Inspiration is a PC-on-PC Social Skills Question

[Lord Twig]

I don't know what you mean by "adjusting their attitude"?

Do you mean, for instance, rousing someone's spirits or restoring their hope? If the player of the injured PC in fact decides that his/her PC's spirits are not roused, and/or that hope is not restored, then s/he can (presumably) decline the healing. Certainly in 4e that was the case, so I don't see why 5e would be different.

If you have something else in mind by "adjusting their attitude", then I'm not sure what it is.

Of course first you have to assume that the character's spirits are down and that they have lost hope. Which conflicts with a character who is an eternal optimist and never let's things get him down. It always conflicts with something. That's part of the problem.

Because the ability is silo-ed into the warlord class.

And as I answered above. Currently it is not siloed in the Warlord class. That wouldn't happen until you introduce one.

The question is like asking why only a sorcerer benefits from having a dragon ancestor, or why only a warlock benefits from selling his/her soul to the devil, or why the gods only answer the prayers of clerics and paladins. Whatever the answer to these questions within the fiction - and in my experience, most tables don't bother to try and answer them in the fiction - those answers have to bow to the mechanical constraints on PC building that are part-and-parcel of a D&D-style class system.

And a lot of these examples are of characters focusing their training in certain areas, and can be answered by multi-classing. Of course you can always multi-class into Warlord, so I guess that's a wash. As long as you don't mind having to take levels in Warlord in order to be an inspiring figure.

 

[Lord Twig]

The 5e Bless spell has no flavour text. But it is an Enchantment spell, and according to the rules an Enchantment spell is one which "affect the minds of others, influencing or controlling their behavior."

So between the ordinary language meaning of the word "bless", plus the rules text for Enchantment, how do you think Bless works, if not by inspiring by the glory and power the deity, whose grace fills the affected character?

There is an additional puzzle about Bless: what happens when the paladin of Bahamut blesses a character, who then goes off and makes an attack roll against an innocent peasant from behind? Does the spell still work? And why? This is another of those corner cases which arise when inspirational/relationship-based mechanics are expressed in general terms.

The spell does still work, and this makes sense because the spell doesn't care what you believe or what you are doing. The magic just enhances your abilities, in this case it is enhancing your mental and emotional abilites, your morale.

You can think of the magical Bless spell like taking performance enhancing drugs, but without any negative side effects. You are pumped up, you are energized. The source doesn't matter, Bahamut or Wee Jas, it has the same effect.

 

[mellored]

This is not a universal truth. Many players care about the fiction and consider it a part of the experience at the table.

what's your opinion of "extraordinary" in place of magic. Like the dragon breathing fire is not "magic".

Also, your PM box is full.

 

[ChrisCarlson]

what's your opinion of "extraordinary" in place of magic. Like the dragon breathing fire is not "magic".

In previous warlord conversations, we were all about providing some sort of bard-like pseudo-magic "words of creation have power" sidebar. It had promise. But was shot down by the more adamant non-magical demanders and subsequently petered out. I thought that was unfortunate. It showed a lot of promise.

Also, your PM box is full.

D'oh! Emptied. My bad.

 

[Bawylie]

The same article that talks about dragon's breath not being magical also talks about different kinds of magic, including the magic of the universe - the physics of the d&d world.

So from the word go, you want to jettison ordinary assumptions of the power of words.

Bardic inspiration is non-magical, the same way a dragon's breath is non-magical. Warlord inspiration is the same.

 

[jayoungr]

My question: do you except that the use of Bless circumvents player agency via mind control (much like casting Charm Person on a fellow PC, but with no save allowed). If not, why not? (After all, it is an Enchantment effect.)

I do not accept that a target under the effect of the Bless spell necessarily, as a result of the spell, feels any kind of positive emotion toward the cleric or the cleric's deity. Further thoughts on that are laid out in this post: http://www.enworld.org/forum/showth...drink/page33&p=6825575&viewfull=1#post6825575

And if the answer to that question is "no", then why do you think warlord inspiration would be any more controversial as far as player agency considerations are concerned?

As I keep saying, I believe that mundane inspiration (which also exists in the Inspiring Leader feat, so it's not just a warlord thing) carries with it unique implications about the relationship between the inspirer and the other characters in the party. I recognize that you do not see a difference.

I think this is a misreading of LotR. Frodo, Faramir, Boromir, Legolas et al do not hold Gandalf or Aragorn in holy reverence. That would be sacrilege

Yes, you will note that I said ALMOST holy reverence. As in, the highest possible level of devotion that can be had without crossing over into sacrilege.

