Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Guest 6801328" data-source="post: 6724674">But don't you see why it's a choice trap?&nbsp; &quot;Ok, anybody who declares their character is in love with mine will get the following cool bonuses...&quot;&quot;Hmm....well, I was going to play a Spock-like, emotionless Monk, but I really need that +2 so...sure...he now has a huge crush on the Half-orc.&quot;It becomes a choice between roleplaying and minmaxing.&nbsp; Sure, you can change your fluff to make it look like roleplaying, but it's really just frosting on top of the minmaxing.&nbsp; It's a blurring of the line between what belongs to roleplaying and and what belongs to mechanics.Here's what I'd be ok with.&nbsp; And by 'ok' I mean 'I think this would be really cool':<ol>
<li data-xf-list-type="ol">A general mechanic that tracked/measured interpersonal bonds.</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ol">The ability for any character to leverage those bonds to, say, restore HP, that worked in proportion to the strength of the bond.</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ol">Ideally, the ability would work best when both players 'participated', in the sense of investing a resource (an action, a hit die, a spell slot, whatever.)</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ol">Something available to all classes...say a Feat...that improved the efficacy of that ability.</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ol">A class that made it easier to use that ability (e.g., as a bonus action rather than an action, or could be done silently, or whatever) but didn't otherwise increase efficacy beyond the level determined by the bond.</li>
</ol>Really the ONLY thing I object to about Warlord concepts is that I don't think leadership, inspiration, admiration, etc. belongs in a class.&nbsp; You shouldn't get to be Captain America (to other PCs*) because you chose the Captain America class.&nbsp; You should get to be Captain America because you earn that respect from the other players and their characters.&nbsp; *Again, I'd be totally, 100% fine with a class that had Captain America-like influence over NPCs, even though in general I think that should be more about level than class choice.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Guest 6801328, post: 6724674"] But don't you see why it's a choice trap? "Ok, anybody who declares their character is in love with mine will get the following cool bonuses..." "Hmm....well, I was going to play a Spock-like, emotionless Monk, but I really need that +2 so...sure...he now has a huge crush on the Half-orc." It becomes a choice between roleplaying and minmaxing. Sure, you can change your fluff to make it look like roleplaying, but it's really just frosting on top of the minmaxing. It's a blurring of the line between what belongs to roleplaying and and what belongs to mechanics. Here's what I'd be ok with. And by 'ok' I mean 'I think this would be really cool': [LIST=1] [*]A general mechanic that tracked/measured interpersonal bonds. [*]The ability for any character to leverage those bonds to, say, restore HP, that worked in proportion to the strength of the bond. [*]Ideally, the ability would work best when both players 'participated', in the sense of investing a resource (an action, a hit die, a spell slot, whatever.) [*]Something available to all classes...say a Feat...that improved the efficacy of that ability. [*]A class that made it easier to use that ability (e.g., as a bonus action rather than an action, or could be done silently, or whatever) but didn't otherwise increase efficacy beyond the level determined by the bond. [/LIST] Really the ONLY thing I object to about Warlord concepts is that I don't think leadership, inspiration, admiration, etc. belongs in a class. You shouldn't get to be Captain America (to other PCs*) because you chose the Captain America class. You should get to be Captain America because you earn that respect from the other players and their characters. *Again, I'd be totally, 100% fine with a class that had Captain America-like influence over NPCs, even though in general I think that should be more about level than class choice. [/QUOTE]

Verification