Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 9671868" data-attributes="member: 6790260">The problem, as is always the case with any Fighter sublcass, is that the base chassis is too full of stuff.You can't actually give the Warlord features the room they need to breathe and flex, because "has 4x attacks per round" and "Action surge" etc. is too strong. The old Banneret shows quite well the limits.People love to say that the best use of Wizards (etc.) is to use powerful control spells so that the non-casters or low-casters are set up to kick huge butt. The Warlord-as-Fighter-subclass answer falls down on this, because they cannot be the kind of person who is best at setting others up. They'll always be best at getting set-up from their allies, they'll just have a minor and distinctly incidental ability to set allies up too.That's why I just can't see ANY Fighter subclass, no matter how well-constructed, being a Warlord.As I've said many times previously, imagine if someone told you we weren't getting a Wizard class because the Eldritch Knight exists. Would you accept the Eldritch Knight we have, right now, as a valid substitute for a full, complete Wizard? Even if you would, do you think the typical Wizard player would? Heck, that the typical player-in-general would?</blockquote>