Talk:Death Hunter (3.5e Class)

Up For Adoption?
Hey, STDoc. I'd like to adopt your Death Hunter class. It's not that I think I can do a whole lot better job with it (I did give it a good rating). It's just that I want to use this class... and maybe make a couple of fine-tuning tweaks here and there - no big deal. So I think I'll adopt this class tomorrow. I swear I won't change anything big. If you don't approve, feel free to undo anything I write and cuss me out, 'cuz why not. Thanks, and I'll see you around! --Nolanf (talk) 06:33, 8 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Adoption is generally reserved for articles that are either incomplete or deemed unfit for use in a game. Since this is neither (as of yet), I don't think it really qualifies. - TG Cid (talk) 15:19, 8 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Okay. I think this class is great just the way it is, but do I have any options?
 * For instance, I don't think this class ought to qualify for the High balance. I think it fits nicely into the Moderate range. Do I have the option to change that? --Nolanf (talk) 18:18, 8 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Possibly... the normal process is to assume that the author wanted to reach their suggested balance and help them get there rather than change it. Since STDoc isn't really around, we could wiki discuss it up and get it changed if the general consensus was that it didn't meet the High mark. But that's not the sort of thing that we let get done unilaterally. The general process for that is found here. - Tarkisflux Talk 23:17, 8 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Another option is to make your own variant as a separate class (possibly calling it 'Death Hunter, Nolanf Variant (3.5e Class)'. If you do that, it would be polite to give STDoc due credit. --Ideasmith (talk) 01:56, 9 October 2013 (UTC)


 * True. I did that once already with the Pirate, Alternative class (then I found out that there was some "Captain" class in one of the more esoteric WotC books, but I digress). With the pirate, however, I felt that was a special case in which I wanted to do a lot differently with the class. With this one, I only want to make a few minor tweaks.
 * I don't know... I'll think about it... --Nolanf (talk) 03:18, 9 October 2013 (UTC)


 * For minor tweaks, there's the Alternate Class Feature. --Foxwarrior (talk) 07:13, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Balance Category
I agree that this is not high. No sufficiently large damage bonuses, no sufficiently useful condition inflicts, battle only utility... Moderate seems more fitting. - Tarkisflux Talk 14:25, 10 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Okay, so I think that there is consensus among people who bothered to weigh in on this subject - the class should be listed as Moderate balance.
 * And it has officially been one full week since the Winter Cleaning template has been put up, so who is in charge of changing that? Naturally, as the spearhead of this little project, I'll volunteer if no one else feels inclined. --Nolanf (talk) 01:08, 17 October 2013 (UTC)


 * I was expecting a bit more commentary honestly, but whatever. We can always re-open if it comes up again.


 * After the time period you're welcome to change the balance yourself (or anyone else can), just remember not to change anything else. If you're still not satisfied with the class, and you may well not be, you'll want to consider a variant or an ACF. - Tarkisflux Talk 06:07, 17 October 2013 (UTC)


 * I've never heard of ACF before, but I'm assuming it means "alternate class features." Is there a template for doing this kind of thing? How is it done?
 * While I have you on the line, I also had a question about filling in missing deities on the deity list. I wasn't sure if there was a standard procedure for that either. --Nolanf (talk) 17:57, 17 October 2013 (UTC)