Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Evaluating the warlord-y Fighter
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Jester David" data-source="post: 6523928" data-attributes="member: 37579"><p>I'm okay with "balance" (to a point) but I'm not a fan of symmetry.</p><p></p><p>The difference between "regains 8 hit points" and "gains 8 temporary hit points" or "parry to negate 8 damage" is functionally irrelevant. You still walk away from the fight with 8 more hit points than you would have otherwise. Healing gets characters back into a fight they had been removed from, but temp hp and damage mitigation prevent them from going down in the first place and potentially preventing lost turns. </p><p></p><p>The big difference is one of flavour. It makes sense for a warlord to parry or call out a warning allowing an ally to duck. Healing doesn't make sense, and so regaining hit points doesn't work with all definitions of "hit points". Mechanics have to be neutral in regards to stuff like that.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Making it an option helps for the healer issue. So warlords can opt not to be "healers". </p><p></p><p>However, it does leave that option at the PC's disposal. Which means they're determining the definition of hit points for the campaign, not the DM. And that opens a can of worms. HP is problematic. So long as nothing draws attention to the wackiness of hit points, people who think they're meat and people who think they're fatigue can play together just fine. But once powers suggest one or the other it creates a narrative disconnect for some. Which causes problems. Having martial healing would be just as problematic as a spell or power firmly stating hp was health.</p><p></p><p></p><p>That doesn't work as well in 5e, since there are no "surges" that would wear out. Characters will either always be able to benefit, or the healing would be limited some other way. Like superiority dice. And, really, there's no good narrative reason why someone can't benefit from repeated pep talks and encouragement. Rocky doesn't just stop listening to Mick because Mick talked to him once before that day. Someone having been beaten up in four or fights prior and being out of surges shouldn't affect the warlord's abilities; one class' limited powers shouldn't depend on another character's resources. </p><p></p><p>And the ability described above works just as well with temporary hit points. Better since the "healing" a pep talk provides necessitates the person being awake and won't last forever, as the weariness and injuries will quickly return. And the commander could also give everyone the inspiring talk before battle, rather than in the middle. </p><p></p><p></p><p>I've played in a LOT of organized play during 3e. And playing with healer was rare. And even when we had a cleric, most healing was handled by CLW wands between fights, so the cleric could save their resources for combats or stuff they wanted to do. </p><p>And the game did not implode. </p><p>Forgoing a healer for extra DPS or crowd control works find a lot of the time. I had a bard in 3e (<em>Living Greyhawk</em>) that was pretty much a cleric replacement. The healing wasn't as good in combat, but it kept people up. But the other buffing took enemies down faster, so less damage was taken overall. So it balanced out. </p><p>And since the game is run by a living, thinking, human being who can account for the group dynamic, healers aren't that essential. My Pathfinder home game prefers recruiting an NPC as a healer and having them tag along, rather than someone filling that role. </p><p></p><p>Instead of thinking of groups without a cleric as being disadvantaged, I prefer to think of groups with a healer cleric as having an advantage. It's a bonus. A perk. And the best way to work towards that is to not assume healing in the game and not assume healing is coming from other sources. 5e isn't perfect in that regard but it works well enough without constant healing. </p><p></p><p></p><p>Changing the question to "Who's going to play the leader?" isn't much better. It still mandates one person has to play a certain type of character. It's *slightly* less annoying because there's more choices than just one, but it still limits their choices to a smaller pool of 2-3 classes. </p><p></p><p>But, really, there's always been choices. The druid for one. And the bard since 3e. And now the paladin can work somewhat. There's no shortage of emergency healers in the game. </p><p>And, worst case scenario, the fighter/warlord can multiclass (into cleric or bard) and get a feat or two.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Jester David, post: 6523928, member: 37579"] I'm okay with "balance" (to a point) but I'm not a fan of symmetry. The difference between "regains 8 hit points" and "gains 8 temporary hit points" or "parry to negate 8 damage" is functionally irrelevant. You still walk away from the fight with 8 more hit points than you would have otherwise. Healing gets characters back into a fight they had been removed from, but temp hp and damage mitigation prevent them from going down in the first place and potentially preventing lost turns. The big difference is one of flavour. It makes sense for a warlord to parry or call out a warning allowing an ally to duck. Healing doesn't make sense, and so regaining hit points doesn't work with all definitions of "hit points". Mechanics have to be neutral in regards to stuff like that. Making it an option helps for the healer issue. So warlords can opt not to be "healers". However, it does leave that option at the PC's disposal. Which means they're determining the definition of hit points for the campaign, not the DM. And that opens a can of worms. HP is problematic. So long as nothing draws attention to the wackiness of hit points, people who think they're meat and people who think they're fatigue can play together just fine. But once powers suggest one or the other it creates a narrative disconnect for some. Which causes problems. Having martial healing would be just as problematic as a spell or power firmly stating hp was health. That doesn't work as well in 5e, since there are no "surges" that would wear out. Characters will either always be able to benefit, or the healing would be limited some other way. Like superiority dice. And, really, there's no good narrative reason why someone can't benefit from repeated pep talks and encouragement. Rocky doesn't just stop listening to Mick because Mick talked to him once before that day. Someone having been beaten up in four or fights prior and being out of surges shouldn't affect the warlord's abilities; one class' limited powers shouldn't depend on another character's resources. And the ability described above works just as well with temporary hit points. Better since the "healing" a pep talk provides necessitates the person being awake and won't last forever, as the weariness and injuries will quickly return. And the commander could also give everyone the inspiring talk before battle, rather than in the middle. I've played in a LOT of organized play during 3e. And playing with healer was rare. And even when we had a cleric, most healing was handled by CLW wands between fights, so the cleric could save their resources for combats or stuff they wanted to do. And the game did not implode. Forgoing a healer for extra DPS or crowd control works find a lot of the time. I had a bard in 3e ([I]Living Greyhawk[/I]) that was pretty much a cleric replacement. The healing wasn't as good in combat, but it kept people up. But the other buffing took enemies down faster, so less damage was taken overall. So it balanced out. And since the game is run by a living, thinking, human being who can account for the group dynamic, healers aren't that essential. My Pathfinder home game prefers recruiting an NPC as a healer and having them tag along, rather than someone filling that role. Instead of thinking of groups without a cleric as being disadvantaged, I prefer to think of groups with a healer cleric as having an advantage. It's a bonus. A perk. And the best way to work towards that is to not assume healing in the game and not assume healing is coming from other sources. 5e isn't perfect in that regard but it works well enough without constant healing. Changing the question to "Who's going to play the leader?" isn't much better. It still mandates one person has to play a certain type of character. It's *slightly* less annoying because there's more choices than just one, but it still limits their choices to a smaller pool of 2-3 classes. But, really, there's always been choices. The druid for one. And the bard since 3e. And now the paladin can work somewhat. There's no shortage of emergency healers in the game. And, worst case scenario, the fighter/warlord can multiclass (into cleric or bard) and get a feat or two. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Evaluating the warlord-y Fighter
Top