Now, this is a fairly minor issue and I also see it as something easily done. Though I am just guessing.
As it stands, Dark Knights are casters who carry a mix of both the typical casters/communers.
I was thinking about it as I drove home today, "What other casters get summon?" Then I began to think about the Anti-Dark Knight. The Paladin. They are communers, which carry a similar mix of spells as DK's... Just the opposite.
Why are DK's casters and not communers? They are definitely a zealous class. Their main spell "malform weapon" is completely based on religion.
So I propose, just to add a more religious feel to the class, that they be changed to communers. The ONLY drawback that comes to mind is that Silence will not affect them anymore, but blasphemy will now be the damaging spell.
What does that mean for DK's? It means DK's will not be able to silence eachother. It also means DK's will be weakened, because blasphemy is much more common than silence.
What does everyone think?
Why do you want to weaken DKs by exposing them to blasphemy?
That just sounds silly to me, for a class that no one plays already because they're useless until you get your malforms up.
I do not like it.
Dark Knights are Caster not communers because they are not dependent of gods. They are a (in my view) a Self-reliable, akin to the "Warmasters".
Their malform is a dark pact with their god. But a DK does not need to follow a god to be a Dark Knight. He can do well without a Malform.
- Paladins are the Champions of the Gods, not DK's.
Now on Balance.
Changing Dk's to Communing actualy strenghts them, because "blasphemy is much more common than silence" is not true.
Blasphemy: Clerics + Shamans
Silence: Clerics + Dark Knights + Thieves + Bards
It also disturbs the Good Clerics balance, as they are a good check class to DK's.
Also DK's are not weak, if you look at their Spell/Skill list they are quite strong.
Sure they prey in the umprepared, but that is not weakness.
Dark Knights are Caster not communers because they are not dependent of gods. They are a (in my view) a Self-reliable, akin to the "Warmasters".
Their malform is a dark pact with their god. But a DK does not need to follow a god to be a Dark Knight. He can do well without a Malform.
- Paladins are the Champions of the Gods, not DK's.
Surprisingly, I think mya has (actually) hit it straight on the head. Paladins are generally the champions of their respective gods, and serve their gods' interest; dark knights, on the other hand, are generally the embodiment of evil self-interest. The spell malform weapon is not necessarily a show of religiousness; rather, as mya put it, it is a dark pact they sign with their god. "I will feed you souls, and you will give me power." Very quid-pro-quo.
If they can no longer be silenced by bards they will be totally overpowered..
I do not like it.
Dark Knights are Caster not communers because they are not dependent of gods. They are a (in my view) a Self-reliable, akin to the "Warmasters".
Their malform is a dark pact with their god. But a DK does not need to follow a god to be a Dark Knight. He can do well without a Malform.
- Paladins are the Champions of the Gods, not DK's.
Now on Balance.
Changing Dk's to Communing actualy strenghts them, because "blasphemy is much more common than silence" is not true.
Blasphemy: Clerics + Shamans
Silence: Clerics + Dark Knights + Thieves + Bards
It also disturbs the Good Clerics balance, as they are a good check class to DK's.
Also DK's are not weak, if you look at their Spell/Skill list they are quite strong.
Sure they prey in the umprepared, but that is not weakness.
Good argument. Convinced me too. Your right. Good job Mya!
Though I will disagree that Mya thinks it will strengthen DKs. It will definitely weaken them. You cannot count bards. That is ridiculous to even attempt to include. Thieves? True. Though no thief will ever kill a non-retarted DK.
If they can no longer be silenced by bards they will be totally overpowered..
LOL.
EDIT: I also disagree with Balinor, DKs are definitely not underpowered. They just take a certain finesse.
no thief will ever kill a non-retarted DK.
?? I don't agree with this at all.
?? I don't agree with this at all.
Yeah, I agree with Anoneemus.. Blackjack, traps, pry, gag, backstab... Can anyone say GG dark-knight?
You two (Mudder and Evangelion) are obviously lacking in DK playtime - you're far better off killing pinnacles than lowbies. Its probably jerks like you who got the malform weapon spell moved form lvl 30-something to 43...
You nkow, its actually possible to kill lvl 50s without a malform too...
Thief vs Dk - its always going to be a toss up. If the DK is blackjacked then I'd be setting the wimpy to zero, checking my sanc (put it up as soon as they backstab you) and getting ready to have my pet rescue me (if possible). I've withstood backstabs and the ensuing melee agianst theives who have blackjacked my DKs. The biggest pain is you can't chase them and have to sit there hoping that you hurt them enough so they don't come back until you can chug a recall.
L-A
Well, L-A, my reply was a joke.
I have a fair amount of DK playtime under my belt, perhaps not as many as L-A, but a good amount. I have never been killed by a thief. Any thief that has come after me has either barely survived or died. shrug
DKs have more than enough weapons in their arsenal to deal with thieves very well. More so than Warriors.
you're far better off killing pinnacles than lowbies.
L-A
$%^$%$####! No wonder this malform's taking forever to go up! I gotta stop killing level 43 characters....
wakes up Oh, wow...I had this dream...and I was successfully playing a DK...
I think dark-knights are similar to monks in the sense that they need to be more ready for battle (in terms of equipment, spell effects and consumables) than their opponent to gain an equal footing in combat. Also, when luck is on their side (pet bashes etc) they will demolish their opponent, but it only takes a few ticks to go from a killing-machine to a lamb on its way to slaughter. The concept of the class is very interesting, and once they start powering up they'll be dealing a lot of pain but the class still poses an uphill challenge.
It used to be the best class for new players to learn the game. I'm not sure if it still is. It certainly has declined since 1.0 and 2.0. I remember when dark-knights were a feared class. Now the occasional dark-knight is respected, and instead rangers, warriors and communers/casters turn into monsters. Hybrids are somewhat of "jack-of-all-trades but master of none" and it hurts them.
In my humble opinion, DKs are a strong class, they have a wide array of offensive abilities that can allow them to deal effectively with just about any other class. They have spells so you can take advantage of vulnerabilities, pump their damage, or take care of those nasty pets, they have more than decent melee, silence is a real treat against casters, and they have charm.
They have devoted their lives to the study of dark magic as well as physical combat' date=' making them a formidable opponent to all.[/quote']
From what I can tell from the help file, DKs use magic to excel in combat, as opposed to the Paladins, who use magic to serve their God:
They are holy warriors who
are empowered by the gods of Light to bring forth goodness throughout
the realm
I honestly don't think changing DKs to communers would be such a good idea, I have always imagined Dark Knights to be an evil class, who only seeks to hurt others, who follows nobody and only seeks to accomplish his own goals.
PS: Now I know how malform works... Bummer. 
Even if you think you know how it works...you don't I promise.
Ah... Thats because the dark knights of old's fireball was DOOM in a ball of fire.
