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: 6837084" data-attributes="member: 996">Whether inspired or manipulated or just directed to an advantageous course of action, support-oriented mechanics - action grants, offensive buffs, hp restoration, defensive buffs (like damage mitigation), condition mitigation, &c - can work well to model the desired outcome.  Gamers can sure have a hard time RPing that sort of thing, though.  Maybe because there aren't a lot of 18 CHA gamers... ;(It was only 1 build out of 6+ ... It does provide the only example of the D&D Warlord, so it has to be a starting point and the 5e version should try to capture that feel, just as it did with all the other classes from a PH1.  But 'inspiring' wasn't really that heavy, the main thing that created that appearance was Inspiring Word, which, in 5e, could easily be just one of many player choices (just like the 4e Cleric always had Healing Word, while the 5e Cleric can take or leave it from one day to the next).Because you chose to avoid taking any class/levels with actual divine magic.  I know that's kinda begging the question, but the point is that classes are there for players to use to build characters.  You can build a devout character who gains most of his power from divine magic (Cleric), or one that gets less/more focused divine gifts (Paladin, MC Cleric/X), or only a little (Magic Initiate: Cleric), or none at all (Acolyte).   Unless the DM called for one, of course.  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />  Though I suppose it could be legitimate for the players to decide to base something on a roll, much like flipping a coin.  Not a matter of the player of the persuasive PC making a check and demanding obedience, but in the sense of the player of the PC that is RP-enclined towards a bad choice but open to being persuaded wanting to bring dice into his decision.Because there is that line between player and character.   Besides, persuasion doesn't force.I guess it depends on how old & cynical you are, and how much energy you have to devote to being righteously indignant all the time.  It also depends on the qualities of humility and empathy.  A lot of the greatest leaders were far from the kind of arrogant jerks that gamers so often seem to visualize high-CHA characters as being.  That's one way to handle it.  Or the player gives the general idea of what the character is saying, and the other players imagine the details (to the extent they need to) that work for them.  Another example is 'Schrödinger's Command.'  When you spent an action point in 4e, you got a bonus from the Warlord's "Commanding Presence" feature.  The idea might have been that he was giving commands, but you decided when to use the action point, and what you did with it, so the commands just happened to be to do what your player decided you should do.  The player of the ally controls the in-fiction actions of the Warlord.  A lot of powers inevitably shook out that way, because that's what support powers do, they enhance allies.  The fluff is that it's through 'leadership' in a variety of senses.Oh, god, please don't make up another "dissociated mechanic." ;P  That's all you need to know, really.  Personal preferences aren't invalidated by letting other people do something you don't care for, personally.  There's no danger the Warlord will be non-optional, and unless it's botched, it should be flexible enough that there'd be a lot of ways to play/visualize it. The team member who 'doesn't work well with others' is a very common trope, and it can be fun to spark off that, and to let it develop over time.  Is it awesome when it happens through roleplay, if there's absolutely no mechanical gain for having RP'd through it?  No, it's a let-down.  Is it awesome when everything about the character points to being able to accomplish it, but because the player isn't an 18 CHA natural leader, the RP doesn't make it happen?  No.  And, resolving something that way makes about as much sense as resolving a grapple attempt by having the player & DM arm wrestle.  If the abilities of the player trump those of the character, you're not RPing the character anymore.That's fine, you just don't pick or decline to accept benefits of Inspiration or Bardic Inspiration or Inspiring Leader - or, if we ever get one, anything like an "Inspiring" Build (archetype in 5e) of the Warlord.  Maybe a Tactical or Resourceful or Skirmishing one, though...</blockquote>

Verification