Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 9671873" data-attributes="member: 6790260">I don't think it needs to be 2-and-2, but I certainly agree that a Warlord subclass focused on the combat applications of magic would be perfectly acceptable.For my part, I like the old Warlock split-subclass model, and think that would be an excellent choice for the Warlord. (There's a vague tracery of this in the 5.5e Cleric: at 1st level you now choose whether to be more a warrior or more a priest, separate from your domain. So it's not unprecedented even in 5.5e to have this kind of "first level broad interest, third level specific focus" split.)E.g. at first level you choose your Leadership Style, which determines what your Leadership Modifier is. Resourceful = Wisdom, highest focus on healing, save-granting, and resilience; Bravura = Charisma, highest focus on buffs, attack-granting, and high-risk/high-reward play; Cunning = Intelligence, highest focus on mitigation, movement-granting, and coordination.Then at third level you choose your Combat Specialty. Ideas I've had include: Vanguard (front-line well-armored warrior), Sapper (military engineer/trickster), Knight-Enchanter (EK/AT equivalent, enhances ally spells), Old Master (monk-like tutor/helper/guide), and Skirmisher (stealthy "commando" type, mobility, hit-and-run, etc.)There are other benefits that I think can and should be mined from the Warlock chassis, but this is all that's relevant to what you've said here. A separate spellcasting-adjacent Warlord subclass might have something to do with Abjuration specifically, possibly Divination as well, and there's precedent for that in the Abjurant Champion. So I could see a Warlord subclass that does that, magical reconnaissance and warding.</blockquote>

Verification