Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 6750098" data-attributes="member: 996">The PDK's damage output should only be a shade behind that of other fighters. It would be easy to create a fighter archetype that was 'more powerful' than other fighter archetypes, or have too much on top of the fighter's high DPR, but it'd be hard to create a set of martial abilities that threatened to be overpowered relative to casters, and, as a support-oriented concept, the Warlord is inevitably stacked up against several casters.Besides, balance is a fluid thing in 5e, very much subject to DM moderation. c) makes it strictly inferior and non-viable as a sole source of support - but a fighter sub-class could never be viable as a party's sole contributor of support functions, anyway, even if decidedly 'overpowered,' there's just too little design space left to the archetypes, and it's delayed until 3rd level, when support is critical at getting through 1st and 2nd.  Sounds reasonable.  With a base class in the PH, you wouldn't want to base your design on feats being used, but it's an OK assumption for a homebrew class, certainly.Nice idea.  Adds flexibility, highlights the importance of the ally to the warlord concept.MAD isn't quite as painful in 5e, where there's a lower cap on your primary, so you can afford to get around to boosting tertiary stats, anyway.  And it fits the concept for either or both INT & CHA to matter.</blockquote>