Search results

You got exploration twice. Ranged is just a type of DPS and the others can be fulfilled by like 2 skills, top. It's not something you build a whole class around. Well in 4e I played every roles (except Controller, but I probably would have gotten to it if we played more) and enjoyed them all. I...

I think you underestimate the AEDU system if you think it’s only about cool down timers. Keywords mattered, and powers often had bonus riders that were dependent on your class feature picks. What’s the point of playing a non-caster if it uses the same damn spell slot system? I think it would be...

Yeah and it's a Fighter, not a Warlord.

My last post on the matter was in 2021. It actually got a bunch of positive responses and suggestions from people. I think I still have room for improvement and there were some good suggestion but I found my motivation waning as I lacked an ongoing game and the restrictions of the system were...

I made SEVEN versions of my own Warlord before giving up?

Okay then, find a better name, I don't care. The Battlemaster is closer to the 4e Fighter than the Warlord, as there's like 2-3 maneuvers top that work for a Warlord flavour. It's a pinch of Warlord Spice on a patty of Fighter meat. The problem is that while they scale in damage and (poorly)...

And the name is like the least important aspect.

For one thing you'd have stuff to look forward to beyond level 3. the Battlemaster is like a Wizard who only gets Level 1 spells!

Then I guess the Barbarian, Cleric, Paladin, Ranger and Rogue are also fighters.

The biggest obstacle is that 5e doesn't have a lot of non-spell type of mechanics to use as inspiration beyond Maneuvers. That's why implementation is a sticking point.

Warlords had plenty of attack powers. What makes you think they wouldn't have an 'I attack' option? They had Martial Weapon proficiency and many of their powers were 'you attack, then your pal gets bonus X'. It existed so you didn’t need to rely on a Cleric to have a support character and had a...

No DM I ever played with remembered Inspiration :confused: felt like a very underdeveloped concept compared to 4e Action Points. If it had a bit more 'oomph' mechanically and each class had a specific feature that keyed off it, I think it wouldn't be so forgettable.

Yeah yeah yeah... we talked about it back in the 4e days and... I don't care. In everyday parlance, a Wizard, Sorcerer, Warlock and Enchanter are the same thing. Hot take: Design class to be able to stand on their own is why they all feel a little flat. I much rather they interact more. I don't...

And? They might have been in charge in the past but it doesn't mean they are now. The party doesn't have to listen to the Warlord like he's their boss if he just isn't. Nobody's giving automatic authority to a guy just because he was a drill sergeant. Do you automatically defer to the Noble...

Sometimes it feels like half-assing a point-buy system. And the synergy between certain classes (or lack thereof) is all over the place. Sometimes your get a Sorcadin and other times you try to make a sneaky Cleric and it falls flat. If you want the system to lean into it then it should be...

Is has 'lord' and 'war' in the name it's pretty simple. But like... the PCs don't have to obey the guy if they don't want to. If the players can handle it, it can even be part of that character's arc.

I already feel like 5e multi classing is really wonky is all. Heh it implies experience and knowledge in the art of war, it doesn't confer automatic authority.

I feel like that's not something you can just slap onto a system after the fact?

That's just people taking 'leader' too seriously. They were more a sage adviser or a cheerleader.

Don't forget some of the EIGHT WIZARDS SUBCLASSES. Paragon Path kick in at a precise level and usually have much MUCH simple prerequisite than a Prestige Class and usually have three features and three powers and fit on one page. Fairly concise package that would be less intimidating than some...