D&D 5E Warlord Name Poll

[mellored]

That you "don't see" the differences speaks not to their existence.

I agree. I know i'm very short sighted with social issues. I have actual brain damage from a virus (toxoplasmosis) while i was in the womb.

That's why i'm asking.

 

[ChrisCarlson]

I'm sorry to hear that. I'm not familiar with the symptoms of such a diagnosis, but perhaps it would be in your best interests to go back and re-read the various previous posts and numerous threads on the matter? Rather than rehashing it here for the umpteenth time...

 

[mellored]

I'm sorry to hear that. I'm not familiar with the symptoms of such a diagnosis, but perhaps it would be in your best interests to go back and re-read the various previous posts and numerous threads on the matter? Rather than rehashing it here for the umpteenth time...

There is a lot more confusion and misunderstanding in those threads.

So the core issue you have with the warlord the fluff?

That's easy enough to change. Especially since i never used or seen used the "you look up to me". Which fits the paladin a lot more IMO. The shining beacon that inspires people just by standing around.


I have seen inspirational "You can do it!!" fluff, which is the same as the bard.
Though i still don't see how tactical fluff "he's holding his shield low on the right side you have a better chance to hit him there" is out of line.

Someone else suggested aiming it at the enemy rather then the ally. 'Hey stupid goblin, i'm a distraction! Ignore the fighter behind you for a moment".
Would that be better?

 

[ChrisCarlson]

So the core issue you have with the warlord the fluff?

Dismissive propaganda. If it were just "fluff" it wouldn't require the other PCs to think/feel a certain way in order to justify the benefit.

That's easy enough to change.

Is it? Efforts to do so have caused a rift in the warlordist brigade. Each time it is tried.

Especially since i never used or seen used the "you look up to me".

Then you're not trying. It's there.

Which fits the paladin a lot more IMO. The shining beacon that inspires people just by standing around.

Then play a paladin. Problem solved.

I have seen inspirational "You can do it!!" fluff, which is the same as the bard.

You are reading a different description of the bard than I, if that's the case.

Though i still don't see how tactical fluff "he's holding his shield low on the right side you have a better chance to hit him there" is out of line.

Your 1st-level warlord should be capable of telling the veteran soldier 20th-level fighter how to swing his weapon better? And you want that to be effective? All day, every day? And it should be okay with the fighter that your little wet-behind-the-ears whelp is incessantly schooling him on the art of the sword swing? Is it any wonder people can't take the argument for such cries to fold this into 5e seriously?

Someone else suggested aiming it at the enemy rather then the ally. 'Hey stupid goblin, i'm a distraction! Ignore the fighter behind you for a moment".
Would that be better?

Depending on the implementation, most likely. But good luck trying to selling that to the rest of the hardline cadre here...

 

[Tony Vargas]

Tell me how it's different for a warlord then a wizard to say "you have advantage to hit this guy".
Or for a warlord / bard / cleric (Edit: or warlock) to say "you can use your reaction to attack that guy".
Perhaps i'm missing something.

The main difference, is, again, magic.

 

[mellored]

Dismissive propaganda. If it were just "fluff" it wouldn't require the other PCs to think/feel a certain way in order to justify the benefit.

Plenty of fluff forces the PCs to think/feel a certain way.
Charm and fear are their own state.

Then you're not trying. It's there.

i never used any of the 4e fluff. I always made my own.

Then play a paladin. Problem solved.

Which problem is solved?

You are reading a different description of the bard than I, if that's the case.

Bardic Inspiration
You can inspire others through stirring words or music.

You change how they feel, they get a bonus. You don't get a choice in the matter, you are inspired.

And there's other examples as well, such as the fighter's rally, inspiring leader feat, etc...

Your 1st-level warlord should be capable of telling the veteran soldier 20th-level fighter how to swing his weapon better? And you want that to be effective? All day, every day? And it should be okay with the fighter that your little wet-behind-the-ears whelp is incessantly schooling him on the art of the sword swing? Is it any wonder people can't take the argument for such cries to fold this into 5e seriously?

