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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Obryn" data-source="post: 7674822" data-attributes="member: 11821">No.... Part of the whole Warlord concept is that a party with a Warlord shouldn't necessarily need to rely on a Cleric/Bard for their healing/buffing, and the Battlemaster falls well short of this metric.One issue is with how watered down and limited these abilities all end up, and it's very much tied in with the miniscule dice pool available. A Battlemaster gets to play at being a weak Warlord for only a handful of actions every few encounters before reverting to a straight Fighter. For example, the basic Commander's Strike takes up dice instead of a more at-will basis. On the healing front, leaving aside the real vs. temp HP debate, and the ability to bring allies back into a fight, Rally provides just a pittance at the cost of a valuable die and a bonus action. 1d10+5 (at best) at 10th level? It's pretty bad, frankly. The scaling is awful. Also missing are the more substantial, combat-changing stuff like the impressive Stand the Fallen. Especially absent is any setup for full-party teamwork or buffing as opposed to just helping one buddy.And this is also where the lack of higher-level maneuvers is problematic. All maneuvers are balanced properly for 3rd level characters. Higher level characters are picking from the same list. There's no better stuff gated behind higher levels. It's clear where the inspiration for those maneuvers came from, but they're a poor substitute. Mind you, the Battlemaster still has the Fighter chassis with all of its perks like Action Surge, Second Wind, feats, etc. But that's frankly part of the problem; giving all these perks to a guy who still gets all this stuff seems poorly-balanced. Which is why I'd like a real Warlord as a class all its own.</blockquote>

Verification