>1st point/question: From what I understand, the AntiPaladin
>puts a bit of himself/his essence into a weapon when he
>converts it to an unholy one. Now this would, in my opinion,
>make it something of an extension of himself/while also tied
>to him through darker powers(thus the fine penalties when it
>is destroyed).

I believe this to be accurate in some form or another.

>One thing I have not understood is why the
>weapons are therefore not made no drop*. This would eliminate
>many of the, in my opinion, poor strategies developed over the
>years for destroying one of the weapons and would make them
>more of an extension of the dark knight himself.

It seems to me that the main benefit of this is that it wouldn't be stealable. If you're wielding it, it isn't stealable, right?
Having multiple unholy blades can be beneficial but it also carries more risk.

>Now yes,
>this makes the weapons harder to destroy of course in some
>ways, but I have always thought to destroy a weapon you should
>have to kill the anti-paladin who wields it. Now here
>consider how painful and difficult it is for an evil to
>destroy/seperate a paladin from a Defiance even, which is not
>attuned to him. I guess I see it as he has worked hard to
>obtain all these charges, everyone should have to work just as
>hard to take them away, a nice challenge.

My feeling is that most anti-paladins, through common tactics, can avoid most of this problem. They just don't. Also, the issue with "controls" is designed to compensate for weapon loss, and I think many agree that it's the better part of unholy blessing.

To me, the weapon can get ungodly sick pretty fast, and if there wasn't a set of ways to lose it, the weapon would either have to be weakened or some other move would have to be taken to keep it balanced as an ability.


>2nd point: A bit different here, but still off of the Dark
>Powers and Extension of one's self view. Just as the weapon
>feed's off the soul/mind of the victim, could there be a
>chance of the weapon feeding off the blood of the opponent
>during combat? This would be a chance of a minor healing due
>to the blows similar to a very toned down vampiric touch. A
>note on this one, I think the dark powers should have to bond
>with the ap significantly and perhaps it only be available
>after the ap has learned at least half of the controls for the
>unholy weapon.

Vampiric bite as a control is IMHO an interesting notion. I have no idea how feasible it is. I do know that it would copy an effect of the necromancer guild, and that is a possible problem. It could be called something other than vampiric effect, but if it does the same thing, well, that's a concern.

- Sabs