Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Remathilis" data-source="post: 6824991" data-attributes="member: 7635">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 &quot;base class&quot; 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 = WLFor 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 &quot;Tactics: Anyone within 40 feet that can hear the warlord adds a damage bonus equal to the warlord's Int Mod&quot; can start to string out the bounds of the math. 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 &quot;4e-ish&quot; 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 &quot;H8rs gonna H8&quot; 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.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Remathilis, post: 6824991, member: 7635"] 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 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. 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. [/QUOTE]

Verification