Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Warlording the fighter
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 6676381" data-attributes="member: 996"><p>Fair enough. That's a big part of the class concept as it was introduced.</p><p></p><p> 5e is still exception-based design, so some exceptions are going to be inevitable, though maybe that's not exactly what you meant by 'exceptions.'</p><p></p><p> That really doesn't leave much, especially when you're talking 'support' style abilities. Concentrating on Bless, for instance, can marginalize a Cleric's participation in combat. Having to spend an action every round for a similar effect, or to need to blow through all of a limited resource (like CS dice) to do so for only a few rounds, would be even more constraining. </p><p></p><p> Another possibility is making some things, especially 'tactical exploits' say, more situational than usual for D&D abilities (even compared to spells, which get highly situational), and correspondingly more numerous/available/powerful.</p><p></p><p> That's an unnecessary constraint. As long as the class presents at least one reasonable narrative interpretation for any given thing that it does, it's fine. Myriad alternatives are always possible, but can be safely left up to the reader. Though, really, there's no need to provide such hand-holding for every single ability. </p><p></p><p> The Warlord only existed in 4e, so clearly needs to be designed to do justice to that version. And the non-4e-fans includes committed h4ters who could never find any appeal in anything so emblamatic of 4e, those latter non-4e fans deserve absolutely no consideration. Other no-4e fans, for instance, may or may not find something appealing in the Warlord, but there's really no way to design for that, specifically. Make a good class, and any reasonable D&D fan of any edition will appreciate it. "Compromise" with h4ters who only want to sabotage the class, though, and you will get a bad class that no one will be able to appreciate.</p><p></p><p> Noble goal! If only all classes were so designed. But, again, you may be setting yourself a bar too high. 5e uses spotlight balance, so it's considered OK for a class to shine more in one 'pillar' than another. The Warlord is clearly a strong candidate to shine in both Combat and Interaction, though. </p><p></p><p> At the risk of seeming as pessimistic and cynical as I actually am, Mike Mearls has publicly expressed disdain for the very concept of the class.</p><p></p><p><s> A shotgun approach can work...</s></p><p><s></s></p><ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul"><s> Obviously the best choice. ;P<br /> Fascinating idea, but how would you get something that meshes well with both the Fighter's multi-attacking and casters' spell progressions?<br /> <br /> At best, you might come up with a warlord-lite that would be to the Warlord as the EK is to the Wizard. At best, CS dice & maneuvers strike me as too limited, and too intermeshed with the fighter's multi-attacking design, to be workable as a way of modeling the same genre character types as the Warlord.<br /> <br /> That'd be unique.<br /> A number of classes have feats like that for other classes to take.<br /> <br /> I think you're taking on a tremendous challenge, and are too open to taking input from those whose agenda is to watch you crash and burn, but I with you the best of luck.</s></li> </ul></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Tony Vargas, post: 6676381, member: 996"] Fair enough. That's a big part of the class concept as it was introduced. 5e is still exception-based design, so some exceptions are going to be inevitable, though maybe that's not exactly what you meant by 'exceptions.' That really doesn't leave much, especially when you're talking 'support' style abilities. Concentrating on Bless, for instance, can marginalize a Cleric's participation in combat. Having to spend an action every round for a similar effect, or to need to blow through all of a limited resource (like CS dice) to do so for only a few rounds, would be even more constraining. Another possibility is making some things, especially 'tactical exploits' say, more situational than usual for D&D abilities (even compared to spells, which get highly situational), and correspondingly more numerous/available/powerful. That's an unnecessary constraint. As long as the class presents at least one reasonable narrative interpretation for any given thing that it does, it's fine. Myriad alternatives are always possible, but can be safely left up to the reader. Though, really, there's no need to provide such hand-holding for every single ability. The Warlord only existed in 4e, so clearly needs to be designed to do justice to that version. And the non-4e-fans includes committed h4ters who could never find any appeal in anything so emblamatic of 4e, those latter non-4e fans deserve absolutely no consideration. Other no-4e fans, for instance, may or may not find something appealing in the Warlord, but there's really no way to design for that, specifically. Make a good class, and any reasonable D&D fan of any edition will appreciate it. "Compromise" with h4ters who only want to sabotage the class, though, and you will get a bad class that no one will be able to appreciate. Noble goal! If only all classes were so designed. But, again, you may be setting yourself a bar too high. 5e uses spotlight balance, so it's considered OK for a class to shine more in one 'pillar' than another. The Warlord is clearly a strong candidate to shine in both Combat and Interaction, though. At the risk of seeming as pessimistic and cynical as I actually am, Mike Mearls has publicly expressed disdain for the very concept of the class. [s] A shotgun approach can work... [LIST] Obviously the best choice. ;P Fascinating idea, but how would you get something that meshes well with both the Fighter's multi-attacking and casters' spell progressions? At best, you might come up with a warlord-lite that would be to the Warlord as the EK is to the Wizard. At best, CS dice & maneuvers strike me as too limited, and too intermeshed with the fighter's multi-attacking design, to be workable as a way of modeling the same genre character types as the Warlord. That'd be unique. A number of classes have feats like that for other classes to take. I think you're taking on a tremendous challenge, and are too open to taking input from those whose agenda is to watch you crash and burn, but I with you the best of luck.[/list][/s] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Warlording the fighter
Top