D&D 5E To much 5th edition content?

HammerMan

Legend
My point would be wether or not the warlord/bard/fighter is using magic or not is just fluff. This was must obvious in 4e because you have basically then”power,” just one is called a “spell” and another is called an “exploit,” IRC.

so just say your bard/battle master hybrid is not using his/her magic but knowledge, charm, and wit instead.
yes but the fluff of magic is baked in. I have tried running a non magic bard and it was hard.
 

log in or register to remove this ad


I feel it's pretty baked in when your warlord yelling at people gets counterspelled. Or they randomly lose the ability to yell at people in an anti magic field. Or they have to yell at people through a spellcasting focus.
 

HammerMan

Legend
I don’t feel like any of the fluff is baked in. We have no issue ignoring any of it in our games. That being said, we are not really pushing the envelope on that front
I am very happy that you are happy with the current set up. I have found playing a 5th level battle master fighter 3rd valor bard did not match playing a 4th level inspireing warlord in 4e.
 

Micah Sweet

Level Up & OSR Enthusiast
100% this

the ability of 4e to play a party with no magic, but no real holes in the tactics of D&D was amazing. Having a fighter a rogue a ranger a warlord was very similar to a other edition fighter cleric mage thief

the fluff of devotion for clerics and druids rubs some the wrong way... and having OTHER healer/leader/buffer types helped.
Of course, the fluff of non-magical healing rubs OTHERS the wrong way. But it should still have been an option. Fortunately, we have the Level Up Marshal now.
 

I feel it's pretty baked in when your warlord yelling at people gets counterspelled. Or they randomly lose the ability to yell at people in an anti magic field. Or they have to yell at people through a spellcasting focus.
Then don’t let this magic things affect your warlord / problem solved. I get the issue for you, it just isn’t an issue I need to worry about.
 



Maybe some people feel the "bloat," yet only look at a few areas. For example, playable races or subclasses. I get it, in 1st or 2e they might have been there; however, that was also when we were all younger and our income to spend on the game wasn't as high. For example, we never got Dragon or Dungeon, and we were avid players. We only bought a few splat books - and we were AVID players.
Also, the bloat feel could be compounded by the internet. I mean, being able to look anything up, and many times finding it, even though it may not be "official," could lead to that bloated feeling.
 

yes bards have great unquie spells (maybe not enough but that's a granular argument) what they don't have is weapon or martial enhancing unique spells.
On thinking about it part of the reason 5e isn't producing gish is that it's going for closer integration for magic or supernatural abilities with fighters. Look, for example, at the Rune Knight, the Psi Warrior, and the Echo Knight. To me we've already got multiple gish and although none are perfect I'd rather see more of what 5e is doing.
I still think it could be solved with a subclass, feat, multi class approach rather than a full on class. It that is my opinion with about 80% of the classes!
I'm of the opinion that an adequate Warlord can be done with a battlemaster chassis, using Direct the Strike for a fighting style - and with a "Spend a superiority dice and your target may spend a hit dice. If they do they recover combined hp, if not they recover a single hp" as a battlemaster maneuver. (And a "Duck" maneuver).
 

Voidrunner's Codex

Remove ads

Top