Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Open Interpretation Inspirational Healing Compromise.
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Remathilis" data-source="post: 6728978" data-attributes="member: 7635"><p>So the answer then has to be "martial magic". You need nonmagical versions of Bless, Cure Wounds, Lesser Restoration, Haste, Healing Word, etc to be a viable support character. I mean, Bardic Inspiration isn't enough, neither is Superiority dice. You'll have to create a whole lot of nonmagical-magic to make a warlord compete with a Cleric or Bard. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Good thing nobody is really suggesting that. Some of us are questioning, however, the specifics of how to do that. Nobody wants another Marshal or Healer class; they secretly aren't hoping for broken or useless PoS class clogging up the drain. They do, however, question how such a class fits in the design paradigm of 5e, and the answer routinely given is "expand it to encompass 4e". </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Marshal is a D&D class through and through; first printing in the Miniature's Handbook (along side the Healer, Warmage, and Favored Soul) and given additional options in 3.5's Player's Handbook II. I'll agree it wasn't a GOOD class, but its as D&D as any other 3.5 class. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>They could have, but they chose not to. That's telling. They instead chose a different design paradigm. Much like how a Vancian caster would not fit 4e's design, marking and martial striker rangers didn't fit 5e's. (The example of Magic Resistance not fitting 5e's paradigm, or having monsters immune to +2 or greater weapons doesn't.) </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Yup, but 4e had no problems redefining those things to fit its own design aesthetics. It took tieflings and forced them into one standard look, origin, and powerset. It redefined paladins from servants of LG to servant's of gods. It had no problem forcing rogues to just use crossbows, or fighter's from having no ranged attack powers, or removing magic from the ranger. In short, it took a concept, but redefined it to fit the new edition.</p><p></p><p>You know what is a good concept, but needs to be redefined to fit a new edition? The Warlord. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Let me correct my hypothetical somewhat:</p><p></p><p>I got a psionics system that is different than magic, uses power points, but has an annoying paragraph of fluff that ties it to the Far Realm. </p><p>You get a Warlord that can heal fallen allies from 0, has support and buffing mechanics, and is completely balanced and fun, but has an annoying paragraph of fluff that ties it to "the magical power of words". </p><p></p><p>Sounds fair?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Remathilis, post: 6728978, member: 7635"] So the answer then has to be "martial magic". You need nonmagical versions of Bless, Cure Wounds, Lesser Restoration, Haste, Healing Word, etc to be a viable support character. I mean, Bardic Inspiration isn't enough, neither is Superiority dice. You'll have to create a whole lot of nonmagical-magic to make a warlord compete with a Cleric or Bard. Good thing nobody is really suggesting that. Some of us are questioning, however, the specifics of how to do that. Nobody wants another Marshal or Healer class; they secretly aren't hoping for broken or useless PoS class clogging up the drain. They do, however, question how such a class fits in the design paradigm of 5e, and the answer routinely given is "expand it to encompass 4e". Marshal is a D&D class through and through; first printing in the Miniature's Handbook (along side the Healer, Warmage, and Favored Soul) and given additional options in 3.5's Player's Handbook II. I'll agree it wasn't a GOOD class, but its as D&D as any other 3.5 class. They could have, but they chose not to. That's telling. They instead chose a different design paradigm. Much like how a Vancian caster would not fit 4e's design, marking and martial striker rangers didn't fit 5e's. (The example of Magic Resistance not fitting 5e's paradigm, or having monsters immune to +2 or greater weapons doesn't.) Yup, but 4e had no problems redefining those things to fit its own design aesthetics. It took tieflings and forced them into one standard look, origin, and powerset. It redefined paladins from servants of LG to servant's of gods. It had no problem forcing rogues to just use crossbows, or fighter's from having no ranged attack powers, or removing magic from the ranger. In short, it took a concept, but redefined it to fit the new edition. You know what is a good concept, but needs to be redefined to fit a new edition? The Warlord. Let me correct my hypothetical somewhat: I got a psionics system that is different than magic, uses power points, but has an annoying paragraph of fluff that ties it to the Far Realm. You get a Warlord that can heal fallen allies from 0, has support and buffing mechanics, and is completely balanced and fun, but has an annoying paragraph of fluff that ties it to "the magical power of words". Sounds fair? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Open Interpretation Inspirational Healing Compromise.
Top