Water, water everywhere, Nor any drop to drink

[Lord Twig]

Because it's so hypocritical. As I pointed out, people will bend over backwards to ignore the inconsistencies in their own arguments. It's okay for me to tell your character how to act and believe, because magic. I can force you to take extra actions, heal, hit better, take less damage, and a multitude of other things, despite the fact that it makes little sense in the game world, and it's okay because its magic. The character that hates music still gets inspired by the bard. The character that's diametrically opposed to your beliefs still gains HP. And, note, the argument is that people don't want other players telling them what to do. So, when that wizard hits you with Haste and grants you extra actions, he's telling you what to do. But, that's okay because... altogether now ... magic.

Like I said, if the argument was at all consistent, then I'd be a lot more sympathetic. But, it's not. A cleric with an at-will cantrip that granted an ally an attack when cast would pass muster without a comment, regardless of the alignment or beliefs of the ally. Heck, as it stands, clerics (and druids) already have a cantrip that grants buffs on any skill checks. Doesn't matter what your deity is or what your deity is about, drop a Guidance spell and someone gets a +d4 on a skill. My Cleric of War can buff your History check for some reason... oh right.... maaaagic. But, apparently, a warlord doing exactly the same thing but without casting a spell is completely unbelievable.

So, yes, this is why I sneer at the arguments being dropped here. They're about as consistent as a wet cardboard box. And hold as much water. For some reason, we don't see constant, daily agitation to change clerics, druids, battle masters, bards and Mastermind thieves. They don't apparently rate high enough as an issue to get their own forum ghetto, exiled out of the mainstream conversation by constant, never ending, thread crapping by people who have made it their mission in life to prevent any 4e elements from polluting the wonderment of 5e.

If a Wizard casts Haste on you he doesn't force you to make an extra attack. If a Warlord inspires you to take an extra attack he doesn't actually force you to take the attack. Neither are forcing the other character to do anything.

Now go read that above again and let it sink in. Understand?

Okay, now, the Wizard uses magic to enhance your physical abilities beyond what is normally possible. A Warlord requires the target character to be inspired by his words so that he can perform better than he normally would without the encouragement.

Do you see the difference?

 

[Tony Vargas]

If a Wizard casts Haste on you he doesn't force you to make an extra attack. If a Warlord inspires you to take an extra attack he doesn't actually force you to take the attack. Neither are forcing the other character to do anything.

Okay, now, the Wizard uses magic to enhance your physical abilities beyond what is normally possible. A Warlord requires the target character to be inspired by his words so that he can perform better than he normally would without the encouragement.

Sure, and if you don't want to RP that you're inspired, you can choose not use the extra attack the Warlord gave you, and, by the same token, if you want to RP that you don't believe in magic, you can choose not to use the extra attack from the Wizard's Haste.

Do you see the difference?

The Wizard can prove he's magical by fireballing you for 8d6 damage, but the Warlord can't prove he's inspiring? Or, conversely, magic isn't real but inspiration is?

 

[Hussar]

If a Wizard casts Haste on you he doesn't force you to make an extra attack. If a Warlord inspires you to take an extra attack he doesn't actually force you to take the attack. Neither are forcing the other character to do anything.

Now go read that above again and let it sink in. Understand?

Okay, now, the Wizard uses magic to enhance your physical abilities beyond what is normally possible. A Warlord requires the target character to be inspired by his words so that he can perform better than he normally would without the encouragement.

Do you see the difference?

No, I really don't. You ignore the cleric example, because now, you have to explain why Vecna is inspiring a paladin to great heights of prowess. You ignore the bard example, because it doesn't fit your argument. You ignore the mastermind thief for the same reason. Or the Battlemaster fighter.

It's not exactly unbelievable that people are inspiring. It does happen in real life. We can point to all sorts of genre examples where it does happen. It also happen in the game as it's written RIGHT NOW.

But, apparently, writing the word Warlord on the character sheet makes it unbelievable. Which brings me back to the idea of it's maaaaagic. It's okay because it's magic and we'll conveniently ignore any consistency or lack thereof. But, by Crom, anything that isn't magic SHALL NOT PASS!

Why doesn't my character get a saving throw vs Haste? I mean, I cannot prevent your wizard from Hasting my character. You are forcing effects on me. How is that okay? You, the player, are telling me, the other player, that I MUST accept this effect on my character. I have no choice in the matter. But, apparently that's perfectly fine. But, my character giving you the choice of making an extra attack (which you don't actually have to take) is too much control over your character? Your paladin automatically grants me bonuses to saving throws, regardless of my faith or lack thereof. In Forgotten Realms, I could be Faithless, doomed to the worst punishment of the setting (having my soul painfully annihilated) but, I still have to take the benefits of your paladin's aura. I am apostate. I deny the very existence of your deity, but, your deity still shields me from enemies.

In game and out, that doesn't make any sense. It's easily as objectionable as anything a warlord could do. But, it passes without comment because.... altogether now... maaaaaaagic.

