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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 6831219" data-attributes="member: 996">That's not a problem, at all.  Do you normally envision the 'fiction' corresponding to absolutely everything every character does?  Do you analyze it's implications at the table?  No, clearly you weren't.  It's only when you go intentionally looking for a problem that you create it.  The point of the game is to have fun, not to go digging for imaginary problem and blowing them out of proportion when you can just let your imagination go in directions that /are/ fun, instead, or, worst case, skip over the boring/annoying bits...   Offered quite early on:It's actually a topic that's been covered earlier, too (for that matter, much earlier, all the way back to the 4e PH1 and the discussion of the 'Leader' role, that it doesn't imply authority nor making decisions for everyone else).  More recently, though, in this temporary forum, we've gone into the range of concepts the warlord might enable.   The plucky side-kick, the faithful retainer always ready with good advice, the pragmatic tactician, the instigator who goes off half-cocked, the manipulator, the bitter rival you feel driven to out-do at every turn, even the perennial victim inspiring heroes to come to the rescue.I don't know how much detail or how many examples it'd take for you to acknowledge there are 'solid' alternatives to the Zap Brannigan stereotype the naysayers have manufactured, but I'm willing to give it a few walls of text if that's what you need.You can include both groups by including the desirable-to-some material outside the Standard Game, and letting those who don't want it ignore it.  For instance, feats are a 3.x-ism that not every old-school D&Der is down with.  They're also officially optional, the DM has to opt into them, and, even if he does, if you don't like feats, you can take all your ASIs as stat bumps.At this point, that's all it /can/ be.  The Standard Game is defined by the PH and set in stone.  Like SCAG's Bladesinger and PDK, any forthcoming Warlord would be very much optional material, probably see the light of AL at most once in whatever season coincided with the product it appeared in.Classes, though, like any player option, are, well, optional by nature.  Even if the Warlord were in the PH1, no one at a given table is forced to play one.  It's not like 1e when you 'needed a Cleric.'  A group would have to have something more against the Cleric, Druid, Bard, and Paladin before they'd even begin to feel pressured into 'needing' a Warlord.  'Optional' is a given.</blockquote>

Verification