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: 6831163" data-attributes="member: 31754">It probably is a 4e issue. There are many things I didn't like about 4e. That's why I disappeared from the D&D community and moved to Pathfinder.The goal of being inclusive is admirable, but it will not be 100% achievable. There are going to be parts of 4e that people like and want in 5e that other people don't like and don't want in 5e. So what do you do? You can't please both groups.For instance, I don't like the "every square is 5' rule, even diagonal". But there is an option to use the 3.5 rule, which makes more sense to me and my group, so that is what we use. There are other options that make the game more 4e like. Shorter Short Rests and Healing Surges and things, but they are optional. So I just ignore those options. Feats are optional, but are allowed in AL while the others aren't.4e has a certain feel to the game. The Warlord embodies that feeling. 5e has a different feeling that, while not completely incompatible, is different by default. It's my opinion that the Warlord should be an option that must be explicitly added. I don't think it should be AL legal.I will agree with you on everything here. All very reasonable.Well, I am expressing my opinion of what 5e should be. In my opinion the Warlord does not fit the feel D&D 5e (or D&D at all for that matter, but that's just my opinion). In terms of bringing together the community it only servers to divide players in to those that want it and those that don't. And of course those that don't care one way or the other (probably the majority).But I understand wanting more options. So include it as an optional class for those that want to add it to their game, just like other optional 4e rules that are available.</blockquote>

Verification