Search results

LOL! I'm sure Morrus is well aware of the full range of posting behaviors on the internet, but this was funny anyways. Reminds me of a recent Dilbert cartoon:

Ahhh...I'm not getting as much as I want when I want it, so therefore this is bad (they're lying...making excuses...things are actually bad...etc). I understand now.

That sounds like it could be fun. Maybe also a Gnome Ranger... Or a Dwarf Rogue... Or a Half-Orc Wizard...

He's most certainly non-lawful. However, he doesn't act Chaotically - he's consistently self-serving. He will follow the law when it's beneficial to him - or the risk is too great - and eschew it as soon as he thinks he can get away with it. That's a pretty good definition of Neutral. As to...

Why does this prevent you playing a Paladin? First, just because you - the player - know that this other player's character is a neutral evil assassin, doesn't mean that your character knows. And to be honest, if anybody in your group knows the character is an assassin, or the player (as their...

True; highlighting how the Battle Master archetype - even divorced from its parent class - is too DPR focused for many Warlord concepts. My thoughts exactly.:)

Yes, No, and Kinda; it depends on the circumstance. My take is that some classes are more descriptors than concrete classifications, and some truly do define a profession. Fighter can be a term one calls themself or just a descriptor someone uses. More concrete professions within the concept...

I disagree on some of your points, but you have some nice ideas in your post also. Going over these threads and the multitude of ideas that have been floated throughout, I've realized some things. One, there are a lot of ideas that are real stinkers. Two, there are some nuggets of pure gold...

Outstanding!!! You Rock copperdogma!!!:cool:

Actually, you did. This started off with this post of yours: ...which was a direct response to this: Not to mention that the larger discussion has from the start, been about the Warlord being in the Core Game - at the least in UA, preferably an official core version usable for AL. If...

Duelist wasn't, but an Archer build was a Warlord option in 4E.

One, the PDK is in an accessory and campaign specific, not the core rules. Yes, it can be adapted, but it shouldn't need to be adapted nor pieced together from multiple books - nor should it require buying a book one may likely have no interest in other than that specific class feature. And...

Not the only problem. Inspirational HP recovery, as is, provides only temporary hit points and can't revive a character from 0 HP. And every part of the Warlord is not in 5E.

Interesting...

With well aimed D4's.:p (*just kidding*) I think Aaron has it right, but the token idea isn't bad either.

If I was playing in a group where the DM came up with a campaign that involved a mash-up of D&D and the Wild West, I would have no problem with it (and I think @Morrus already did with Santiago/Campaign_Guide). If someone wanted to make a genre-appropriate version - a medieval "gunslinger" -...

Wow. How do you not see the contradiction and irony in this statement?

No. That's not what everybody does. Advocating for things you want is a different thing than advocating against things you don't want. It really is advocating against other people having what they want. And again (because I know you were already asked this, but haven't really answered it)...

Except threatening to boycott says the exact opposite - and actions speak louder than words.