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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Neonchameleon" data-source="post: 6144810" data-attributes="member: 87792"> Indeed.  But in D&D the same resource measures wounds, morale, and fighting spirit.  And it's quite obviously not just wounds that are measured by hit points because you aren't impeded with them.  If there are different resources added to separate these then the warlord can focus on one of them (although we'll hit Gresham's Law - one will be fundamentally more important than the rest).  As it is, your ability to keep going is measured by your hit points. It's open to discussion.  It is, however, too powerful to be a feat when compared to feats seen so far. First it's a magic item.  Which is inherently problematic for oh so many reasons. Second I'm going to propose an alternative solution, stolen from WFRP 3e (although I don't think that the idea was original there).  A party sheet to go along side individual character sheets - and the party sheet has its own "class" and can be replaced.  It also outlines how the characters work together (WFRP ones include "Brash Young Fools", "Coven on the Run", "Notorious Scoundrels", and "Righteous Champions").  And that can include spike healing in the form of "Pushing through."  The Warlord at this point could interact with and augment the party in ways that make it very distinct as a class.First, it's a magic item.  We're running into the Christmas Tree Effect.  Second it's a magic item.  Which again ties it down in ... awkward ways.For the former it does. I've experience of this on both sides of the screen.  DMing for a party with too many leaders is obnoxious.You've just made a feat that's about three times as good as any other I'm aware of in D&D Next.  Class features are generally much, much stronger than feats (one of the failings of the 3e Fighter).  This could, admittedly, be solved by bumping up the power of feats to make the rest competative there.D&D is an RPG.  A Role Playing Game.  If you don't get the gamist part right you aren't designing well.Focus fire (and the maxim that "The more you use the fewer you lose") is orthodox miliatary strategy in just about every military guide book known.The Art of War3.8. It is the rule in war, if our forces are ten to the enemy's one, to surround him; if five to one, to attack him; if twice as numerous, to divide our army into two. 3.9. If equally matched, we can offer battle; if slightly inferior in numbers, we can avoid the enemy; if quite unequal in every way, we can flee from himOr in short focus fire when you can and evade where you will take the focus fire.The Art Of War3.2. Hence to fight and conquer in all your battles is not supreme excellence; supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy's resistance without fighting. (See 3.9 above as well).Focus fire is simple common sense and works on a personal skirmish level as well as for large military units.  Two people attacking someone split the defender's attention.  Only in D&D and real life and just about every military strategy or tactics game ever (remember D&D was derived from tabletop wargaming) do you see people refusing to engage their adversaries unless at an advantage or creating a holding action and this being considered smart tactics.Of course it won't be copy and paste from 4e.  No one in their senses thinks it will.  I'd be much happier if it was trying to be its own thing. You mean that spellcasters uber alles is a feature and not a bug?  Because if not I don't understand what you are saying.</blockquote>

Verification