Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Crimson Longinus" data-source="post: 8087308" data-attributes="member: 7025508">D&D should attempt to emulate the real existing concept instead of merely imitating it's past failed attempts at doing so. Lazy warlord that never fights and heals allies by shouting is not something that needs to exist. The very real concept of a warlord however should.In case of the paladin it is not a big deal, I am particularly vigorously advocating getting rid of them, at least not in an environment where ranger and barbarian exist as separate classes. However the claim was that it couldn't be done within 5e framework but I am convinced that it very easily could be. That being said, I feel that the concept of paladin has been adversely affected by being so divorced from the fighter. Instead of a devout knight with a little bit of divine favour it has now become rather bizarre computer-gamey thing that no longer emulates the original real world and mythological tropes, but exceedingly flanderised pop-culture and computer game derivations of them. This is the same thing I don't want for the warlord.With some other classes there however is even bigger problems. I have several times mentioned sorcerer and warlock. Warlock has interesting mechanics, but lore that fails to properly set it apart from the clerics. Sorcerer has unique lore, but mechanics that are utterly bland. And of course thematically it makes much more sense for an innately magical creature such as sorcerers are in the lore to have always-on magic effects and rapidly recharging magic that warlocks get. Between these two there is material for one whole coherent class, which would be better than either of the existing classes alone. They were made separate for silly legacy reasons and both were worse for it.So it is not that I don't want people get what they want out of spite or anything of the sort. But sometimes what you want might prevent the thing I want from happening. Like here we have two different mental concepts of what a warlord should be.</blockquote>

Verification