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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Remathilis" data-source="post: 7369823" data-attributes="member: 7635">D&D doesn't do obscure supplements; it does yearly rules updates bound with a heaping topping of fluff. If you're looking for obscure online supplements, WotC will kindly point you to the DMsGuild. Anything WotC puts out in its official capacity is going to be big and put in the major release, so it needs to appeal the widest swath of players.  And while I did not enjoy my time with 4e, I do not begrudge those that did. However, it is fair to say the treatment of martial characters, outside of some true hardcore fans, wasn't the most well-received element of the game; if the Essentials Knight, Slayer, and Thief were any indicator. Yet 5e can't be everything to everyone. There are fans of the Elf class from BECMI who love D&D. There are fans of Council of Wyrms who love D&D. There are fans of Player's Option: Skills and Powers who love D&D. Do they deserve official support too?So let me spell out my considerations. * I believe that there is design space for an archetype of martial leader commonly called the Warlord.* I believe the concept warrants more design space than a Fighter or Rogue subclass allows.* I believe the concept should support hp recovery, buffing, tactical considerations, and allowance of extra actions (including some form of attack)* I believe there is sufficient room currently to create a martial leader based on the rules that already exist, once remixed and expanded upon. * I don't believe the game can support a nonmagical version of the cleric, equal enough to the cleric enough to substitute for it, and not fundamentally warp with its inclusion.* I don't believe nonmagical characters should have powers equal to 6th level or greater magic.* I don't believe the lack of a non-magical support character for low/no magic games is alone sufficient to warrant its creation.* I don't believe that the 4e warlord is the only, let alone best, way to emulate the archetype of the martial leader. So perhaps it is that I believe there should be *A* warlord class, but not necessarily the *4e* warlord class, although the concepts share significant overlap. Its not caster supremacy, its keeping mundane and magical effects separate. If a highly intelligent warlord can devise plans equal to foresight, than what exactly makes the spell magical? As for waiting; get in line behind the chronomancer, Incarnum, and Birthright...I don't begrudge you. Play 4e all you want. You're still part of the D&D table. I want a warlord that could be accepted at most tables, not just the ones that enjoyed 4e.</blockquote>

Verification