And just for an idea, a death knight's armor is not enruned, unless the death knight wants it to be. Furthermore, I understand that saronite turns the wearer mad? Saronite is the blood of an Old God, after all!
(12-05-2011, 11:28 AM)13kira13 Wrote: [ -> ]Furthermore, I understand that saronite turns the wearer mad? Saronite is the blood of an Old God, after all!
Death knights are immune to the mind-melting effects of saronite.
I'm not sure how fruitful it will prove to post the profile without any inkling of acceptance of the concept from the staff thus far (for the record I largely agree with the previous posts from Bountyhunter and Loxxy), but I suppose if you wish to just move that discussion to that thread then that can be done.
Just saying that it may be better to clear the concept before trying to write up the profile.
Quote:From here
Rules are meant to be broken forgotten, but only in VERY rare cases. Just as Kretol has told me that a half-orc half-ogre might be possible if I work hard on it and show that it might, indeed, work, so I believe that the runemaster/inscriber turned dk/dark inscriber might work, as well, by the same principle. (that these are not so far stretched to be completely impossible).
Runemasters likely aren't even canon in WoW, or are at least so rare that they never factor into any discussions. With the Monk class getting added into the next WoW expansion, it's likely that they'll never see any sort of canon addition (as Runemasters were the d20's version of the D&D Monk.) Or, on a different note, DKs are essentially Runemasters in the first place, as they're the ones that focus on the use of runes. Their original concept for implementation into WoW was essentially combining Runemaster, Necromancer, and WC3 DK into one class.
Though I agree with a comment above, in that DKs essentially get their old skills replaced in their new life. DK abilities presume a certain skill with weaponry that they get from their old lives, while using (what they believe to be) stronger abilities natural to their new, corrupted forms.
The difference between 'normal' runemasters and death knights that I know of is that runemasters enrune their bodies, while death knights do so on their weapons and/or armor. By doing so, the runemasters may tap in their bodily runes to achieve the 'plate' armor that death knights have, more or less.
This is true, but the differences essentially exist mostly as a matter of style and theme. The core idea is the same between the two classes, using runes to enhance one's melee abilities to match those of your peers.
Traditional rune usage we usually tell people to simply represent through the Inscriptionist profession. Buff scrolls are good for that.
Simply put, the way I see it, is the next:
Runemaster dies, is reborn as a death knight with a minimum of damage to his bodily runes. Of course, he can no longer tap in his arcane powers, both from the damage he has gotten to them, as well as from forgetting how to, and being unable to tap in arcane magics due to being undead, thus heavily relying on necromantic magics.
So, after he escapes the Lich King's control, he goes back to Thunder Bluff, where he finds about his strange runes on his body. He decides to modify his bodily runes, like dark inscribers do, to be able to tap into these powers once again, now necromantically deformed.
Now, of course, the death knight would have to keep his dk'ish runed weapon to be able to survive, as a cataliser, but heavily rely on his ex-runemaster abilities, rather than his new, dk'ish ones.