divine punishment.” ― Oramis, Eldest by Christopher Paolini.
to me paladins have always been more than a knight
That's because you are thinking of Knights in real life and not Knights in a fantasy setting, as indicated by your use of the term "historically" when referencing their fighting style.
Click Here to Download my Lancer Class w/ Dragoon and Legionnaire Archetypes via DM's Guild - Pay What You Want
Click Here to Download the Mind Flayer: Thoon Hulk converted from 4e via DM's Guild
“It is a better world. A place where we are responsible for our actions, where we can be kind to one another because we want to and because it is the right thing to do instead of being frightened into behaving by the threat of divine punishment.” ― Oramis, Eldest by Christopher Paolini.
So Oath of Crown in SCAG?
i think of it this way... alot of people try to be the paragon of what ever but only a few succeed or get the favor of the gods etc.
same with clerics, you can be a priest but never be granted any cleric powers
Don't know, haven't seen SCAG. Thought about buying it, but ended up buying another damn adventure book (there's so many and they are all filled with fun encounters/dungeons).
Click Here to Download my Lancer Class w/ Dragoon and Legionnaire Archetypes via DM's Guild - Pay What You Want
Click Here to Download the Mind Flayer: Thoon Hulk converted from 4e via DM's Guild
“It is a better world. A place where we are responsible for our actions, where we can be kind to one another because we want to and because it is the right thing to do instead of being frightened into behaving by the threat of divine punishment.” ― Oramis, Eldest by Christopher Paolini.
Yeah, but you're an adventurer. You're supposed to have been called for a much bigger purpose. You've already been chosen by the gods. You already ARE a paragon compared to others. A typical band soldiers/guards can die to a group of goblins. At level one, you delve into their lair without a thought.
That's the difference between D&D and historical facts. Jason, Capt. Kirk, Aragorn, etc... These are all adventurers. The idiot solders/red shirts/guards getting killed simply doesn't happen to you. Hell even sub-characters like Boromir (a low level adventurer) dying is because they were willing to do what was needed. And when your death does come, it's because you fought something that the typical town guard could never hope to stand up to, and chances are, your death actually meant something to the world.
Click Here to Download my Lancer Class w/ Dragoon and Legionnaire Archetypes via DM's Guild - Pay What You Want
Click Here to Download the Mind Flayer: Thoon Hulk converted from 4e via DM's Guild
“It is a better world. A place where we are responsible for our actions, where we can be kind to one another because we want to and because it is the right thing to do instead of being frightened into behaving by the threat of divine punishment.” ― Oramis, Eldest by Christopher Paolini.
yeah im just saying if you want to play a "knight" that is more like a background thing more than it is a subclass you can approach it thorugh the fighter or paladin alike
Again, you could easily say the same thing about Paladin. It's just a fighter with the acolyte background.
Click Here to Download my Lancer Class w/ Dragoon and Legionnaire Archetypes via DM's Guild - Pay What You Want
Click Here to Download the Mind Flayer: Thoon Hulk converted from 4e via DM's Guild
“It is a better world. A place where we are responsible for our actions, where we can be kind to one another because we want to and because it is the right thing to do instead of being frightened into behaving by the threat of divine punishment.” ― Oramis, Eldest by Christopher Paolini.