Seriously. Half the threads in the top ten of the 5e forum are all rehashing Warlords: yay/naye, how, why, what do they get....
Didn't we do all of this already last year?
Probably the same group that dishonestly screams that a martial character doing more than "I attack" and the occasional ability check is using magic.
A non-magical support class. They use a mix tactics and inspiration to buff allies, and cajole enemies into bad position.I actually don't know what a warlord is. Was it a class in a previous edition or something?
If only there was someone to explain it...
Now that's not trying to pick a fight. Nosir.
A non-magical support class. They use a mix tactics and inspiration to buff allies, and cajole enemies into bad position.
It was called Marshal in 3.5, and warlord in 4e.
In 5e, there are the mastermind and purple dragon knight subclasses, but they are too little for some fans, and you still end up spending most of your actions attacking instead of supporting. Similar to how an Eldritch knight isn't a good replacement for a wizard class.
Probably the same group that dishonestly screams that a martial character doing more than "I attack" and the occasional ability check is using magic.
A non-magical support class. They use a mix tactics and inspiration to buff allies, and cajole enemies into bad position.
It was called Marshal in 3.5, and warlord in 4e.
In 5e, there are the mastermind and purple dragon knight subclasses, but they are too little for some fans, and you still end up spending most of your actions attacking instead of supporting. Similar to how an Eldritch knight isn't a good replacement for a wizard class.
It's not. And the PDK is not a replacement for the Warlord. Sure it's got some of the features, but it's still mostly a fighter.Why would anyone think the EK is a replacement for the wizard?