Dark Knight

[Exstal]

I see dark night being a job stemming from the marauder class. The class is already 2 handed so they could have a scythe or great sword. Now obviously we only have 5 slots for a job so keep that in mind and they will still have tank armor which has its benefit as u will see. I'm seeing pug/arc as sub which seems op to me so maybe pug/arc or thm

Souleater next weapon skill 20% hp converted to dmg cannot be used with darkness.

Darkness single atk. Dmg given is absorbed

Crushing blow high dmg+bind

Vehemence 50%dmg up 50 def down

Unholy sacrifice 30% hp sac for high aoe dmg.

It would a crying shame if SE doesn't give DRK its own base class.

[Deathscythe343]

It would a crying shame if SE doesn't give DRK its own base class.

I agree with Roffel. Marauder kind of makes sense for this.

[Exstal]

Why give its own base class when Mrd has all the skills it already has that's menacing? Berserk? Vengeance? Storms blow which increase slashing dmg? It's all right there overpower???

I agree with Roffel. Marauder kind of makes sense for this.

2 handed axe for Dark Knight seems kind of lame? They (SE) have so much time to create a new cool base class with a completely different skill set from Marauder. Sure, you *can* make Dark Knight from Marauder but why do it when you can make a whole new playstyle.

I believe they should only make 1 class into 2 jobs if that was the intention from the ground up like SCH/SMN. Going back to change or modify is probably more work than it's worth.

[Roffel]

Why give its own base class when Mrd has all the skills it already has that's menacing? Berserk? Vengeance? Storms blow which increase slashing dmg? It's all right there overpower???

[Roffel]

Obviously you don't kno the lore of drk. There is only 2 times they had 1 handed weapons and that was tactics and 4. Everywhere else they had gs and scythes. Ur looking for diff when all they were are brutal and evil sacrificing there own life for sheer power. Trying make its own class AND job would be a hell of alot more work then adding 5 job abilities and armor. The skills are there why not just use them. The animation is amazing for Mrd. Mrd has the capibilities of being a great dps give. This would give them that.

[Kitru]

Everywhere else they had gs and scythes.

On only 1 occasion did DRK have a scythe and that was FFXI. There's better precedent for DRK to use a sword and shield than there is for them using a scythe. Also, you're forgetting FF2, wherein Leon the original dark knight, was a spear/shield specialist. Cecil was also a sword and shield user, rather than a greatsword user and he's basically the foundation of the entire DRK archetype in FF. It's only in the most recent iterations that DRK has become synonymous with greatswords.

I'm not disagreeing with you that they should use greatswords, though. It's just that, if you look at their historical appearances, there's more precedent for them to use 1h and shield than there is to use a 2h sword.

Trying make its own class AND job would be a hell of alot more work then adding 5 job abilities and armor.

And yet adding 5 abilities wouldn't really make a DRK based off of GLA that's actually compelling to play. It's one of the reasons why you're not like to see any DPS class based off of GLA (or CNJ): they're too vested in their base role that you're not going to make a compelling DPS playstyle with just 5 abilities, and, if it's not compelling to play, what's the point? A lot of classes are simply too vested in a single role to ever get another job, since it's highly unlikely they'll ever double up on jobs with a given role for a single class. THM, ARC, GLA, and CNJ are all basically locked to a single job. LNC and PGL have some potential to be turned into tanks, and MRD has some potential to be turned into a DPS (it's substantially more problematic than turning LNC/PGL into tanks), but, honestly, it's much more likely that they'll only have double jobs for classes built with it in mind because, elsewise, you're liable to get mechanics that don't work for both or too many abilities that are only useful to one job.

[Bloodclaw]

On only 1 occasion did DRK have a scythe and that was FFXI. There's better precedent for DRK to use a sword and shield than there is for them using a scythe. Also, you're forgetting FF2, wherein Leon the original dark knight, was a spear/shield specialist. Cecil was also a sword and shield user, rather than a greatsword user and he's basically the foundation of the entire DRK archetype in FF. It's only in the most recent iterations that DRK has become synonymous with greatswords.

Wellll, lets see how that holds up.

FF2: Favored weapons were two handed, specifically Axe and Spear. While not as proficient with it as an axe, his most powerful weapon is a spear.

FF3: Sword and shield were options not sure how useful/prevalent though. Seems equal with others.

F4: Both sword and shield as well as spears where used. Mostly spears favored with the Dark Knight. The Dark Knight art often looked like a dragoon and wielded a spear. In "The After Years" When facing his evil self, the dark knight it is wielding a spear as well.

F10-2: Actually a tank class that can wield a sword 1 handed and 2. But no mention of a shield.

F11: Two handed weapons, Sword and Scythe.

However, judging that the job will probably be from the Gladiator class to keep people from specializing in both Paladin and Dark Knight, there is a good possibility of a shield and sword dark knight. However I still think that a new precedence of a two sword wielding dark knight could be there. Likely hood is not much though.

[Lord_Zlatan]

key mechanic for DRK being a tank IMO (even though they shouldn't be [again imo] but probably will be) is Reverse.

[Bloodclaw]

Well in exploring the idea of a Gladiator being the class for the DRK, I remember that shields since the Roman period were often sharpened. They were the single "no-nice you suck now" weapon of the period when made out of metal. They would bash an opponent then harshly thrust the shield to the side cutting the opponent. Due to the lack of prevalent metal armor, this was about an unstoppable tactic. So i could see a stance that made all the enmity production split between damage and enmity reduction with the exclusion of provoke (perhaps pure damage for provoke?). It would be an interesting take, on the entire job due to its history of getting a lot of attention and dealing with it, constantly fighting over enmity with the tank in XI.

[Kitru]

Well in exploring the idea of a Gladiator being the class for the DRK, I remember that shields since the Roman period were often sharpened.

Weaponizing shields happened through their entire use so it's not just a Roman era thing. Sharpening the edges of a shield doesn't even make much sense given that it weakens the defensive capability of the shield (thin outer edges) and adds significant weight (since you can't really sharpen wood, the outer rim would need to be made of metal). The only common offensive addition to a shield was a spike bolted/screwed to the center to improve the traditional shield bash without screwing with the center of balance or weakening its structural integrity. Punching with the edge of a shield wasn't an unknown tactic, but it wouldn't really need a sharp edge to cause appreciable damage since it would accomplish much the same thing as brass knuckles.

GLA already has Shield Bash and Shield Slam which cover the most of the offensive shield tactics (they're held by your hand and forearm so you have limited range of motion and, with the exception of smaller shields like bucklers and targes, they're too large to move around a great deal). The only really missing attack is punching with your shield (hitting with the edge of the shield rather than the face) but that's basically impossible with anything larger than a targe.

P.S. The roman shields everyone thinks of (scuta, sing. scutum, the tall ones that Roman infantry used) were cylindrically curved so as to deflect arrows (as opposed to block them, which is basically asking for an arrow through your arm or a broken shield) and too large to effectively move around tactically (you kept it vertical at all times). Sharpening the sides would basically be useless as would the top since it's so tall. The only edge you would bother sharpening would be the bottom though the only use would be used to slam it into the ground and attack an enemy's feet/toes in a full on melee rather than moving from side to side but that's something of a specialized and not particularly deadly tactic (if you're looking to distract, slamming their foot with an blunt edge is just as effective).

P.S.S. Metal armor was actually very common in the Roman era. Mail armor (lorica hamata) was standard issue for heavy infantry (you wouldn't want to put much armor on light infantry) and plate armor (lorica segmentata) was basically the choice of anyone who was looking to spend money on armor.