thats why im thinking about putting lv1 deathknight on 1st position defense if at all 
in such case the trait would be too op actually,
i dont know do you remmember the times when maw could devour via skull hits? it would be something similiar - theoretically a low chance but in the end happemning too much and being not able to protect from it
at this point its a matter of personal opinion but im sure the majority would think the same i do about it being too op if not stunnable
This trait does like half of what the spell of Death does which i can just recast infinitely, i don’t see how this could ever be op as a oneshot trait especially linked to the heros death.
Sure you could field a lv1 Deathknight, but what’s the point of that?
You could just use Death or any Hero Class with Creeping Death equipped, get some extra damage and be able to recast the spell whenever you want, and not having to sacrifice a troop for it.
Noone will actually be playing this class the way it is now, and i get we are all happy about the 4-match Deathmark being avoided, but this should not result in making Deathknight useless.
deathknight is far from useless and i dont understand how can you not see the concept,
it was lv1 on defense so that its killed as fast as possioble: to give time for deathmark to proc and to reduce chances/opportunities for attacker to stun it (which is just an early experimental idea)
and you can use creeping death with deathknigh class if you didnt notice, providing that the hero gets mana to actually cast it but you know on defense teams its not always the case
and the strong point of deathknight on offense would be that its less likely to be stunned yet most likely to be killed first so you will actually get a one-cast-death-spell-worth of effect rather guaranteed
there are much worse traits out there among hero classes and legendary units
But why get your hero killed deliberately when there already are a couple of ways in the game to spread Deathmarks without sacrificing anything?
I can get Death ready to fire quicker than the AI takes to kill off my hero, even one without class stats, and after Death is cast there is not even a need for Deathknights trait, multiple Deathmarks don’t stack, and i generally can recast Death before most of its Deathmarks expired(or more rarely actually procced). There really is no upside on that.
its an offensive tool that doesnt require mana. using it you can ensure mana goes to other ways even the ones that also use deathmark effect - it does not exclude using death or any other mana using method
sure i dont say its best method but its a method and not a bad one either
edit:
so far we dont have many deadly traits:
the difference would be this trait has a higher chance but is usable only once
Elspeth on hero seems like a valid option. Death Mark everything on the very first turn, get a replacement knight and a load of mana of your choice to boot.
why did i not think about it, looks like fun 
Elspeth was the first option that came to mind when i read the change to the trait, and if any Deathknight sacrifice strategy would make some kind of sense it would definitely involve her.
Still you would forgo any kind of plannable strategy with random knight troops, and you would not gain anything from it that you could not achieve in a more efficient or reliable way. You get your Deathmarks out a bit quicker, but basing a strategy on Deathmarks and random Lance and Winter knights appearing is not really a reliable race in the first place.^^
Also, how exciting and epic does a mighty hero class feel, if its only purpose is to die fast…i don’t understand how anyone can see this as good design. Rather rename the class immediately to Dead Knight.
arent you forgetting half of the classes have less useful traits then him?
his trait is actually useful, and you are free to use a weapon of your choice along with it
funny, i may use it 
I didn’t forget, it is the limited usefulness of some other classes, that makes me fight the addition of yet another one of such limited usefulness 
i can agree with desire to make those classes more useful, but please not by strenghtening an instakill mechanic 
I think this is were the disconnect lies between us. Personally i’d give him a trait that had nothing to do with Deathmark at all. But it seems the Devs are commited to do so and with the current iteration of the trait the class will be really weak, and i’d rather see the class being somewhat useful even if it means to use a mechanic i personally don’t like much in a meaningful way.
Not 4/5-match Deathmark kind of meaningful !!! But something more than it is now.
Death mark all enemies and 25% chance to summon Death when i die?
tbh it feels too strong to me to add there anything but if u must buff it add anything but not strengthen the death mark please 
###Next week’s event troop
This spoiler image is fan-assembled from game files, and is UNOFFICIAL
REMINDER: All future troop details are subject to change at any time. (Retrieved 2017-04-10)
Prince Azquila
Epic / Suncrest / Stryx Knight
Spell: Wrath of the Sky (13 Blue/Yellow) - Summon a Lightstorm. Deal [Magic+5] damage to an enemy. If the enemy dies, all allies gain 5 Attack.
Traits: Naga Slayer / Stryx Shield - Allied Stryx gain 2 Armor. / Holy Armor
Requires: Minor Wind, Arcane Blade Traitstones
Max stats: Attack - 17; Life - 21; Armor - 23; Magic - 8 (When fully ascended and level 20)
Flavor Text: You are the wind beneath my wings.
Will arrive in 7 days (2017-04-17).
just +2 armor for allied stryx? thats silly low
It is basically an armour version of the Bond traits, so 2 is probably from that.
Now my question is… are they going to retcon a bunch of existing Bond traits into those? Or just have them both… Because we’ve seen some Undead Shield traits in spoilers already.
Other candidates for this obviously include Mechs, Knights, Dwarves…
One of the most beautiful if not the most beautiful -
I like the new trait more than match 4 random dm…
I think a few retcons of the ubiquitous bond traits into the new armour versions wouldn’t hurt…
