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
[Warlords] Should D&D be tied to D&D Worlds?
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="pemerton" data-source="post: 6144207" data-attributes="member: 42582"><p>A 4e CHA warlord, or a 4e paladin, fill very much the same archetypical space: they are capable in combat, but their greater contribution is to defend and inspire their allies. (A CHA paladin is also more overtly magical, with a variety of ranged and AoE attacks - that's some D&Dism creeping into the archetype, as is to be expected.)</p><p></p><p>I feel that they resemble their archetype - Arthur, Aragorn, Faramir, Captain America - pretty well.</p><p></p><p>That's a fair question. But much the same question applies to clerical spells - why can't <em>any</em> devoted PC call upon the power of a deity? And to sorcerers - why can't I declare that my <em>fighter</em> is descended from dragons, and hence has innate magical abilities?</p><p></p><p>The answer isn't primarily an ingame one, it's a metagame one - D&D is a class-based game and it rations player resources by reference to classes. So warlords (and perhaps paladins) get to use their CHA in ways other PCs can't; clerics get to use their CHA in ways other PCs can't; etc.</p><p></p><p>I discussed the bard and the fighter upthread. Also my reasons for thinking that it has to be done at the class level - given the way D&Dnext is distributing abilities, and given the mechanical goal that this PC can take the functional place of a cleric - and my take on the existing fighter options.</p><p></p><p>As for your first comment, about a table decision as to the meaning of hit points:</p><p>Agreed.</p><p></p><p>But in mechanical terms will largely suck unless it does - as [MENTION=87792]Neonchameleon[/MENTION] has pointed out upthread. And in story terms, unless it consists of hp restoration, it won't enable the PC in question to rouse another PC who has been knocked out of the combat. (To repeat: in RPGs which have separate player-side morale mechanics, like BW's Steel attribute, this would not be so. But D&D is not such an RPG. Hit points are the only consistently appicable player-side mechanic for representing ability to continue fighting.)</p><p></p><p>This isn't true for Aragorn, Faramir or Gandalf, all of whom rouse by speaking words to urge on their comrades. As Neonchameleon has pointed out, Captain America and Cyclops similarly rouse their allies in their respective comic books.</p><p></p><p>As I've already noted, a bonus vs fear is not very significant in D&D because there is no routine invocation, in combat, of those mechanics. They apply only against a certain sort of magical mind control.</p><p></p><p>A bonus vs death is like a weaker version of hit point healing - it is highly conditional, and unless the bonus is very big is unlikely to bring the downed PC back into the fight.</p><p></p><p>This is another option that is like a weaker version of healing, isn't it - conditional temp hp of short duration.</p><p></p><p>The skald aura is not meaningfully different, in this context, from the warlord's Inspiring Word, except that oddly enough the bard's presence let's a different PC restore hit points to a third PC by spending a minor action - the connection between metagame action economy and ingame fiction seems even more abstract in this case than in the case of Inspiring Word.</p><p></p><p>If you want to play a herbalist, sure. This overlaps heavily with a caster's ability to create potions, of course. And doesn't seem to have much to do with playing a battle captain. </p><p></p><p>Damage negation is generally not as strong as healing, for well-known reasons, and also does not play in story as rousing one's allies back into the struggle. But that's not to say that it's a bad mechanic. The same remarks apply to temp hp.</p><p></p><p>Ah, yes. I believe it's called Inspiring Word!</p><p></p><p>I've already commented, multiple times now, that the paladin and the warlord fill the same archetypical space. The reason for distinguishing them in D&D is that D&D draws a very sharp magic/non-magic divide (unlike romantic fantasy fiction of the Arthurian or LotR variety, which does not draw such a distinction). Also, a D&D paladin has a tendency to bring other mechanical baggage (alignment, falling mechanics) which are notorious for a whole range of reasons (and are in various ways connected to the diving magic branding of the paladin).</p><p></p><p></p><p>I could do all that, rebuilding the game from the ground up - or I could do something which requires fewer mechanical tweaks: namely, let my Aragorn PC use Inspiring Word to restore his allies' hp. I mean (and just picking up on one of your points), why do we need to introduce Fate Points when the game already has a perfectly good combat-related ablative metagame resource?</p><p></p><p>I don't really understand why you're going through all these options and contortions to tell me that a warlord isn't the best way to do what I want to do. You may not particularly care for it - that's fine. But I don't think I'm being irrational. I think I'm being very commonsensical. After all, unlike fate points, or damage reduction, or some of your other options, hit points and hit point healing have been with us since the game began. I know how, and that, hit point healing works. And 4e shows me that it can work even when the hit point restoration is non-magical. So why can't I just have that?</p><p></p><p>And this is where I ask once again the question: is D&Dnext the inclusive edition, or the "everyone but 4e" edition? What is so objectionable about non-magical spike healing (otherwise known as Inspiring Word) that a game which is meant to capture "the broad essence of D&D" doesn't have room for it?