D&D 5E How much Warlord do you want?

[Salamandyr]

Honest to betsy, I don't want any warlord, class, subclass, or other. I'm tired of dissecting the warrior archetype into any more smaller chunks.

Being a warlord is something I just wanna see fighters do, at upper levels. "You're 15th level? Time to build a castle and lead some armies!"

I don't even want to limit it to fighters--Mordenkainen has led armies. Rary is supposedly the top military strategist in the Flaeness (if I remember my Greyhawk lore correctly). Thieves and assassins can lead guilds. Clerics can have legions of Templars, Rangers and archer companies, Barbarians and hordes. Paladins are basically fighters with some extra stuff, so they can lead armies.

Being a warlord isn't a class thing...it's a high level thing.

 

[Yunru]

Onslaught never claimed any such thing. What you've attempted to do is commonly referred to as a strawman. Followed immediately by an ad hominem. Bad form. I recommend against such tactics.

Aahem: "Barolo, you're part of the silent majority on the subject."

Yes, a direct quote assigning a side to the silent majority is a real strawman. *rolls eyes*

Followed immediately by an ad hominem. Are you sure I'm the subject of your post, or is it more of a mirror?

 

[Corwin]

Aahem: "Barolo, you're part of the silent majority on the subject."

Correct. Sounds like you are more taking issue with the very notion of there even being something called a "silent majority". Good luck fighting that fight.

Yes, a direct quote assigning a side to the silent majority.

Clever. Again, sounds like you don't believe in silent majorities. Have fun with that.

 

[Corwin]

Being a warlord isn't a class thing...it's a high level thing.

Or even just a roleplaying thing.

 

[Yunru]

Correct. Sounds like you are more taking issue with the very notion of there even being something called a "silent majority". Good luck fighting that fight.


Clever. Again, sounds like you don't believe in silent majorities. Have fun with that.

Nonsense. The Silent (almost) always exist (be they majority or minority), but to assign one's views (or another's, as the case may be) to them is a fallacy.

Nice strawman, but I clearly stated my issue was with something other than the silent majority existing.

As is you're two for two on the things you accused me of doing. Funny that.

 

[cmad1977]

I don't want a warlord because I like reading people whine about it incessantly.

It tickles me so.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[LapBandit]

Honest to betsy, I don't want any warlord, class, subclass, or other. I'm tired of dissecting the warrior archetype into any more smaller chunks.

Being a warlord is something I just wanna see fighters do, at upper levels. "You're 15th level? Time to build a castle and lead some armies!"

I don't even want to limit it to fighters--Mordenkainen has led armies. Rary is supposedly the top military strategist in the Flaeness (if I remember my Greyhawk lore correctly). Thieves and assassins can lead guilds. Clerics can have legions of Templars, Rangers and archer companies, Barbarians and hordes. Paladins are basically fighters with some extra stuff, so they can lead armies.

Being a warlord isn't a class thing...it's a high level thing.

You're describing a role and not a set of like features grouped together that makes a class or archetype. That said, I'd prefer the fighter get anything that people feel they need in the warlord. The class is already lacking versatility, any class derivative of it should simply be added into it.

 

[Salamandyr]

You're describing a role and not a set of like features grouped together that makes a class or archetype. That said, I'd prefer the fighter get anything that people feel they need in the warlord. The class is already lacking versatility, any class derivative of it should simply be added into it.

I'm really not...I'm describing what is an end point of a career as a fighting man.

As to the latter part, I mostly agree, except I dislike sequestering interesting development opportunities inside class roles, instead of opening them up in the game rules themselves.

 

[Corwin]

Nonsense. The Silent (almost) always exist (be they majority or minority), but to assign one's views (or another's, as the case may be) to them is a fallacy.

Fallacy, huh. I love that you used that word. Well played.

 

[LapBandit]

I'm really not...I'm describing what is an end point of a career as a fighting man.

As to the latter part, I mostly agree, except I dislike sequestering interesting development opportunities inside class roles, instead of opening them up in the game rules themselves.

I see. Well, perhaps your perspective is better served by feats (and maybe the "Warlord" is just that, a feat) that emulate those abilities.

I've often wondered what D&D would look like if more of the class features were feats and everyone got an ASI every two levels. You could increase the ASIs for the Fighter and Rogue accordingly.