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="Neonchameleon" data-source="post: 6144517" data-attributes="member: 87792">What it will take to make the warlord is the ability to organise a non-magical party to function without significantly reduced capacity. A significant part of this is something with the utility of spike healing.I belive that there are significantly fewer than you think due to the power and utility of clerical healing.  Which is why I opened this thread to be as much about the cleric as the warlord.Not even slightly. I believe that for something to be a meaningful Warlord we must be able to function as a party without significantly reduced efficiency while not including a cleric or magical equivalent.I do not need to play a warlord to enjoy D&D. And I play plenty of games which don't have warlord equivalents. The lack of a Warlord will, however, demonstrate that D&D Next isn't serious about uniting the editions because it isn't even covering the classes in the 4e PHB.Further I believe that without a meaningful warlord D&D's range of worlds it covers effectively is significantly limited. Clerical magic isn't common (nor is Vancian casting - D&D works best IMO when outside specific D&D worlds or anything Exalted-style the best PC caster is normally the Bard (2e, 3e, or 4e), and there may not even be any of them with the party.If you mean that the Fighter can get Inspiring Word in place of most uses of expertise dice and the rogue can in place of sneak attack I do not consider that meaningfully different from a unique class feature. It'll be ... interesting ... to balance. But that's details.If you mean that everyone gets Inspiring Word, that would have a very bad impact on the game. It means any smart NPC is going to confirm kills with a coup de grace. And it's going to render focus fire a very weak tactic.</blockquote>

Verification