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: 6726414" data-attributes="member: 996">Of course I see the difference.  I also provided examples of not-necessarily-magical and non-magical things that involved inspiration.  So the precedent is already there, Inspiration is a thing, and it's a thing another character can just do.  With the Warlord as it was hammered out in 4e, at least the mechanics mostly made it very much your choice whether you took the benefit or not (free actions to take granted actions, option of spending a healing surge, &c).  5e wording tends not to be so precise, but it still shouldn't be a major sticking point.If you're down to 1hp?  Maybe your resolve is pure steel, but at 1 hp, some encouragement could still help.  Maybe it's not respect and admiration but rivalry, or resentment and a need to prove you /don't/ need the encouragement.   Even with bounded accuracy, that's a wildly improbable party composition there.  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />  But, y'know, I actually see a lot of logic to the level of both the ally and the warlord coming into the way the abilities work.  More than that, I see an opportunity with 5e's much more open design to make the Warlord's abilities more ally-centric.  It's not that the Warlord has some x/rest weirdness that helps once and is mysteriously gone for no reason (OK, the reason's abstraction, not important), it's that exhorting allies to do greater things requires something heroic from them, and there are limits.  Like in the hypothetical 'My Hero' tactic, your ally can't come dashing to your rescue if he's already pushed himself too far beyond his limits (fails that CON save).  Does there need to be? If you take any one class out of the game, it's rationale might be hypothetically 'unprecedented.'  No other class makes infernal pacts for power, for instance, but the Warlock was added to the game.  All casters were Vancian until the Sorcerer.  Besides, there's precedent for inspiration as a mechanic.  It seems like the issue is the same:  the Noble Battlemaster with Inspiring Leader is claiming a superior social position, getting you to 'rally' and 'Inspiring' you with his 'Leadership' all the time.  How is that not the same issue?  Why does it being a class make it an RP problem?  To be clear, I said 'player conflict.'  That is a player conflict, yes.  Two players have character concepts.  One player thinks the other's will conflict with how he plans to RP his character.  The players need to resolve that.  Maybe you favor 'lone wolf' or 'alpha' concepts that you feel 'Inspiration' mechanics would risk consistently undermining?  I'm sure there's ways around that which you could hammer out with any player who brought in such a character.  Presumably, in more detail the longer the campaign's expected to go.I've given a number of examples of how varied the Warlord side of the RP equation could be.  Can you think of no way a character you were playing might interact with an Inspiring Character of whatever stripe, in a way that supported both concepts?   Why is 'just by choosing a feat' better than 'just by choosing a class?'  The latter is a more momentous choice, and it can't be sprung on you in the middle of a campaign.Because they sound cooler?  Like I said 'mostly.'  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />  It also had a lot of CHA based builds, and high CHA gets you that sort of thing - whatever it is you evoke in others, you're going to evoke more of it with high CHA.  Anyway, you can say "yes, let's have a Warlord, and make sure it can be used for lots of cool and varied concepts" (I think, now that I type it, it's actually kinda hard to picture your avatar saying that) hard to object to something like that.  It's appropriate to the more outre 'Princess' or lazylord builds, it was tricky to do one 100% warlord over many levels, because there just weren't that many maneuvers that supported it.   I'd hope that the 5e Warlord is given a more flexible design that could let you take that sort of build to it's logical conclusion.    Even then, you'd have to expect most of the support to be the more traditional heroic warrior leading from the front, followed by tactician, followed by the really amusing stuff.  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /></blockquote>

Verification