D&D General Bannerets: The Tactical Geniuses with Int 8

[Mannahnin]

Stephen is a system-breaker. Brilliant surgeon / naturalist. Espionage agent. Speaks a dozen languages. Crack shot, deadly fencer. Maxed out in Intimidation. Cellist. Does just fine with the ladies, when he tries.

(I'm thinking GURPS) Got a bunch of bonus points from Disadvantages like his addictions, code of honor, and the revolutionary activities in his past which could have gotten him hanged.

When you rolled stats sometimes you get all 18s.

Certainly not all 18s if we're thinking D&D. Not much Strength, Constitution middling, Wisdom very doubtful at times. His Charisma/Intimidate aren't all that; though O'Brien talks about his reptilian glare, my recollection is that part of the reason he winds up in duels is that the offenders he runs up against aren't intimidated enough to know better and apologize. And he's always described as small and ill-favored. Probably only really high Dex and Int.

 

[Tonguez]

Cha is the intelligence the Leader uses to inspire and understand people, he may not be giving out historic lore or solving complex equations, but he can understannd how people act. He can anticipate changes on the battlefield and tap in to emotions of both allies and enemies.

furthermore 10 is average 8 is only one step below so 80% of the people you see in the world have an int dumpstat

 

[JPL]

(I'm thinking GURPS) Got a bunch of bonus points from Disadvantages like his addictions, code of honor, and the revolutionary activities in his past which could have gotten him hanged.


Certainly not all 18s if we're thinking D&D. Not much Strength, Constitution middling, Wisdom very doubtful at times. His Charisma/Intimidate aren't all that; though O'Brien talks about his reptilian glare, my recollection is that part of the reason he winds up in duels is that the offenders he runs up against aren't intimidated enough to know better and apologize. And he's always described as small and ill-favored. Probably only really high Dex and Int.

Well… I gather that big ruddy blonde guys like Jack were more in fashion, but there are occasional references to the idea that Stephen is capable of cleaning up pretty nicely, and is in his own way just as attractive as Jack.

Oh, it would take a week to stat Stephen out in GURPS.

 

[eclair~]

The problem is that the Banneret isn't billed as a "tactical genius"; the idea of the class is a warrior who inspires others with their deeds.

(In 2014, at least, where the class features actually require your allies to be able to see and hear your inspiring deeds/actions. The 2024 incarnation just does stuff and other people magically benefit from it somehow.)

 

[DammitVictor]

You also have the problem that narratively, many fantasy motiffs often have the fighter as the "leader" of the party....but in dnd terms it just makes more sense for that to be the high charisma or high int (or maybe high wis) characters.

Traditional fantasy narratives don't mesh with the fantasy TTRPG conceit of "dump stats", particularly the idea that not only must every character have different heroic abilities, but "balanced" heroes have to have specific notable deficiencies compared to average non-heroic individuals.

An 8 INT isn't a debilitating cognitive impairment; it's a speed bump to a character with proficiency + expertise (or Skill Focus) in a couple of INT skills, or a PF1 or 5E Bard with their respective class features.

But Captain America obviously doesn't have an 8 INT. He doesn't have the depth or breadth of scientific education as Tony or Reed... but he beats them at checkers. And chess. He beats Thor in hnefltafl and Nine Men's Morris. He pisses Beast off if they discuss Shakespeare or Dante or Cervantes during hand-to-hand training; he does it on purpose because his layered metaphors about romantic warfare help Hank remember not to drop his elbows. He's both a traditional and a syncretic martial artist, military philosopher, and elder statesman who's both fluent and literate in half a dozen languages.

Conan "the Barbarian"... let's not discuss him in class terms. He has linguistics as a superpower; he speaks more languages than this forum, literally more than every single registered member put together. He spends more time in the Aquilonian Royal Library than the kings who built it; he tolerates a conspiracy against his throne because he enjoys their revolutionary poetry.

Richard B. Riddick is pretty archetypal as a (spellless) Gloomstalker Ranger and Rogue of some kind. (PF1 Slayer for sure.) He's a connoisseur of murder cutlery, makes his own masterwork knives out of field-expedient resources, and is a skilled micropolitical operator. He can work out the sensory abilities-- and weaknesses-- of an unknown xenomorph species by examining a single skull.

In D&D, all three of them would have INT as a dump stat; if they could afford WIS and CHA at all, with their maxed out STR/DEX/CON, they'd take precedence over INT. (Unless in 3.PF where they need INT for skill points.) Leaving aside their multifaceted class features, these iconic fantasy warriors simply aren't modeled by standard ability score models. There's no reason and no way for their D&D versions to have thise traits, especially when INT and WIS and CHA skills are part of the "protected niche" of their spellcasting counterparts, whose leadership abilities aren't supposed to be their "dump stat" (compared to martials) since 3.0.

 

[Clint_L]

One of the bits I really liked out of 4th ed. was the warlord, a leader class which depending on billed could benefit from a high Intelligence, Wisdom, or Charisma score. I hope we will eventually see a fighter build for 5th ed. for smart and/or cagey leaders.

For now, the new banneret is a good step towards a non-magical leader / buffer subclass. But you're probably looking at Int as a dump stat, so the party leader that (or battle captain, at least) is the dumbest guy in the party.

Your description of this subclass is exactly why I have strong reservations about it. I do not want players assuming that their character is the party leader/battle captain because of their chosen class/sub-class. I worry it'll lead to players trying to tell others how to play.

 

[mellored]

Banneret is still 90% fighter, with a splash of warlord.

The only way to make a fighter subclass that is close to a warlord is if you could trade your attacks to give allies a bonus.

I.e.
Level 3:
When you would make a weapon attack, you can forgo one of them boost your allies. Choose one of the following...
-move without provoking opportunity attacks.
-all attacks against the target have advantage until the start of your next turn.
-make an attack as a reaction.
-advantage on the next save.
If you have multiple attacks, you can use this feature multiple times, but must pick a different target each time.

Level 7:
You can forgo 2 attacks.
-disadvantage on the next save.
-....

Or something like that...

 

[MechaTarrasque]

What's this "the fighter is the dumbest guy in the party?" There are plenty of barbarians, paladins, and sorcerers in the world . Like the guy being chased by a bear says: I don't have to be faster than the bear, just faster than the guy next to me.

 

[Marandahir]

Battle Master with various Int or Wis-based martial superiority techniques is the inheritor of the Tactical, Resourceful, Insightful, and Skirmishing Warlord builds.

The variant "Lazylord" build, usually using either Tactical Presence or Resourceful Presence, has an inheritor in the Roguish Archetype known as the "Mastermind".

Gladiator Fighter, Dance Bard, Swords Bard, Rev-5e Valor Bard, some builds of Monks, and the Banneret, Cavalier, and some Cha-based builds of the Battle Master Fighter are the inheritors of the Inspiring Presence and Bravure Presence Warlords.