Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 6842223" data-attributes="member: 22779">So, the only valid warlord is the one you envision?&nbsp; I posted a pretty specific outline of a warlord, and you brushed it off as &quot;not a warlord to you&quot;.&nbsp; So, what do you see as a warlord?&nbsp; A Battlemaster with, say, Noble background and choosing all the support options STILL has the best AC in the game, can only actually do warlordy stuff a very limited number of times per short rest - something like 4-7 when a short rest should see something like 10-20 rounds of combat.&nbsp; A high level Battlemaster would have FORTY attacks in that time, and he could actually do anything like a warlord 7 times.&nbsp; He blows through that in 1 round on an action surge.&nbsp; The other 90% of the time he's a fighter.&nbsp; Would you accept a wizard that only casts spells 1 round in 10?&nbsp; Why or why not?&nbsp; That's every bit as much of a wizard as your Battlemaster is a warlord.&nbsp; Should be perfectly acceptable.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Hussar, post: 6842223, member: 22779"] So, the only valid warlord is the one you envision? I posted a pretty specific outline of a warlord, and you brushed it off as "not a warlord to you". So, what do you see as a warlord? A Battlemaster with, say, Noble background and choosing all the support options STILL has the best AC in the game, can only actually do warlordy stuff a very limited number of times per short rest - something like 4-7 when a short rest should see something like 10-20 rounds of combat. A high level Battlemaster would have FORTY attacks in that time, and he could actually do anything like a warlord 7 times. He blows through that in 1 round on an action surge. The other 90% of the time he's a fighter. Would you accept a wizard that only casts spells 1 round in 10? Why or why not? That's every bit as much of a wizard as your Battlemaster is a warlord. Should be perfectly acceptable. [/QUOTE]

Verification