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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Neonchameleon" data-source="post: 9140933" data-attributes="member: 87792">But we don't have it. We have a half-assed knock off of the 4e concept.If we went back to first principles without referring to the 4e vision the Warlord would clearly be either a non-magical bard or a pet class. The only reason the half-assed 5e alternatives are offered as a warlord is as watered down 4e that removes everything that made the warlord fun and evocative.They really aren't that different.The 4e ranger's striker damage bonus was quite literally Hunter's Mark. No. Because it turned the Essentials Defender's Aura into a feat - Sentinel. Then gave fighters an extra feat And you know what inspiring doesn't create? Force fields! Things that make you shrug off sword blows without actually taking damage! What inspiring does do is enable people to dig deep when the chips are down.Which is why I am saying how it could work in 5e. But force fields have always been a miserable approximation of inspiration's ability to endure.And you know what else was lost when 5e decided to go with video gamey force fields over dramatically interesting and more psychologically accurate ability to dig deep? The ability to play a low magic game. (Which also takes rituals being open to all). If the warlord can be the panic button and anyone can ritual (or anyone with the feat and they aren't stucck with basic ones) rather than it being class locked then you can have a party of all martial characters. It's much grittier and simpler but doesn't work in 5e without extensive house rules. 5e is magic, magic everywhere largely because grognards and h4ters campaigned against the warlord so hard.</blockquote>

Verification