NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 6144300" data-attributes="member: 42582">There is very little room in the action economy of D&Dnext for such abilities, and so I am not expecting to see them. The reason there is no room for these abilities is because there is no analogue to the encounter or daily power - all standard actions are the equivalent of a single basic attack, and hence the only tactical warlord ability for which there is room is Commander's Strike and its ilk.Whereas there is plenty of room in the mechanical architecture of Next for non-magical healing.Why do I have to take away anything?Let's drop the extra attacks, for which there is no room in the action economy at least until we get to the high level "action surge" sort of stuff. What would be imabalanced about a class that was able to heal, to grant out-of-turn movement to allies (probably letting them use their move as a reaction, so as not to unbalance the action economy), and to add bonus damage? Mechanically, it could be a cleric or a paladin variant, but with significantly different flavour text.I don't know where this idea of "wounds disappearing" comes from. D&Dnext at present has no wounds mechanics - like most versions of D&D, it has a hit point mechanic. And obviously any table that is using warlords and non-magical healing is not interpreting hit points as meat.Sam is an interesting case, because I think the only version of D&D that can easily model him is 4e - as a mostly lazy warlord who helps Frodo - but I think it is fairly hard to build a lazy warlord into the D&Dnext architecture, because (at least in its current form) it lacks the metagame sensibilities to support that sort of build.Huh? This is no different to debating whether Arthur should be a paladin or a cavalier, or whether Merlin should be a wizard or a druid. [MENTION=2067]Kamikaze Midget[/MENTION] upthread advocated the "three ways to be a vampire" approach, and I have nothing against that. If someone wants to build a ranger Aragorn or a fighter Faramir, go to town. I am just talking about the version of those characters that I am interested in.And to reiterate: that version (the inspiring battle captain) is a staple of the romantic fantasy genre; I have an edition of D&D that makes it easy to build that character (in fact I have a wealth of options - STR cleric, WIS melee cleric, paladin, whether STR or CHA, plus all the warlord variants - and that's before I look at multi-classing and/or hybriding); and I therefore don't think it's unreasonable to ask that D&Dnext, which is meant to be the universal edition that captures everything D&D-ish that there is in D&D, to also allow me to build that character. At the moment the closest I have is the cavalier build of the paladin, which brings with it quite a bit of mechanical and flavour baggage around spellcasting and divine magic.</blockquote>

Verification