D&D 4E 4e Clone − help create it!

[Garthanos]

I think true encounter powers belong in a 4e clone...

 

[Zardnaar]

I think true encounter powers belong in a 4e clone...

Functionally same thing but uses different terms. 4E isn't OGL.
Short rest powers that refresh in 1 or 5 minutes are funtionally the same thing.

Healing surges are out, encounter powers are out, warlord is out. Doesn't mean you can't have equivalents.

Unless it's purely for Homebrew.

If it's in the 4E phb and isn't OGL or in 3/5E personally I wouldn't use it.

 

[Garthanos]

Functionally same thing but uses different terms. 4E isn't OGL.
Short rest powers that refresh in 1 or 5 minutes are funtionally the same thing.

I am referring to using
Martial Tricks this cannot be applied to anyone who has seen it recently
Druids or Environment Straining casters your magics require a scene change to refresh.
Clerics/Warlocks you require a short 1 minute re-tainting or purification ritual to clear your spirit (a potion might allow this once in a while for a cost)
Paladins recover by defeating bad guys after every fight because you are serving your god that way

Healing surges are out,

But i call them Heroic Exertions and they fuel Practical Arts if you fail the skill check or can provide an auto success in general on significant skill checks...

Doesn't mean you can't have equivalents.

Ummm yeh why on earth are you worrying about it when it is that simple.

Personally I do like the name Battlemaster and I now like the name Marshal but I didnt at first.

 

[Zardnaar]

I don't mind the Battle master name. Didn't even mind the 4E names except when they renamed stuff.

I don't care so much if people get what they want, just don't take away what I want. Life 101 I suppose.

 

[Garthanos]

I am referring to using
Martial Tricks this cannot be applied to anyone who has seen it recently
Druids or Environment Straining casters your magics require a scene change to refresh.
Clerics/Warlocks you require a short 1 minute re-tainting or purification ritual to clear your spirit (a potion might allow this once in a while for a cost)
Paladins recover by defeating bad guys after every fight because you are serving your god that way

We could call these Scene Powers as a group

 

[Yaarel]

We could call these Scene Powers as a group

The term ‘encounter’ is a normal 5e term. By itself, it refers to anything the adventuring party meets.

But the term ‘combat encounter’ specifically refers to ‘a clash between two sides’, organizing into a ‘cycle of rounds and turns’ that begins ‘when everyone rolls initiative’ (PH 189).

So, it seems appropriate to refer to these powers as ‘per combat encounter’, abbreviated ‘• combat’:

action • combat



For 5e terminology, ‘per long rest’ is standard, but there are awkward situations where it is necessary to say ‘per day’, such as for elf Trance.

Analogously, ‘per rest’ (short or long) is standard, but there can be situations where it is necessary to say ‘per combat encounter’.



In 4e, the player was responsible for the narrative of a power effect, occasionally narrating the reactions of the hostiles to the effect. Thus both the DM and the player told the story of the scene. In 5e, the player narrates the character only, while the DM narrates the world around the character.

It seems to me vital for each power to include a narrative in its description that rationalizes the effect.

The ‘trick’ is a great example of a narrative explanation. The hostiles in a combat encounter fall for it once, but are unlikely to fall for it again.

If so, the power might work better to mechanically target the Intelligence defense. A particularly intelligent hostile is less likely to fall for the trick. And a less intelligent one more likely.

This suggests to me, a low Intelligent creature might fall for the same trick twice in a combat encounter. Maybe mechanically, the ally can keep on repeating the same ‘per combat encounter’ power on future turns until some hostile succeeds against it, or until the ally chooses to use a different power for ones action.

The ‘trick’ is mainly a mental attack analogous to a ‘feint’ action to Help an ally, a Deception skill or a Charm or Illusion.

 

[Yaarel]

Regarding a name for the 4e Warlord class, I love Knight.

The meanings of the term ‘knight’ capture both the feel of a soldier formally educated in military tactics (Intelligence) and the feel of a living symbol who inspires the morale of comrades (Charisma). And the ‘knight’ can be a kickass warrior in combat.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Regarding a name for the 4e Warlord class, I love Knight.

It was used for a 3e PHII Class, and for a 5e Fighter sub-class in UA.

Then there's the (Purple Dragon)Knight, which also appropriated "Bannerette."

The meanings of the term ‘knight’ capture both the feel of a soldier formally educated in military tactics (Intelligence) and the feel of a living symbol who inspires the morale of comrades (Charisma). And the ‘knight’ can be a kickass warrior in combat.

It also implies legitimate authority (by medieval standards) under a feudal system, which is narrow for what the class could potentially model - then again, just about any name is going to be a bit narrow, considering all the concepts you could do with the Warlord.

 

[Yaarel]

It was used for a 3e PHII Class, and for a 5e Fighter sub-class in UA.

Then there's the (Purple Dragon)Knight, which also appropriated "Bannerette."

It also implies legitimate authority (by medieval standards) under a feudal system, which is narrow for what the class could potentially model - then again, just about any name is going to be a bit narrow, considering all the concepts you could do with the Warlord.

I will double check the 3e Knight class. It seems fine for the Warlord ‘Knight’ to pick up some aspects − especially if a Fighting Style. Likewise the 4.5e Essentials Knight.

Purple Dragon Knight, and the Paladin ‘White Knight’, ‘Black Knight’, and Green Knight, are specific and require the modifier, in the same way that ‘oriental amethyst’ isnt really an amethyst.



But the Warlord is really the true Knight, and can do everything the reallife archetypal knight can do, including military tactics and morale inspiration.



I view the modern police officer as a kind of knight. So, yeah, knight tends associate ‘legitimate’ authority, but this can potentially be democratic, for example. It makes sense to associate the D&D class with access to government officials. Who else could pay for all of this armor and food for an army? Regarding illegitimacy, the medieval knight has plenty of examples of an independent ‘knight errant’, who seeks to make their own reputation and might be unaffiliated with any particular government. Plus there are stories about knights that go rogue or become villainous.

The Warlord class actually comprises all of these knightly concepts.

 

[Tony Vargas]

I will double check the 3e Knight class. It seems fine for the Warlord ‘Knight’ to pick up some aspects − especially if a Fighting Style. Likewise the 4.5e Essentials Knight.

It was an early attempt to create a fighter-type with MMO 'Agro,' it wasn't a very good attempt, the Essentials Fighter(Knight) could be seen as an evolution of it, not as good as the standard 4e Fighter ("Weaponmaster"), but better than the 3.5 Knight or the 5e Fighter.

So, yeah, knight tends associate ‘legitimate’ authority, but this can potentially be democratic, for example. It makes sense to associate the D&D class with access to government officials. Who else could pay for all of this armor and food for an army?

Authority/social-position is one of the many thing that raises some hackles about the class. And, in 5e, social position seems to be handled via Backgrounds. So Noble is a background, as is Soldier, and Officer or Knight could easily be more specific Backgrounds. 4e also had backgrounds (and Themes), including several sorts of Nobles - I'm playing a Disgraced Noble later this afternoon, in fact.