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
Spellcasters and Balance in 5e: A Poll
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="bert1001 fka bert1000" data-source="post: 8316761" data-attributes="member: 7029588"><p>You are only a great martial leader because nothing else exists! People are saying that Battlemaster leader shouldn’t be the weakness of a martial leader. The peakness of a martial leader should and can be much more, and you need to get to those levels to model certain fictional concepts and stay reasonably balanced as a game construct. So, yes, once you raise the bar on leadership you no longer can be both elite warrior and elite leader for balance sake.</p><p></p><p>I kinda get how this diminishes your concept, but since the current implementation of "elite martial leader" wasn't that great, I don't see it as a big loss to move that to average or good fictional leadership positioning. People don't get to have concepts where they are both elite warriors and elite spellcasters either. It's a design choice that opens up the Elite leadership/good fighting concept I guess at the expense of Elite leadership / Elite Warrior concept. But since the current Elite Leader concept implementation is pretty lame, we are just losing some relative status. You still have the Elite Fighter/good leader Battlemaster, which apparently a bunch of people are happy with anyway.</p><p></p><p>So is this your actual objection, and you actually do understand the concept of leader first/Warlord prime or not? If so, this objection is something I kinda understand. If you still don't understand the concept of leader first, we probably just don't have enough common ground to have any real discussion.</p><p></p><p>Honestly, I'm kinda surprised you and ECMO3 are still fighting the concept of leader first/Warlord Prime given you both seemed to have engaged with Undrave's Warlord homebrew in good faith. It may not be your thing and you may never use it but you seemed to get what he was trying to do? I haven't looked it over in detail, but Undrave's homebrew seems to be trying to create a leader first/Warlord Prime class that can't be recreated well using current other classes/subclasses. With its Shouts, etc. it seems like a character where you are a better leader than the Battlemaster in exchange for some fighting prowess.</p><p></p><p>It's hard to see where you are actually coming from because half the time you seem to just not acknowledge the leader first concept (which basically means there is no conversation) and then sometimes you do, but you are worried about relative positioning of the Battlemaster leader or balance between casters and martials (which are more interesting things we can talk about once the Elite leader / good warrior concept is acknowledged).</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="bert1001 fka bert1000, post: 8316761, member: 7029588"] You are only a great martial leader because nothing else exists! People are saying that Battlemaster leader shouldn’t be the weakness of a martial leader. The peakness of a martial leader should and can be much more, and you need to get to those levels to model certain fictional concepts and stay reasonably balanced as a game construct. So, yes, once you raise the bar on leadership you no longer can be both elite warrior and elite leader for balance sake. I kinda get how this diminishes your concept, but since the current implementation of "elite martial leader" wasn't that great, I don't see it as a big loss to move that to average or good fictional leadership positioning. People don't get to have concepts where they are both elite warriors and elite spellcasters either. It's a design choice that opens up the Elite leadership/good fighting concept I guess at the expense of Elite leadership / Elite Warrior concept. But since the current Elite Leader concept implementation is pretty lame, we are just losing some relative status. You still have the Elite Fighter/good leader Battlemaster, which apparently a bunch of people are happy with anyway. So is this your actual objection, and you actually do understand the concept of leader first/Warlord prime or not? If so, this objection is something I kinda understand. If you still don't understand the concept of leader first, we probably just don't have enough common ground to have any real discussion. Honestly, I'm kinda surprised you and ECMO3 are still fighting the concept of leader first/Warlord Prime given you both seemed to have engaged with Undrave's Warlord homebrew in good faith. It may not be your thing and you may never use it but you seemed to get what he was trying to do? I haven't looked it over in detail, but Undrave's homebrew seems to be trying to create a leader first/Warlord Prime class that can't be recreated well using current other classes/subclasses. With its Shouts, etc. it seems like a character where you are a better leader than the Battlemaster in exchange for some fighting prowess. It's hard to see where you are actually coming from because half the time you seem to just not acknowledge the leader first concept (which basically means there is no conversation) and then sometimes you do, but you are worried about relative positioning of the Battlemaster leader or balance between casters and martials (which are more interesting things we can talk about once the Elite leader / good warrior concept is acknowledged). [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Spellcasters and Balance in 5e: A Poll
Top