Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="MechaPilot" data-source="post: 7365642" data-attributes="member: 82779">That's not quite accurate.&nbsp; My proposal is that the warlord can grant an ally the ability to do one of a few select things as a reaction (when they, presumably, otherwise would not be able to do so).&nbsp; Exactly what those options are would determine how much of the warlord's action potential is consumed.For example, I could easily see a warlord who hits an enemy while using her attack action being allowed to spend a bonus action to let another ally engaged in melee combat with that same foe use a reaction to disengage.&nbsp; This would let the warlord come in and help an injured ally retreat from harm without provoking an OA.For attack granting, I can see more than one model, and neither of them are mutually exclusive features.&nbsp; A warlord could have one feature that grants a single attack, while also having another feature that grants an attack action.&nbsp; Presumably, the warlord would not be able to use both of those features in the same turn.The warlord makes buffing more efficient (efficient, not effective), effectively allowing the buff to affect one additional target, but not really because it doesn't let the buffed character act in two different places on the battlefield at once, or create a second bag of HPs for enemies to whittle down.&nbsp; Of course, this assumes the buff isn't already affecting multiple targets.&nbsp; If a cleric has blessed the whole party, warlord included, there is no increased efficiency of buffs.What level it should be offered is a valid question.&nbsp; However, as I mentioned, I'm proposing more than one granting feature.&nbsp; Granting a whole attack action in exchange for your action and your ally's reaction could easily be delayed to 3rd level, meanwhile lesser granting abilities like the disengage I mentioned above could be had at first level.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="MechaPilot, post: 7365642, member: 82779"] That's not quite accurate. My proposal is that the warlord can grant an ally the ability to do one of a few select things as a reaction (when they, presumably, otherwise would not be able to do so). Exactly what those options are would determine how much of the warlord's action potential is consumed. For example, I could easily see a warlord who hits an enemy while using her attack action being allowed to spend a bonus action to let another ally engaged in melee combat with that same foe use a reaction to disengage. This would let the warlord come in and help an injured ally retreat from harm without provoking an OA. For attack granting, I can see more than one model, and neither of them are mutually exclusive features. A warlord could have one feature that grants a single attack, while also having another feature that grants an attack action. Presumably, the warlord would not be able to use both of those features in the same turn. The warlord makes buffing more efficient (efficient, not effective), effectively allowing the buff to affect one additional target, but not really because it doesn't let the buffed character act in two different places on the battlefield at once, or create a second bag of HPs for enemies to whittle down. Of course, this assumes the buff isn't already affecting multiple targets. If a cleric has blessed the whole party, warlord included, there is no increased efficiency of buffs. What level it should be offered is a valid question. However, as I mentioned, I'm proposing more than one granting feature. Granting a whole attack action in exchange for your action and your ally's reaction could easily be delayed to 3rd level, meanwhile lesser granting abilities like the disengage I mentioned above could be had at first level. [/QUOTE]

Verification