Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 6777445" data-attributes="member: 996">No magic or music for the Warlord.&nbsp; So the Bard, as an arcane full-caster, is just not a potential component of a Warlord-alternative build.&nbsp;&nbsp; You can cobble together a little something out of Noble or Soldier for Background, Inspiring Leader &amp; Martial Adept as feats, and PDK/Battlemaster or Mastermind as an archetype, and that's about it.&nbsp; There's lots more functionality already available that'd be appropriate, but it's silo'd in caster &amp; magic-using sub-classses.No.&nbsp; The concept really requires a lot of flexibility.&nbsp; Both to contribute adequate support to keep a party going while remaining viable as an individual PC, and to allow players with very different visions or specific bugaboos to come up with a build that works for them.&nbsp; As a general rule the Warlord was not deadliest of the martial classes, on his own.&nbsp; So, no, nothing should make you think that, really.Don't see how.&nbsp; Support is a critically important, but not terribly spot-light-grabbing role.&nbsp; The extant 5e support-oriented characters are all full casters with a great deal of versatility on top of support (indeed, they can ignore support almost entirely via spell choice on a day to day basis), and they tend to have better basic combat abilities than other full casters (like the Wizard), as well.&nbsp;&nbsp; Even if you had a Warlord class or fighter archetype that was a fully-capable support character on top of being equal to other fighters in every way, it wouldn't be over-powered or over-versatile compared to existing support characters -&nbsp; just in comparison to said fighters.&nbsp; So it's problematic to try to start with a the fighter and trim away and add things until you have a workable support class.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Tony Vargas, post: 6777445, member: 996"] No magic or music for the Warlord. So the Bard, as an arcane full-caster, is just not a potential component of a Warlord-alternative build. You can cobble together a little something out of Noble or Soldier for Background, Inspiring Leader & Martial Adept as feats, and PDK/Battlemaster or Mastermind as an archetype, and that's about it. There's lots more functionality already available that'd be appropriate, but it's silo'd in caster & magic-using sub-classses. No. The concept really requires a lot of flexibility. Both to contribute adequate support to keep a party going while remaining viable as an individual PC, and to allow players with very different visions or specific bugaboos to come up with a build that works for them. As a general rule the Warlord was not deadliest of the martial classes, on his own. So, no, nothing should make you think that, really. Don't see how. Support is a critically important, but not terribly spot-light-grabbing role. The extant 5e support-oriented characters are all full casters with a great deal of versatility on top of support (indeed, they can ignore support almost entirely via spell choice on a day to day basis), and they tend to have better basic combat abilities than other full casters (like the Wizard), as well. Even if you had a Warlord class or fighter archetype that was a fully-capable support character on top of being equal to other fighters in every way, it wouldn't be over-powered or over-versatile compared to existing support characters - just in comparison to said fighters. So it's problematic to try to start with a the fighter and trim away and add things until you have a workable support class. [/QUOTE]

Verification