Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="CapnZapp" data-source="post: 7364255" data-attributes="member: 12731">A lot of assumptions. A lot."All the elements of a warlord exist already in 5E"So frakking what? Unless they all can be combined, that's utterly irrelevant."A Rogue sneak attacking more than once is broken"False. A Rogue needs to successfully sneak attack twice if she has any hope of being the Queen of DPR. What's wrong with character X getting this crown, when everybody is okay with character Y, Z having it? The Rogue is a lot squishier than the fighters, why the doom and gloom about finally granting the dpr class its dpr crown?!?Besides, as soon as the party gets dissatisfied with this how about the warlord not granting Rogue X his extra actions anymore...? After all, playing the "warlord" means being the lord of war, meaning warlord = I'm the one getting to decide who gets the spotlight.No. Just no. Who wants to play a Warlord that can only feebly mimic a real hero?!?!?!?!?If I can't replicate a Sharpshooter attack, how about forgetting the warlord and building a real archer?The same with points 2-4. The point about being a Warlord is about being the excellent fifth wheel. Each round getting decide "we need a second ranger/warlock/fighter".I have a much better suggestion. Create the class with no restrictions and then say "any player named Zardnaar gets to decide whether the class may be used in his game". <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />A support class like a cleric generally deals anemic levels of damage with weapons.Sure. But I'm not playing a Warlord to do anemic levels of damage. I'm playing a Warlord to have my friend deal awesome levels of damage. Otherwise I would have played somebody capable of dealing awesome damage.The fact that I can skip dealing awesome levels of damage to instead take a modest support action, such as a heal (less than Life Cleric levels) is simply not broken in 5E. 1) In-combat healing is way overrated (maybe unless you're a Life Cleric)2) Out-of-ocmbat healing is already cheap as f*uck (so why not allow the Warlord to do it too)And that is why I believe a potential 5E warlord needs to give up at will attack granting.Just cut off my legs while you're at it too, Zard. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f61b.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":p" title="Stick out tongue    :p"  data-smilie="7"data-shortname=":p" />You don't get it. At-will action granting is the core fun part of the class. Maybe I should set you a task instead.If you were to finish off a class design that already has unrestricted at-will action granting, Zardnaar, how would that look like?Feel free to give it d4 hit dice or no armor or 20 ft Speed or whatever you feel is needed. Let's discuss anything but "don't give the Warlord the ONE thing it absolutely should have"!</blockquote>

Verification