A first level wizard can help a level 20 fighter hit things, at-will.
Heck, an owl can do it.

I don't see what's wrong with a warlord being better at it then a wizard.

Depending on the implementation, most likely. But good luck trying to selling that to the rest of the hardline cadre here...

That's good to hear.

So how do you feel about something like...

1: Battle Study: You can spend a bonus action to study a creature who is engaged in combat and gain insight into their weaknesses and then share it with your allies. You and each of your allies who can see and hear you gain +1 to hit attack rolls against the creature. This can stack up to your Int modifier. This bonus last until you take a long rest.

 

[ChrisCarlson]

Plenty of fluff forces the PCs to think/feel a certain way.
Charm and fear are their own state.

No. Those effects tell a player that their character is temporarily being forced to think/feel a certain way.

Or are you finally admitting that what you really want is for warlord features to act as charm/fear effects used on your fellow players' characters?

 

[ChrisCarlson]

A first level wizard can help a level 20 fighter hit things, at-will.

No. The wizard is casting a spell which infuses the fighter with magic that lets him exceed his own already considerable skill. Nowhere in the spell's description does it say that the wizard is telling the fighter how to use his fighting skills better. Please quit trying to muddy the discussion by conflating such things.

Heck, an owl can do it.

Then play an owl.

I don't see what's wrong with a warlord being better at it then a wizard.

At what? Casting spells that empower his allies beyond their limits? Sounds good to me. But try selling that to your warlord fanbase.

That's good to hear.

So how do you feel about something like...

1: Battle Study: You can spend a bonus action to study a creature who is engaged in combat and gain insight into their weaknesses and then share it with your allies. You and each of your allies who can see and hear you gain +1 to hit attack rolls against the creature. This can stack up to your Int modifier. This bonus last until you take a long rest.

Handing out attack bonuses to an unlimited number of friends, all day long as a bonus action, is far too potent for a 1st-level class feature. Given the paradigm of bounded accuracy, especially.

What about this:

1: Battle Study: You can spend a bonus action to study a creature who is engaged in combat and gain insight into their weaknesses and then share it with your allies. Up to four of your allies within 60 feet, who can see and hear you, may add 1 to an attack rolls against the creature once during the combat. They may use this bonus after rolling but before the DM says whether the roll succeeds or fails. You can use this feature a number of times equal to your Intelligence modifier (a minimum of once). You regain any expended uses when you finish a long rest. At 5th level you regain them after a short or long rest. The bonus granted increases when you reach certain levels in this class. It becomes +2 at 5th level, +3 at 10th level, and +4 at 15th level.

 

[mellored]

No. Those effects tell a player that their character is temporarily being forced to think/feel a certain way.

Was there fluff that said someone had to permanently look up to the warlord?

All effects where temporary.

Or are you finally admitting that what you really want is for warlord features to act as charm/fear effects used on your fellow players' characters?

I'm not very interested in the emotional aspect of any of the classes. Much more interested in a tactical one.

Though i could see a few charm/fear effects for them. Possibly as a inspirational / intimidation sub-class. Similar to the berserker's fear effect.

And all charm and fear effects can be used on anyone, including other PC's. But i do think i'm finally getting a better understanding of what your against.

 

[ChrisCarlson]

Was there fluff that said someone had to permanently look up to the warlord?

All effects where temporary.

So my barbarian only has to admire your warlord when you are around? Brilliant.

I'm not very interested in the emotional aspect of any of the classes. Much more interested in a tactical one.

To be blunt, I'm glad you are not the one creating 5e then. There's more to D&D than "tactics" (whatever that even means).

Though i could see a few charm/fear effects for them. Possibly as a inspirational / intimidation sub-class. Similar to the berserker's fear effect.

And all charm and fear effects can be used on anyone, including other PC's. But i do think i'm finally getting a better understanding of what your against.

And how do you think the barbarian PC might react after the fellow wizard PC keeps casting charm person on him to get him to do what he wants? Oh, wait, emotions don't matter to you. Just tactics. Nevermind.