Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="mellored" data-source="post: 6735911" data-attributes="member: 6801209">Prone to being overpowered is probably the correct way to say it.&nbsp; I think i did the calculations at some point, and it was OP in 30% of a randomly selected group.&nbsp; Though groups are rarely randomly selected.&nbsp; And still not nearly as OP as wizards/clerics/druids where in 3e.Plus, most of the already OP things the warlord had in 4e have been solved with bounded accuracy and tighter action economy.I mean in 4e you could (with a large amount of char-opping) grant an opportunity attack, a free action attack, and a reaction attack, with a +int (10) bonus to-hit all on the same turn.&nbsp; And given that a basic attack was ~80% of your normal damage, that's ~480% normal damage.In 5e the same warlord could grant 1 reaction attack, with +int (5) bonus to-hit.&nbsp; And each attack would deal only 50% of most characters (past 5).&nbsp; That's ~75% normal damage.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="mellored, post: 6735911, member: 6801209"] Prone to being overpowered is probably the correct way to say it. I think i did the calculations at some point, and it was OP in 30% of a randomly selected group. Though groups are rarely randomly selected. And still not nearly as OP as wizards/clerics/druids where in 3e. Plus, most of the already OP things the warlord had in 4e have been solved with bounded accuracy and tighter action economy. I mean in 4e you could (with a large amount of char-opping) grant an opportunity attack, a free action attack, and a reaction attack, with a +int (10) bonus to-hit all on the same turn. And given that a basic attack was ~80% of your normal damage, that's ~480% normal damage. In 5e the same warlord could grant 1 reaction attack, with +int (5) bonus to-hit. And each attack would deal only 50% of most characters (past 5). That's ~75% normal damage. [/QUOTE]

Verification