 

[Jester David]

That is exactly the issue. At least one prior ed of D&D could be used for low-/no-magic campaigns (or even just no-caster parties) relatively seamlessly, while 5e currently isn't up to supporting that style of play. One of the justifications for having 5e at all was that prior editions didn't support a wide enough range of 'styles,' and it was another stated (by Mearls, in L&L) goal of 5e to do so.

Which edition was that?

1e-2e had a fair amount of magic classes and clerical magic was all but required to heal in a reasonable rate.
3e was rife with magic, with everyone having a magical arsenal.
Magic items were also assumed in 4e and there was no non-magical controller.

 

[jayoungr]

As I pointed out, people will bend over backwards to ignore the inconsistencies in their own arguments. It's okay for me to tell your character how to act and believe, because magic.

But people are telling you that as they see it, magic does not tell characters how to believe--while mundane inspiration does. You're begging the question by claiming the argument is inconsistent.

I can force you to take extra actions, heal, hit better, take less damage, and a multitude of other things ... and it's okay because its magic.

Yes. Exactly. I cut out the part about it not making sense, because magic is what makes it make sense. Magic can cause a PC to take extra actions, heal, hit better, take less damage, and a multitude of other things and it doesn't change how the PC feels about the character casting the spell that causes it.

The character that hates music still gets inspired by the bard.

Yep. Because the character doesn't have to have positive feelings about the music in order to get the physical benefits. The spell goes straight from caster's mouth to target's body without affecting the target's mind or feelings.

The character that's diametrically opposed to your beliefs still gains HP.

Yep. It happens to your stamina no matter what your mind thinks. That's what magic does.

And, note, the argument is that people don't want other players telling them what to do.

People don't want other players telling their PCs how to FEEL. Different thing.

You can't get HP or extra attacks or whatever from mundane inspiration without involving your feelings in some way. That's the entire concept of mundane buffing and healing.

 

[Lord Twig]

No, I really don't. You ignore the cleric example, because now, you have to explain why Vecna is inspiring a paladin to great heights of prowess. You ignore the bard example, because it doesn't fit your argument. You ignore the mastermind thief for the same reason. Or the Battlemaster fighter.

You obviously didn't read what I said. I don't ignore the Bard example. I state quite clearly that it has the exact same problem. Likewise the Mastermind Rogue and Battlemaster Fighter, same problem. They already require other people's characters to react a certain way to the inspiring character, whether it fits your character concept or not.

It's not exactly unbelievable that people are inspiring. It does happen in real life. We can point to all sorts of genre examples where it does happen. It also happen in the game as it's written RIGHT NOW.

Yes, there are people that are inspiring. They can convince people to fight for a cause, but once they are fighting I doubt they can make them fight any better. Certainly not on a blow by blow basis. Someone mentioned a boxing coach. Do you really thing a boxer is twice as effective if the coach is in the corner saying, "Hit him again! Hit him harder!" Really?

And as you mention, some of this is already in the game, that does not automatically make it good.

But, apparently, writing the word Warlord on the character sheet makes it unbelievable. Which brings me back to the idea of it's maaaaagic. It's okay because it's magic and we'll conveniently ignore any consistency or lack thereof. But, by Crom, anything that isn't magic SHALL NOT PASS!

There is nothing inconsistent about magic in D&D. It makes sense in the fictional world. It has its own rules, and it follows them.

Why doesn't my character get a saving throw vs Haste? I mean, I cannot prevent your wizard from Hasting my character. You are forcing effects on me. How is that okay? You, the player, are telling me, the other player, that I MUST accept this effect on my character. I have no choice in the matter. But, apparently that's perfectly fine. But, my character giving you the choice of making an extra attack (which you don't actually have to take) is too much control over your character?

Honestly I would allow a save against beneficial magic if the player decided his character wouldn't accept it. I can only assume they left it out because it is a pretty rare case where you wouldn't want it.

And again, it is not the granting of the attack that is the problem. It is the fact that my character has to be inspired by your character to gain the effect. No only that, but he gains the effect whether I want my character to be inspired or not. I can choose to not use the effect, but it doesn't change the fact that my character was inspired, against my will, and can take an extra attack now. Refusing to use it doesn't change that.

Your paladin automatically grants me bonuses to saving throws, regardless of my faith or lack thereof. In Forgotten Realms, I could be Faithless, doomed to the worst punishment of the setting (having my soul painfully annihilated) but, I still have to take the benefits of your paladin's aura. I am apostate. I deny the very existence of your deity, but, your deity still shields me from enemies.

Yes, exactly. You don't need to believe in magic, or gods and goddesses. It doesn't matter if you are a believer or not. The Paladin's faith creates a magic effect. A Cleric's Flame Strike is also a magical effect, it requires no belief or inspiration or anything on the part of the targets to get burned. Likewise a Bless, as a magical effect, boosts your chance to hit with weapons whether you agree with the doctrine of the god granting the effect or not.

Remember, magic is science in the D&D world. So it's the same as if a dedicated faith healer gets a shot of antibiotics in our world. It doesn't matter if he thinks science is evil or working against god's will or whatever. The antibiotics are going to work. Because they factually work. No belief necessary.

