Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 8545588" data-attributes="member: 6790260">Were people actually saying the bolded? It sounds to me like you have blown the criticism out of proportion. It has never been "impossible to succeed" without magical healing, in the sense that it has always been possible to still wrest victory from the jaws of defeat without it, even in the far more meatgrinder-y days, purely because of random luck. What is almost always being described is that if you don't have a real healer on hand, you have a dramatically greater chance of individual character death and TPK. That remains true in 5e.So, originally I was going to make a sarcastic remark here, but I realize that is unproductive. Trying for a more friendly approach: Are you familiar at all with 4e? Part of the reason so many 4e fans truly loved the Warlord class was that it was a support-focused class...that could still stand on its own decently well, didn't have to sacrifice its own contributions in order to support others, and directly enhanced a more high-risk/high-reward playstyle as opposed to the reliable but often dull and purely reactive playstyle usually associated with playing a "support" character. Many, many people over the years have expressly said how refreshing and exciting it was to feel like they could play a support character that felt awesome right alongside the people they were supporting.</blockquote>