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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Remathilis" data-source="post: 6730201" data-attributes="member: 7635">Here is my point...Ok, we decide we are going to make a warlord that can act as support in a nonmagical game (aka, no spellcasting classes). We decide we are going to allow him some form of healing ability because clerics can restore hp so warlord's should. But a cleric can also heal conditions (poisoned, blinded, deafened, diseased) as well; there is no way to remove those conditions in the game without magic, so now the warlord needs some mechanic that can remove or negate those conditions (or the first time you fight some poisonous snakes or diseased dire rats, the game is going to fall apart). Also, a cleric can grant all manner of bonuses, such as Bless, Warding Bond, or Guiding Bolt (all of which grant bonuses to attack or defense) so a warlord needs to be able to grant bonuses like that too somehow if he's to be the nonmagical support class. He also should probably be able to remove Fear or Charm effects as well, since he's our only support...Rather than keep saying "a warlord should do X nonmagically because he's the support class in a nonmagic game", I'd rather the focus be on "Well, clerics, bards and druids bring good support in the form of spells, what should a warlord bring that's unique?" Why do I want to be a warlord rather than a cleric (assuming the two are both options) other than "I can do everything the other can do, nonmagically?"Which is actually part of my point: you can't assume that a fighter, a warlord, a rogue, and a barbarian could play through Rise of Tiamat just because you now have a "nonmagical" support class. It requires far more than a warlord to make nonmagical campaigns work. Additionally, I think its a very low point on the design scale since most D&D DOES use magic and doesn't deviate much from that norm.  I'm not convinced that just adding a warlord class would give 5e the same flick, but I'm repeating myself...Yet you have to if you want to count Barbarian among the nonmagical list; or even your own warlord fluff below now. The line I quoted was from the <a href="http://www.dungeonbastard.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/barbarian_p1.jpg" target="_blank">DEFAULT</a> Barbarian fluff. (Last paragraph, before "Primal Instinct") and it clearly shows two examples of sources for Rage, a magical one and a nonmagical one. I'm just quoting the PHB. If you want to house rule all Rage comes from "pain", then go ahead. Man, I REALLY thought we were behind all the "Warlords are 110% nonmagical, suggesting otherwise is edition warring, but if it helps you sleep at night, you can pretend its magical" line of crap. I thought we came to a "warlords do their thing and we don't know exactly why; might be magical, or something else" compromise. I guess that was wishful thinking on my part.</blockquote>

Verification