Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Lets design a Warlord for 5th edition
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 7379791" data-attributes="member: 996"><p>Bravuras are not like Paladins, and should logically get melee-offense-oriented styles, GW & TWF are certainly appropriate. Something like the hypothetical Protector, pages back, might also get a choice of styles, but like Protection or Defense, as the name implies. </p><p></p><p>Most Warlords, though, should be much more about their allies than their weapons.</p><p></p><p> 'Exploit' was the 4e term for all martial powers, and I still vaguely feel like it was chosen in part to take the word away from discussions of 'exploitable mechanics.' The BM's "Maneuver" sounded like a much better term for that sort of thing. Mike's "Gambits" also sound nicer than 'exploits,' and sound, to me, more like tactical plans and tricks, FWIW.</p><p></p><p>Also, I kinda like the idea of using several terms. Apprentice-tier abilities labeled 'Maneuvers,' heroic 'Gambits,' etc.</p><p></p><p> 5e doesn't go in for 'no flavor text:' everything is meant to be designed from concept up, not mechanics first, then flavor to your liking.</p><p></p><p>That said, phrasing that leaves room for players to play their characters as they envision them is better than locking down RP options. For instance, the PH is clear that a Monk's ki is magical, but that doesn't stop an Open-Hand monk from looking significantly less magical than an Elemental one, and various characters could have various opinions about the Open-Hand monk. Bottom line, though, in an anti-magic effect, his ki is inaccessible. </p><p></p><p>The Warlord didn't use magic, his abilities were not supernatural, but it would be perfectly reasonable to phrase fluff such that there's plenty of room for people to believe supernatural agencies are at work. Heck, IRL, lots of people have believed in supernatural agencies - God or fate or luck or what-have-you assuring the victories of a famous general or the like. Mechanically, the bottom line should still be 'not magic,' but the bottom line of their being no magic IRL has never stopped RL believers.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Tony Vargas, post: 7379791, member: 996"] Bravuras are not like Paladins, and should logically get melee-offense-oriented styles, GW & TWF are certainly appropriate. Something like the hypothetical Protector, pages back, might also get a choice of styles, but like Protection or Defense, as the name implies. Most Warlords, though, should be much more about their allies than their weapons. 'Exploit' was the 4e term for all martial powers, and I still vaguely feel like it was chosen in part to take the word away from discussions of 'exploitable mechanics.' The BM's "Maneuver" sounded like a much better term for that sort of thing. Mike's "Gambits" also sound nicer than 'exploits,' and sound, to me, more like tactical plans and tricks, FWIW. Also, I kinda like the idea of using several terms. Apprentice-tier abilities labeled 'Maneuvers,' heroic 'Gambits,' etc. 5e doesn't go in for 'no flavor text:' everything is meant to be designed from concept up, not mechanics first, then flavor to your liking. That said, phrasing that leaves room for players to play their characters as they envision them is better than locking down RP options. For instance, the PH is clear that a Monk's ki is magical, but that doesn't stop an Open-Hand monk from looking significantly less magical than an Elemental one, and various characters could have various opinions about the Open-Hand monk. Bottom line, though, in an anti-magic effect, his ki is inaccessible. The Warlord didn't use magic, his abilities were not supernatural, but it would be perfectly reasonable to phrase fluff such that there's plenty of room for people to believe supernatural agencies are at work. Heck, IRL, lots of people have believed in supernatural agencies - God or fate or luck or what-have-you assuring the victories of a famous general or the like. Mechanically, the bottom line should still be 'not magic,' but the bottom line of their being no magic IRL has never stopped RL believers. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Lets design a Warlord for 5th edition
Top