Search results

I let the players hand out inspiration. I don't have an anti-inspiration rule. I also don't have a problem injecting normalizing properties to the game on account of accurately portraying the consequences of a players actions.

Been playing for over 30 years and the highest I ever reached was 15 in 3.5. Right now level 7 Arcane Trickster is the top level dawg in my PC folder. DM'd level 3s but nothing higher. Sry, can't help.

yeah, when I read that I kind of expect an announcement by WoTC soon. I can only assume that there is stuff going on behind closed doors.

The wave of the future is announce a 5E compatible product with all the appropriate wording changed to comply with an old OGL, even though the intent is to make money off of a current system that is clearly not an open game product. Obfuscation, everyone is doing it.

I think my modelW class design is going to borrow portions of this idea.

For what it is worth, me thinks CHA and WIS.

Zard, you not only have uncovered the way a warlord class could be built, you have shown us tinkerers that engineering any class from a warlock template is not only doable but probably fun.

I joined the WoTC boards just to be part of the 5E play test. I am glad I did. I was intrigued with the design philosophy. Making the game mine has been my kind of thing and I probably won't move on DMing any other version. As a player I look for Moldvay's OD&D, Astonishing Swordsmen and...

Stop playing the class and play your character concept.

half drow

1. Bring something everyone can eat. Eating in front of a DM that can't eat what you are eating because of an allergy is dangerous to your PC's health. 2. Stop telling others they need to shower. I am certain they already know this anyway. 3 Giving in to the whims of that hot nerd chick that...

I am unable to discuss a Warger without a temporary Warger forum.

A sound way to add variety to the randomness. By design, 5E has a place for unusual characters. A sorcerer with a high strength is doable.

Don't press this button.

I used to see this, but now I am changing my views. Turning the class upside down sorta speak. Besides, if I took WotC advice on the matter I would not be here. Not all classes need multi-attack to function. To me, extra attack for the modelW is now an arbitrary/legacy distinction.

I prefer no INT bonus and no extra attack. It is not important for a 'spell-less' support class. Make it even with a cleric. If I want a low magic fightey warlord I will go with Battlemaster. Focusing on non-magic healing, enabling PCs, and positioning using SLAs. EDIT: And bolster allies

For every character that has 20K THP, they encounter a goblin that hits for 20,001 damage.

There is a need for a non-magical support class is the basic consensus. After that, implementation is pretty fragmented, IMO. Unbiased playtesting, perhaps?

The Warlord base seems fractured and I hope WoTC will not fire off a token class if so squeezed. Maybe what the fanbase needs is a PrC to chew on for a while. The thing I hate about PrCs is the prereqs.

I kinda face-palm the theory that a warlord can not be a fighter because fighters are too good at fighting. But, I will move to the feats question. Because feats are something that any class can take. The feat system could offer items 1 and 2, from the OPs post, to any class, low or high magic.