D&D 5E Warlord - Is 5E SRD/DMsGuild a Solution? Is AL a Problem?

[Remathilis]

I was eyeing the swordmage class product at the DMsGuild.
http://www.dmsguild.com/product/170971/Swordmage-Class
It's a silver seller and well reviewed. Likely doing well for the author.
Then I noticed he was the one that also did the warlord fighter archetype.

So more people apparently want to pay $1 for a swordmage class that PWYW for a warlord archetype.

Side note: my friend bought that Swordmage. It's broken as Baator, he says. :-/

 

[FrogReaver]

Side note: my friend bought that Swordmage. It's broken as Baator, he says. :-/

Appears my fears of third party content being unbalanced are substantiated

 

[Jester David]

Side note: my friend bought that Swordmage. It's broken as Baator, he says. :-/

"Broken" is non-constructive feedback.
Providing a review and contributing his thoughts to the discussion might get problems with the class fixed.

Given the range of power levels in 5e, "broken" is also pretty subjective. Broken like the beastmaster or broken like a moon druid?

Appears my fears of third party content being unbalanced are substantiated

Sure. Y'know, if you base hundreds of products by dozens of creators based on the single review of a single product.

There'll be some terrible products, sure. But WotC has released some stinkers in the past. I'm not going to judge the entire D&D catalogue based on, oh, Complete Divine.

 

[FrogReaver]

Do you remember my actual concern? I don't have time to vet all these third party sources one at a time. So having wheat mixed with tares doesn't really help me no matter how good the wheat is.

"Broken" is non-constructive feedback.
Providing a review and contributing his thoughts to the discussion might get problems with the class fixed.

Given the range of power levels in 5e, "broken" is also pretty subjective. Broken like the beastmaster or broken like a moon druid?


Sure. Y'know, if you base hundreds of products by dozens of creators based on the single review of a single product.

There'll be some terrible products, sure. But WotC has released some stinkers in the past. I'm not going to judge the entire D&D catalogue based on, oh, Complete Divine.

 

[Remathilis]

"Broken" is non-constructive feedback.
Providing a review and contributing his thoughts to the discussion might get problems with the class fixed.

Given the range of power levels in 5e, "broken" is also pretty subjective. Broken like the beastmaster or broken like a moon druid

Caveat: I've not looked at the product, this is what he told me in casual conversation. Any inconsistencies could come from either of our faulty memories.

Basically, he thought what the designer did was take the eldritch knight and bladesinger and smash the two subclasses together on top a ranger chassis (1/2 caster), with little regard for how it all blended. For example, he said he got to add his Int mod to melee weapon damage (on top of Str/Dex mod), as a bladesinger can, but around 10 levels sooner than a bladesinger can (I know its a high level ability for bladesingers, and its a lower level one for swordmage). He also said several of the new spells and abilities felt like straight 4e ports, and didn't blend well with 5e design aesthetics. I might break down and grab it to look at for myself, but his general opinion (he bought it because he was going to ask if he could play it my game) was "maybe we can use it to build a better balanced version with?"

I see more than a few parallels between that description and what gets discussed about Warlords in this forum.

 

[Tony Vargas]

I see more than a few parallels between that description and what gets discussed about Warlords in this forum.

Interesting, let's take a look:

Basically, he thought what the designer did was take the eldritch knight and bladesinger and smash the two subclasses together on top a ranger chassis (1/2 caster), with little regard for how it all blended.

OK, yeah, I see the parallel. The EK is a fighter sub-class, the suggestion has often been made that the Warlord just be a fighter sub-class, and it is a terrible idea. The bladesinger is a wizard sub-class, and the valor bard is a bard sub-class, both full casters with some added melee ability, and it has been suggested the Warlord be based on the bard, as well, also a terrible idea. Mashing the two together would, likewise be a pretty whacked way to try to get there. So far, so good (bad).

For example, he said he got to add his Int mod to melee weapon damage (on top of Str/Dex mod), as a bladesinger can, but around 10 levels sooner than a bladesinger can (I know its a high level ability for bladesingers, and its a lower level one for swordmage).

