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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Lord Twig" data-source="post: 6754364" data-attributes="member: 31754">1. But he accomplishes the same thing as a character that heals with magic. So if a Cleric is healing actual damage, then so is the Warlord. The damage doesn't change just because it is a Warlord healing instead of a Cleric.2. You are missing my point. I understand that I am not being told I have to like it, but if given a choice I would rather it not be in the game at all. Because like it or not, if it is in the game I will have to play with it. (Unless I can convince the people I play with not to use it I guess.)3. I understand that the Warlord is about improving team performance, and that is a great role for a character in a game like D&D. The problem is the Warlord improves performance by ordering the other characters around. That's his fluff. A Wizard can enhance the party also, but he magically grants you extra speed, or powers up your weapon, or physically makes you bigger, or whatever. He doesn't order you to do something an thereby creates an opportunity.The name Commander's Strike has Commander right in the name! You either follow his command or you lose the opportunity. If he is commanding then by definition you are following his command if you take that opportunity. And it would be foolish not to! Now I am forced into taking commands from another character and I don't want to.As I said with the Battlemaster, you could re-fluff it to a "Create Opening" ability where the Warlord delivers a blow in such a way that it creates an opening for an ally and that would be more acceptable, but that doesn't appear to be what people want. They want a leader. They want to lead their troops (a.k.a. the other players) into battle. The problem is there is a large group of people that don't want to be lead.</blockquote>

Verification