In game and out, that doesn't make any sense. It's easily as objectionable as anything a warlord could do. But, it passes without comment because.... altogether now... maaaaaaagic.

And now I have explained why it works. Sciiiiiience, I mean, maaaaagic works because it is a fact. Fire burns, gravity attracts, water is wet, magic is real and can make magical effects.

 

[Hussar]

Not agreeing with you is not the same as not reading your points.

Like I said, you're perfectly willing to turn a blind eye on the inconsistency of magic but not the mundane.

So it's okay for your faith to make me stronger but apparently not okay for my character to inspire yours.

And note, you are mistaken about how warlords work. Tactical warlords don't inspire you at all. They just see things that you miss and then communicate that information to you. Whether you choose to act on it or not is up to you.

Essentially your beef is only with one type of warlord.

 

[FrogReaver]

You obviously didn't read what I said. I don't ignore the Bard example. I state quite clearly that it has the exact same problem. Likewise the Mastermind Rogue and Battlemaster Fighter, same problem. They already require other people's characters to react a certain way to the inspiring character, whether it fits your character concept or not.



Yes, there are people that are inspiring. They can convince people to fight for a cause, but once they are fighting I doubt they can make them fight any better. Certainly not on a blow by blow basis. Someone mentioned a boxing coach. Do you really thing a boxer is twice as effective if the coach is in the corner saying, "Hit him again! Hit him harder!" Really?

And as you mention, some of this is already in the game, that does not automatically make it good.



There is nothing inconsistent about magic in D&D. It makes sense in the fictional world. It has its own rules, and it follows them.



Honestly I would allow a save against beneficial magic if the player decided his character wouldn't accept it. I can only assume they left it out because it is a pretty rare case where you wouldn't want it.

And again, it is not the granting of the attack that is the problem. It is the fact that my character has to be inspired by your character to gain the effect. No only that, but he gains the effect whether I want my character to be inspired or not. I can choose to not use the effect, but it doesn't change the fact that my character was inspired, against my will, and can take an extra attack now. Refusing to use it doesn't change that.



Yes, exactly. You don't need to believe in magic, or gods and goddesses. It doesn't matter if you are a believer or not. The Paladin's faith creates a magic effect. A Cleric's Flame Strike is also a magical effect, it requires no belief or inspiration or anything on the part of the targets to get burned. Likewise a Bless, as a magical effect, boosts your chance to hit with weapons whether you agree with the doctrine of the god granting the effect or not.

Remember, magic is science in the D&D world. So it's the same as if a dedicated faith healer gets a shot of antibiotics in our world. It doesn't matter if he thinks science is evil or working against god's will or whatever. The antibiotics are going to work. Because they factually work. No belief necessary.



And now I have explained why it works. Sciiiiiience, I mean, maaaaagic works because it is a fact. Fire burns, gravity attracts, water is wet, magic is real and can make magical effects.

I understand your problem with the warlord and warlord-esque concepts already present in DND 5e.

What I don't understand is how you can see all these warlord-esque concepts already present in 5e and then draw the line in the sand at the warlord. If such concepts are already present then what does it matter if we or the devs consolidate such concepts into a single cohesive class?

 

[Lord Twig]

Not agreeing with you is not the same as not reading your points.

Like I said, you're perfectly willing to turn a blind eye on the inconsistency of magic but not the mundane.

Then you believe there is an inconsistency. I do not. Therefore I am not turning a blind eye to the inconsistency.

Otherwise I could just say that you are intentionally refusing to see the consistency of magic. That wouldn't be right either, would it?

So it's okay for your faith to make me stronger but apparently not okay for my character to inspire yours.

My faith (or my characters, but whatever) makes me able to cast spells. The spell makes you stronger. The same as my science allows me to build a car that makes you faster. You don't need to know or care anything about science to use a car.

And there is nothing wrong with deciding that your character inspires my character, but when a game mechanic assumes my character will be inspired by yours that choice is taken away from me.

And note, you are mistaken about how warlords work. Tactical warlords don't inspire you at all. They just see things that you miss and then communicate that information to you. Whether you choose to act on it or not is up to you.

Essentially your beef is only with one type of warlord.

The tactical Warlord has a different problem. And you say it right there. They see things I miss. As a matter of fact it is flatly impossible for me to see whatever it is I'm missing. Only the Warlord can realize that I can do more every six seconds. Only when a Warlord is around can I perform at my best.

It doesn't matter how motivated I am. It doesn't matter what is on the line. It doesn't matter how many people are helping me or how well I work with my team, any random Warlord can walk up and tell me what I am doing wrong, what I'm missing, and make me better.

"Sorry friend Fighter I have know since boyhood and have fought with for the last 10 years! Sorry my true love that I am fighting for! I need to take this guy who just joined our party over here with me because only he can make me a better Fighter."

Yeah, that's just not going to work for me.

 

[Hussar]

"Sorry friend fighter I must leave you behind because this guy's imaginary beard in the sky makes me a better fighter."