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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 6725025" data-attributes="member: 996">I'm not sure that isn't just rhetorical, but you do bring up a point.  There are really more than the two extreme camps.  There are those who want the Warlord in 5e, those who want it purged from the game forever, those who might want something like the Warlord but find it some how not quite meeting their need, there are those who want to exclude the warlord for whatever reason but would settle for making it so bad no one would ever play it, there are those who despise the concept of the warlord, there are those who despised it's mechanics in 4e, there are those who despise it for being new-to-4e, there are those who are fine with the concept as long as it's strictly inferior to magical alternatives.For most of those who despise the warlord, are still fighting the edition war, never want it at their table, want to dictate to the world that it never be played, or want it to be unplayable or strictly inferior, changing the warlord in a reasonable way will never be an acceptable compromise.  The only plausible compromise is to make it more convenient for them to keep the warlord from the tables where they actually play.  5e already does that by Empowering the DM to ban or modify any part of the game, but that empowerment could be made easier (for instance, with modules), or effortless (opt-in).For others, though, the exact mechanics, fluff and implementation might matter.  The compromise here, since we are talking 5e, still needs to be inclusive.  Not least-common-denominator (the Warlord least objectionable to the largest plurality, but but satisfying to few among them, and inevitably excluding the rest), but most customizeability, so everyone can get as close as possible to what they want, while opting out of what they don't.That means things like the OP:   Phrasing the fluff of the class to leave open loopholes that make it more palatable to some, without undermining the concept for everyone else.   It also means designing a class with a great deal of both build and play flexibility.</blockquote>

Verification