NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Gimby" data-source="post: 9550265" data-attributes="member: 49875">For what it's worth, I largely had this happen in a 4e game - I was playing the Warlord who was butting heads with another character.  Depending on how the relationship was going we were using the definition of Ally to alter whether or not the rival character (and others, from time to time) benefited from the Warlord abilities.  Sometimes they would reject the abilities, sometimes the Warlord would exclude them from passive effects (like the Tactical Warlord initiative buff). And this was great! It really gave some mechanical heft to their relationship and the performance of the party when everyone was in harmony was significantly better than when they weren't, which was to us at least, a surprising but very immersive mechanic. For what it's worth, this didn't only affect Warlords in 4e - remember this was riding off the definition of "Ally", which was a defined mechanical thing.  I forget the exact wording, it's been a while, but it was something like "Two creatures are Allies if they both believe that they are".   Many effects from a variety of classes used Ally as a target, so this would affect them all equally.  It also meant that you could get some subtlety in class/power effects by the Ally/Creature distinction - some effects you can compel onto your target, some you can't.   Again, it's been a while but IIRC the Cure X Wounds cleric powers used creature targeting (so you could heal a resisting target [Magic!]) whereas the  X Word abilities all used Ally targeting, so you'd need their permission.To me, the above scenario is great - an NPC who is able to sufficiently able to disrupt the party's social cohesion significantly impacts their ability to co-ordinate as a group.   Feels dramatic and appropriate for the genre.Just to expound a bit further, the concept of an enemy completely hosing a character's main schtick isn't unique to the Warlord here, even if the method is unusual.   Anti Magic Field casts, destroying spell components or books, Zone of Silence, Reverse Gravity on a melee fighter and so on.   The Warlord can also take analogous actions to revert the effect - many will be Charisma focused and can persuade their party members back, while Intelligence focused ones might have to come up with a clever solution, in much the same way as the advice for a Wizard in an anti-magic field has always been.Now, the objection here is that Anti Magic fields shouldn't be that common, but there isn't actually any rules against that (or even in most core DMGs, really much advice), so simply don't make your hyper-persuasive enemy/enchanter common either.Side note, Bards were also defined as Leaders in 4e.  Ironically enough, Warlords could do Cheerleader much better</blockquote>

Verification