Search results

Are you saying 100% of all players will say no to that narrative? Because if not then doesn't that mean we can have that narrative?

Do you mean PC's or players?

Okay. And why does any of that mean we can't have the narrative of a Drill Sergeant benefiting the party?

I've seen a Battlemaster with good charisma using Inspiring Leader feat and Rally Manuever for cha based temp hp on allies regularly. He was definitely played more leadery.

I don't see a problem with either narrative.

But some Fighters are just that, veterans with high charisma. Mechanically sure. Narratively you've done nothing to address the issues I explained above.

As a really narrow example. Let's make a Drill Sergant class. Fluff is something like "The Drill Sergant is a dedicated trainer of groups of fighting men. They know how to get the most out of them, how to push them past their limits, how to forge your unit into a cohesive whole." Now I know...

My thinking is more, Herald - why can't a fighter do shouts/cries, especially if the required fluff is that these are totally mundane shouts/cries. Tactician - what is happening narratively that lets the tactician allow someone to do X? Banneret - again, what is happening narratively to justify...

Okay, so maybe I should have elaborated more. The reason it's bad fluff is because 1) it forces other players to go along with a narrative they may not want for their PC 2) it limits other players ability to roleplay their fighter or barbarian as a drill sergeant

You keep trying to support your claims with rules that don't actually say anything remotely close to what you claim. I mean, what the heck does being able to move it have to do with it dodging attacks? (dodging attacks being the actual claim we are discussing) Another prime example of the...

To me that sounds like a bad attempt at justifying the mechanics you want with terrible fluff. I think the fluff issue is even bigger than the mechanical ones.

You apparently really like web. I think you are overrating web for most classes. It costing an action is rough. Sorlocks get around that because they can fuel more attacks/rerolls. But I don't think Ranger or Eldritch Knight will. Ranger's Ensnaring Strike is a bonus action that does the...

Hunter Ranger + Ensnaring Strike seems fairly comparable through 10th level. I’d have to do a deep dive, but I anticipate it’s very balanced.

Ummm, Clerics can take Heavy Armor at level 1. I think you are thinking of one of the playtest documents.

I like Sleet Storm. It would be okay for this but probably not as good as Web. There's always Fire Wall but not really a control option. I think Slow with the ability to push back enemies deserves mention, though it's not a zone.

Posts like these kind of make me hope they never make a 5e Warlord.

That’s an absolutely huge leap. Accepting your illogical leap isn’t required. Animated illusions cannot dodge arrows by RAW. Okay. The RAW is that physical interaction reveals it to be an illusion. RAW isn’t verisimilitude. Or a carefully considered necessity. Okay.

Technically RAW would still stop those illusions on an attack as the arrow passing through them would be physical interaction and would show them to be illusions :) Yes, I think it's dumb too, but such is RAW sometimes. Then again, RAW keeps you from getting 4th level spell effects with 1st...

Maybe. Advantage there helps. To put things in perspective, scorching ray + hex with advantage would need to make about 71 attacks to match the 700ish damage of the battlemaster and sorlock. A level 11 sorc dumping every possible slot into scorching ray gets to make 61 attacks. He can make...

I think there's some interesting space in martial support options. Though I don't know that any of it is currently unexplored. The only issue is that it's spread a bit too thin over all the martial classes/subclasses. We have fear, disarming, forced movement, advantage, disadvantage, allied...