Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 6658412" data-attributes="member: 996">Definitely not true.  No other leader touched the most extreme Cleric healing-focused builds, like the Pacifist Healer, but Inspiring Warlords could do a crazy amount of healing, well beyond the 'adequate' baseline of all leader builds.  That's not working fine.  If you don't predict who will be hit and for how much, they're a wasted resource, and when someone does go down, the can't bring him back up.  That is an irredeemable failing. Both temp hps and hp restoration would be reasonable features - and, it had both, so there's no reason not to.  Separating day-lengthening and standing fallen allies in combat into temp hps and hp-restoration, respectively, would make a lot of sense. It's a fraction of their features, since every other spell has an equal claim on being a 'feature.' None, and there's no call to do so.  Druids don't give up shapeshifting or casting Call Lighting to cast Cure Wounds, now do they?  But the most iconic and critical.  Healing Word wasn't taken away from the Cleric.By definition, as an out-after-the-standard-game optional class, the Warlord, as a whole, will be opt-in.  There is no need to 'compromise' with those who object to the Warlord, as they already got exactly what they wanted:  no Warlord, at all, in the PH.   No 4e class had the sheer versatility enjoyed by the 5e neo-Vancian casters.  It's not that those things don't matter, it's that they're handled with less granularity.  WPT, for instance, let the Warlord shift an ally out of reach of an enemy, enabling him to open up distance with a regular move on his turn.  In 5e, this translates to letting an ally disengage, saving him an action.  That certainly matters, even if shifting is no longer, strictly speaking, part of the game.</blockquote>

Verification