D&D 4E A gathering of Martial Controllers - what do you think

[Garthanos]

I think you are missing my point. I'm talking about practical considerations, like "nobody ever fed these guys, or paid the slightest attention to whatever was needed to bring them along, but mysteriously here they are!" which is exactly very abstract and weird! This is what I mean when I talk about fictional positioning.

Not thinking I ever thought myself about making the retinue unrealistically easy/frequent to renew if actually lost due to extreme circumstances. i am one of those who thinks Schrodinger's X needs to be used only occasionally. And suddenly "we have back up" is one of those.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Not thinking I ever thought myself about making the retinue unrealistically easy/frequent to renew if actually lost due to extreme circumstances. i am one of those who thinks Schrodinger's X needs to be used only occasionally. And suddenly "we have back up" is one of those.

Yeah, there can be this weird 'logic' to it, admittedly. What I generally don't, in most sorts of games I'm going to run, want to see happening is that the whole game is like this, that it just becomes entirely surreal.

 

[Garthanos]

Yeah, there can be this weird 'logic' to it, admittedly. What I generally don't, in most sorts of games I'm going to run, want to see happening is that the whole game is like this, that it just becomes entirely surreal.

Tony is more forgiving of it... There is a problem with making it a daily even. It could be a martial practice (or even just an effect achievable with the boyscouts preparedness practice) if one can come up with a way to make it sufficiently situationally valuable. In this case you wouldnt be renewing your retinue but bringing in commonly aquireable hirelings.

I suppose like the once a month limit on the heros shout one could insert an arbitrary limit.

There are the non-arbitrary limits in place for the Preparedness practice however, things cost what they might reasonably cost (in coin of Karma Points usually or promises), so hiring a bunch of mercs to meet you at X, n days hence depends on where X is and whether you got the last bunch glory or just death and similar considerations.

Normally a ritual/practice is more efficient than the unpracticed method in a town I can purchase food for X for instance and acquiring similar via hospitality practice is efficient and while it too implies off screen activity, the preparedness practice earns a convenience surcharge (no or little efficiency benefit) because it will effectively always be invoked when that resource would not normally be available at all.

 

[Garthanos]

Well rituals are kind of a resource of controllers and leaders so.... practices seem appropriate to mention in controller threads.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

OK, so I can think of a number of ways to make this work that would limit the 'surreal aspect'. One would be what you called a 'preparedness' mechanism that let you retcon in acquisition of resources that you need NOW, interpolating their acquisition into the narrative at some earlier offscreen point. I'm totally comfortable with this, conceptually. There's still the potential lingering question of exactly how hard it might be to DO, but in principle its fine. I guess the whole thing could provide the player with virtually unlimited narrative authority in respect to the retconned fiction. Perhaps you hired an agent to send some guys on ahead where they conveniently link up at the critical moment, or to follow later, or you make contact with some sort of local tribe, etc.

Other options would include mystical ones. You're such a good leader that the very spirits of dead warriors rally to your cause and materialize to fight on your side. This is probably fine for certain characters at higher levels. It would be like the old Horn of Valhalla. This would make a perfectly good power, maybe for a PP. Greater versions would be perfectly feasible at Epic. Given the infinite malleability of magical explanations you could also extend this to control over the very forces of nature, commanding the earth to rise up and obey your orders, etc. Another spin on that could involve fey or shadow magic.

I guess the other path to take would be simply a heavier buffing path. While you're cohorts are 'minions', they don't need to STAY mere minions. They could become pretty tough, or follow rules that produce significant 'toughness'. Think along the lines of the Spirit Companion that the Shaman gets. The thing is CLOSE to unkillable right off the bat. A 'marshal' could give his minion cohorts similar levels of toughness, even using pretty much the same rule.

 

[Garthanos]

I think the first two are kind of their own distinct thing and made as practices and rituals they have a fair amount of class flexibility. The main issue is getting prices working nicely. I can see how one might really want the narrative to affect the prices which makes me itch a little.

I think the Shamans Companion is analogous to a squire, I think it will take some tweaking to give a Warlords combat retinue (split into 3? and the basis of area of control based area effects )

(there is also a trusty page and porter with enough gumption to stick with you aka unseen servant)

 

[Tony Vargas]

I guess the question with these sorts of mechanics is how abstract are you making the game? I mean, its a class feature, right? That means you PRETTY MUCH have to accept that it can't be subject to 'fictional positioning' considerations, to put it in terms that Pemerton would probably use.

I'm fine with getting really, really abstract, as I feel D&D has always been there in a lotta ways.

I do like the idea of such a character milking the old 'training the villagers to defend themselves' (and getting them all killed in the process, but somehow, you're still the hero) trope. When the BBEG has a small population that's opposed to it, oppressed by it, loyal to it only out of fear or the like, that's an opportunity for some fairly good fiction, that, in most RPGs, ruins the actual flow of play, by adding too many DM-controlled creatures to combats, creating logistical logjams, stealing the heroes' thunder, and the like (getting innocents masacred). If that fun bit of RP gets you allies that can be abstracted into a useful - but not OP - power in some battles, though, that's fine.

My point is, I'd rather have rules that allow a 'warlord' to gain all sorts of crazy advantages when commanding 'minions', but leave the actual mechanics of such minions (hirelings in 4e terminology) up to the normal hireling rules. Thus a fighter or wizard could easily hire a couple 'archers' to follow him around and provide added firepower, but if they were commanded by a WARLORD (with the right options I suppose) then they'd be much more powerful. Admittedly that's allowing for circumstances to be created by the GM which might make your character unable to perform some function he has, but there are answers to that (IE get some magic which allows the production of instant minions, plan carefully, make sure you have alternative powers/targets for your effects, etc.).

One way to handle it that I'd considered for the Controller take on the Warlord was a fairly simple mechanical distinction. When a Leader Warlord gives 'commands' and tactical advice and the like, the player or DM (if the target is the NPC) make the rolls using their stats, if the Controller Warlord does the same, he makes a check using his powers - the allies are just fulfilling his Requirements line.

Edit: Another thought, to enable highly situational powers without going the whole ritual/practices route and making it about gp/surge resource management, would be to have powers that have an additional or different effect, either explicitly or as a consequence of how they're written, when the situation comes up. In this case, that'd mean a power that works in a Leaderly way when only PC allies are available, but in a Controllery way when a swarm/mob/throng - formation - of temporary allies is available.