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 6144207, member: 42582"] A 4e CHA warlord, or a 4e paladin, fill very much the same archetypical space: they are capable in combat, but their greater contribution is to defend and inspire their allies. (A CHA paladin is also more overtly magical, with a variety of ranged and AoE attacks - that's some D&Dism creeping into the archetype, as is to be expected.) I feel that they resemble their archetype - Arthur, Aragorn, Faramir, Captain America - pretty well. That's a fair question. But much the same question applies to clerical spells - why can't [I]any[/I] devoted PC call upon the power of a deity? And to sorcerers - why can't I declare that my [I]fighter[/I] is descended from dragons, and hence has innate magical abilities? The answer isn't primarily an ingame one, it's a metagame one - D&D is a class-based game and it rations player resources by reference to classes. So warlords (and perhaps paladins) get to use their CHA in ways other PCs can't; clerics get to use their CHA in ways other PCs can't; etc. I discussed the bard and the fighter upthread. Also my reasons for thinking that it has to be done at the class level - given the way D&Dnext is distributing abilities, and given the mechanical goal that this PC can take the functional place of a cleric - and my take on the existing fighter options. As for your first comment, about a table decision as to the meaning of hit points: Agreed. But in mechanical terms will largely suck unless it does - as [MENTION=87792]Neonchameleon[/MENTION] has pointed out upthread. And in story terms, unless it consists of hp restoration, it won't enable the PC in question to rouse another PC who has been knocked out of the combat. (To repeat: in RPGs which have separate player-side morale mechanics, like BW's Steel attribute, this would not be so. But D&D is not such an RPG. Hit points are the only consistently appicable player-side mechanic for representing ability to continue fighting.) This isn't true for Aragorn, Faramir or Gandalf, all of whom rouse by speaking words to urge on their comrades. As Neonchameleon has pointed out, Captain America and Cyclops similarly rouse their allies in their respective comic books. As I've already noted, a bonus vs fear is not very significant in D&D because there is no routine invocation, in combat, of those mechanics. They apply only against a certain sort of magical mind control. A bonus vs death is like a weaker version of hit point healing - it is highly conditional, and unless the bonus is very big is unlikely to bring the downed PC back into the fight. This is another option that is like a weaker version of healing, isn't it - conditional temp hp of short duration. The skald aura is not meaningfully different, in this context, from the warlord's Inspiring Word, except that oddly enough the bard's presence let's a different PC restore hit points to a third PC by spending a minor action - the connection between metagame action economy and ingame fiction seems even more abstract in this case than in the case of Inspiring Word. If you want to play a herbalist, sure. This overlaps heavily with a caster's ability to create potions, of course. And doesn't seem to have much to do with playing a battle captain. Damage negation is generally not as strong as healing, for well-known reasons, and also does not play in story as rousing one's allies back into the struggle. But that's not to say that it's a bad mechanic. The same remarks apply to temp hp. Ah, yes. I believe it's called Inspiring Word! I've already commented, multiple times now, that the paladin and the warlord fill the same archetypical space. The reason for distinguishing them in D&D is that D&D draws a very sharp magic/non-magic divide (unlike romantic fantasy fiction of the Arthurian or LotR variety, which does not draw such a distinction). Also, a D&D paladin has a tendency to bring other mechanical baggage (alignment, falling mechanics) which are notorious for a whole range of reasons (and are in various ways connected to the diving magic branding of the paladin). I could do all that, rebuilding the game from the ground up - or I could do something which requires fewer mechanical tweaks: namely, let my Aragorn PC use Inspiring Word to restore his allies' hp. I mean (and just picking up on one of your points), why do we need to introduce Fate Points when the game already has a perfectly good combat-related ablative metagame resource? I don't really understand why you're going through all these options and contortions to tell me that a warlord isn't the best way to do what I want to do. You may not particularly care for it - that's fine. But I don't think I'm being irrational. I think I'm being very commonsensical. After all, unlike fate points, or damage reduction, or some of your other options, hit points and hit point healing have been with us since the game began. I know how, and that, hit point healing works. And 4e shows me that it can work even when the hit point restoration is non-magical. So why can't I just have that? And this is where I ask once again the question: is D&Dnext the inclusive edition, or the "everyone but 4e" edition? What is so objectionable about non-magical spike healing (otherwise known as Inspiring Word) that a game which is meant to capture "the broad essence of D&D" doesn't have room for it? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
[Warlords] Should D&D be tied to D&D Worlds?
Top