Hmm... no parallel, there. DPR boosts aren't exactly on the Warlord short list.

He also said several of the new spells and abilities felt like straight 4e ports, and didn't blend well with 5e design aesthetics.

The 5e design aesthetic is to bring together both fans and material from all editions. Objecting to something because it's recognizably from 4e is almost as anti-5e as it is anti-4e, and given the unfortunate history of the edition war, all too easy to take as mere 'h4ter' prejudice. I guess the parallel holds, there, too.

 

[Jester David]

Do you remember my actual concern? I don't have time to vet all these third party sources one at a time. So having wheat mixed with tares doesn't really help me no matter how good the wheat is.

You don't have to vet them all. You just need to vet the high rated products that include content you want that have an acceptable price. It doesn't matter what a swordmage product costs or its quality if you don't want it in your game.

 

[ChrisCarlson]

<snip>...a terrible idea. <snip>...a terrible idea. <snip>

Those are just opinion. I happen to disagree with you. Does that mean our votes cancel?

DPR boosts aren't exactly on the Warlord short list.

More opinion. Other people say otherwise.

The 5e design aesthetic is to bring together both fans and material from all editions.

Mischaracterization. Or quote please.

Objecting to something because it's recognizably from 4e is almost as anti-5e as it is anti-4e, and given the unfortunate history of the edition war, all too easy to take as mere 'h4ter' prejudice.

More of your one-man edition warring. Also, you've been asked on numerous occasions, by many people (including mods), to stop using those inflammatory, derogatory terms. This is yet another request.

 

[Remathilis]

IOK, yeah, I see the parallel. The EK is a fighter sub-class, the suggestion has often been made that the Warlord just be a fighter sub-class, and it is a terrible idea. The bladesinger is a wizard sub-class, and the valor bard is a bard sub-class, both full casters with some added melee ability, and it has been suggested the Warlord be based on the bard, as well, also a terrible idea. Mashing the two together would, likewise be a pretty whacked way to try to get there. So far, so good (bad).

Moreover, taking a couple subclasses and smashing them into a whole new class seems like it can land people in trouble. Especially taking an ability that is normally high-level and giving it to the "base class" at lower level. I'm sure he justified it (1/2 caster vs. full caster) but I think the same problems that taking EK + BS = SM would apply to MM+PDK+BM = WL

IHmm... no parallel, there. DPR boosts aren't exactly on the Warlord short list.

For himself, no. For his allies? That's the name of his game. He's supossed to be buffing allies numbers as a major element. Even an innocent ability like "Tactics: Anyone within 40 feet that can hear the warlord adds a damage bonus equal to the warlord's Int Mod" can start to string out the bounds of the math.

IThe 5e design aesthetic is to bring together both fans and material from all editions. Objecting to something because it's recognizably from 4e is almost as anti-5e as it is anti-4e, and given the unfortunate history of the edition war, all too easy to take as mere 'h4ter' prejudice. I guess the parallel holds, there, too.

Ok, I'm going to defend my friend here because he was a bigger 4e fan than I was for a time. I don't know exactly what abilities or spells he was speaking of, nor why he viewed them as "4e-ish" so I cannot elaborate further on this. I DO know he loved the 4e Swordmage though, and it was his favorite 4e class, so he did have an emotional connection that was disappointed with THAT version of the class. He wasn't speaking from the "H8rs gonna H8" club.

That said, the idea that just because ability X worked one way in 4e means it needs to do the exact same in 5e is a false one. Lots of 4e-isms made it into 5e and don't do the exact same thing they did, and that's OK. It's not a betrayal to have (hypothetically) a warlord healing ability that doesn't resemble Inspiring Word, or that a warlord isn't a warlord without Wolf Pack Tactics as an ability. The class cannot be beholden to everything the 4e version did, doing it like the 4e version does it.

 

[Remathilis]

More of your one-man edition warring. Also, you've been asked on numerous occasions, by many people (including mods), to stop using those inflammatory, derogatory terms. This is yet another request.

I'm going to start reporting his posts that use "h4ter" in them. No matter the context. Kill them all and let Mods sort them out.