Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pming" data-source="post: 6705175" data-attributes="member: 45197">Hiya!As Jester here says...In another Warlord thread (the "big one" I think), I contended that a Warlord class shouldn't be a great toe-to-toe fighter. That his abilities should be FIRMLY in the hands of "support". If a Warlord finds himself in melee with a Fighter or Barbarian...the Warlord should, at most, be able to defend long enough to have help arrive...but he should absolutely not be able to content 1-on-1 with a Fighter of equal level. The fighter FIGHTS...the Warlord does not.All of the Maneuvers basically make the Warlord the "Fighter +1". Someone wanting to play a Warlord should be weighing all the factors... and, IMHO, the most prominant one should be "do I want to play an active roll, or support role?". If the latter, then Warlord should be on the list. IF the former, it should not.A Warlords 'abilities' should be of the variety where another PC requests/asks the Warlord for support...not one where the Warlord dictates who gets what. The warlord should have abilities that, after the warlord makes some particular roll, grant some effect or bonus to another PC (if the PC wants it). For example, if the Warlord makes a DC 15 "Strategy Test", he can organize the Fighter and Thief into positions where the Fighter can give the Thief Advantage on his next attack. Or maybe the Warlord can make a DC 10 "Strategy Test" to allow the party to move into position before initiative is rolled. Things like that. Things that give the party or other PC's some tangible bonus if the Warlord makes some particular roll. But giving the Warlord all these melee, toe-to-toe Fighter abilities? Completely misses the point of what a Warlord should be, IMHO.EDIT: I guess what that long-winded spew was trying to get at is... Warlord abilities shouldn't be dependant on the Warlord being in combat and attacking. Getting into melee should be a last resort of a Warlord. He should be standing right next to the Wizard, observing the battlefield and making tactical decisions and using his knowledge and vantage point to help... not swinging a two handed sword at an ogre who's trying to bite the Warlords head off. Hard to make tactical decisions for the thief who is 30' behind the ogre, hiding in shadows when you have more 'pressing' matters to attend to (like not getting your own head bit off). In fact, I'd say that the Warlords 'abilities' should be reduced or denied if he ends up getting into combat. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />^_^Paul L. Ming</blockquote>

Verification