Gandalf and Aragorn aren't worshipped. They are loved, admired and respected.

Yes. And this is what people say they want for their warlord characters (i.e., they want to play someone "like Aragorn or Gandalf").

@mellored has already mentioned upthread, mulitple times, that one person might inspire another through the words they use, and the strength of their personality, without the inspired person loving or admiring them.

Would you agree that the target must at minimum respect the source of inspiration, and care about what he/she thinks?

Also, are you saying that love and admiration are not the most obvious sources of finding inspiration in another character?

I would add that it is not uncommon for one person to come to respect another person because that other person is inspiring to them; that is, respect is an effect and not a cause of inspiration.

My character is still being forced into positive emotions toward another character because of another player's mechanical actions. It's not really better if that happens after the mechanical actions rather than before.

If my PC loves and/or respects someone else's PC, I want that to happen because of roleplay, not because of a game mechanic. I want to look at how the other character behaves in the game and then decide whether my PC would find that worthy of love/admiration/respect.

But even if we put all these cases to one side, and treat admiration, love or respect as the paradigm - I don't see the problem.

Do you think people like being presented with some character they've never heard of and informed that that they will now love, respect, and find inspiration in him/her? Because I think most people want to decide for themselves whether they (or their PCs) respect and admire someone. They want it to be earned.

Out of curiosity, would your thoughts change if the warlord was an NPC? If the GM had a stranger come up to your party in the middle of battle and informed you that the PCs were filled with respect and admiration for this character--before telling you anything else about the character? You wouldn't resent that even a tiny bit?

the reason the warlord is able to inspire my PC is because s/he is someone whom my PC respects and admires.

Well, at least you come out and admit it.

This raises the same issue. Why would anyone suppose that subordination is a necessary condition of inspiration? Legolas, for instance, isn't subordinate to Aragorn - Aragorn is his friend and companion, not his master.

He is the (second) leader of the Fellowship. Are you saying that does not in any sense whatsoever make the other members of the Fellowship subordinate to him? I don't see how you can have a leader without a hierarchy.

In other posts on the warlord I have conjectured that the real source of the warlord divide is differing conceptions of protagonists, as either self-sufficient atoms, or as related to and even dependent on others. It seems to me that only if you have the former conception would it be some sort of burden on your agency, as a player, to play your PC as admiring and respecting a fellow PC.

There's a difference between commitment to the success of the group as a whole and a feeling of admiration/respect for a single member of the group.

 

[ChrisCarlson]

Bardic inspiration is non-magical, the same way a dragon's breath is non-magical. Warlord inspiration is the same.

Are the flames created by the Create Bonfire spell magical? Can the hit points restored by Cure Wounds be dispelled? Just because an effect is not magical does not mean the source was equally mundane. The same is described in the bard's description. The same could easily be said of the warlord.

 

[Bawylie]

Are the flames created by the Create Bonfire spell magical? Can the hit points restored by Cure Wounds be dispelled? Just because an effect is not magical does not mean the source was equally mundane. The same is described in the bard's description. The same could easily be said of the warlord.

I'm cool with that, provided it's not a spell. Or invocation. Or obviously caster-y thing with slots/preparation.

 

[ChrisCarlson]

Yeah. I thought I recalled you being on board with the proposed "magic sidebar" compromise back when it was a thing. I'm sure we are much closer that you might think on what we consider viable.

 

[jayoungr]

I think this is a misreading of LotR. Frodo, Faramir, Boromir, Legolas et al do not hold Gandalf or Aragorn in holy reverence. That would be sacrilege; and for Gandalf or Aragorn to accept such reverence would be to commit the sin of pride of which Sauron is guilty (and arguably the Ringwraiths also, in their lust for domination which led them to take the rings from Sauron).

Gandalf and Aragorn aren't worshipped. They are loved, admired and respected.

...one person might inspire another through the words they use, and the strength of their personality, without the inspired person loving or admiring them.

Here's another Tolkien-related exercise which may throw some light on the discussion. Imagine a party of PCs who relate to each other much as the Fellowship does (large group!). Aragorn has "Ranger" on his character sheet and Gandalf has "Wizard." Now, imagine that any of the others has "Warlord" written down. How would inspiration in the party work then?

What if Boromir is the Warlord?

Merry?

Gimli?

Legolas?

Any of the others?

And if Aragorn doesn't have "Warlord" on his character sheet, what's happening at the table between his player and Boromir's in that Moria scene quoted earlier?