Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Starfox" data-source="post: 6145026" data-attributes="member: 2303">Tho those stating a cleric is not needed; I find the need of a cleric irrelevant to the warlord class really. If a player wants to contribute to the team by healing instead of by defeating enemies faster, that is a valid role-playing choice. If said player wants to play a mundane character to do this, that is also a valid RP choice. The to me the question is if the rules can live up to the player's expectations, not if the role is necessary. I am GMing a homebrew game where PC's cannot die under normal circumstances, and all hits are recovered trough a 15 minute short rest. There should be very little need for a healer for tactical reasons. I still have a player playing a healer character because that is what the player wanted to play - and spends his time keeping fallen enemies alive because of his code. The basic premise here is that the warlord should be able to fill the survial-boosting role the cleric does. An ability that gets people killed clearly does not do that. In NPCS in your game waste time killing downed foes, that is a feature of your campaign. I don't think that is a common DM attitude and one that I'd not enjoy either as player or DM, and frankly it is irrelevant - the ability to let a "dead" character get one final shot off does not meet the stated survial-boosting goal of the warlord.That world is not DnD tough, neither Next nor any other edition. And the thread deals mainly with warlords for Next.</blockquote>

Verification