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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Gorgoroth" data-source="post: 6099187" data-attributes="member: 6674889">If DDN were modular towards archetype niches like Pathfinder, I think a warlord archetype of fighter, with parry class feature swapped out for something 4e-esque could be do-able. I wouldn't want people who truly want to play a warlord from level 1 to have to take a plain old fighter then wait a few levels to prestige class into it (despite my thinking that this would model reality better). I guess we'll see how they implement it, I give a 50-50 chance between a complete class and some type of meta-class of fighter. Then again, the other examples of wizard warlords and barbarian warlords would have to be seen. I don't think straight multiclass option, where you'd give up spellcasting levels to split with warlord is going to do Gandalf builds any favours. In the sense that a specialty could give a class feature or two, or free access to MDDs (so that wizards or non-melee types might take it), would make it a no-brainer to have in every party. I'd rather he not have any unmagical healing and let the healer kit handle that role. A warlord is not the same concept as a field medic, and should not be handled by the same person, in my opinion (and this coming from a guy who played a ranger|warlord hybrid in 4e and loved it. it was OP though, for sure. waaay OP. I gave up very little on the ranger side to get a buttload of healing, good powers, and other boons). Reorient the Axis was one of the coolest powers in my killswitch build, BUT I will say this : although it was super fun to play and tactical, it felt extremely chess-like and there is no easy way you could implement that in a battle system that doesn't assume a grid. Just too specific to positioning to be useable. The wording would have to be both precise and flexible, to allow grid and non-grid based combat viable without slowing the whole game down. If a series of quick skirmishes in DDN requires the battlemat to be broken out to accomodate the particulars of the warlord, that will be a huge design fail. Then again, OTOH, wizard spells in AD&D often had very specific particulars but they weren't grid-based quite often, they had much more fluid descriptors. E.g. volumetric fireballs. In that case, a grid actually smears the possibilities that you can do. Blow up the bottom of a well and clear up all the slime all the way up the pipe...is not something you can do in 4e, because it dreams in 2-dimensions. That's another thing, tactical options should not assume 2 dimensions. I thought that was a real cheapening of D&D when every single power was designed with a 2d-battle grid in mind. So far, the fast n loose aspect of DDN is what I hope goes forward, and let's hope the implementation of warlord party favours doesn't ruin the fast-paced action in the theater of the mind that the game currently supports.  And I'm a huge minis fan, I have hundreds, but I want a game where it's optional and the 4e warlord and wizard and even most of the classes make it compulsory.</blockquote>

Verification