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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Jester David" data-source="post: 6806846" data-attributes="member: 37579">The healer is problematic. First, as mentioned repeatedly, combat healing is handy but not essential. Getting someone back up when at 0 is handy but too situation for a dedicated character. Something you do once every two or three combats is not a role, it's a secondary or tertiary role.But the issue comes with warlords not being able to cast lesser restoration or greater restoration, which is essential to the healer archetype. Theoretically a warlord class could allow an ally to reroll a save or something, but that can only go so far and isn't very useful after the fact. Because of the way monster powers are set up in the game, a martial healer can never be the equal or match of cleric or bard or druid. They can never completely replace those classes like they could in 4e. As such, since that goal is unobtainable, it's better to focus on other things the warlord can do.It is tricky. But personally I like the idea of a tactical warlord that uses Int far more than an inspiring warlord that overlaps a little much with the bard for my tastes. The Int based martial character is a much larger role. Heck, in general Int is an underused stat.Reactions are a big design space. The meta powers of having practiced and run drills with allies allowing them to react to triggers such as an enemy moving adjacent or making an attack. Maybe some powers with triggers: when you and an ally both X then you get a bonus.The warlord could also be the king of readied actions, maybe being able to move in addition to making a regular action. They might have something akin to "delay" as a class feature. That keeps combats quick, since they're acting outside of their turn but not doing much on their actual turn.</blockquote>

Verification