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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="ChrisCarlson" data-source="post: 6804915" data-attributes="member: 6801216">Then you are just ignorant of the situation. What I don't want is needlessly irritating mechanics or broken classes mucking up a game I enjoy. There are other systems and editions that suit the needs of some people asking for certain warlord features and design criteria. That's okay. But smashing square pegs through round holes seems an odd choice to ask of the devs. Also, I've asked on numerous occasions, of anyone who is so passionate about the idea of a full-warlord, to post one for public consideration and critique. And I have repeatedly gone on the record that I would like to see a balanced, 5e-faithful, warlord sub/class. No one has offered one. Just a stack of mile-long wishlists, demands for infinite flexibility, and disparaging comments about the devs (for "insulting 4e fans") and anyone who is skeptical of the notion that you (the general you) can get everything you want in a neat little package.Odd. I cannot seem to find that description of this subforum anywhere. This is a subforum for all discussions of warlords. Not just fanboi lovefests. Criticism, and cautionary sentiments, are valid forms of discussion WRT such a thing as this. Or do you not agree?Interesting. I'd argue it was shunted here to its own prestigious subforum because of the countless warlord threads that were clogging the front page of the main forum. Which one you wanna bet is more accurate?And my answer is, "Another warlord? Why? There is already plenty of options scratching that itch in 5e." <shrug>To discuss and comment on an interesting hot topic in a public forum. What's yours?</blockquote>

Verification