Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 7040896" data-attributes="member: 22779">The problem with using the Bard for a Warlord is that it comes with a number of goodies that really aren't very &quot;Warlordy&quot;.&nbsp; I mean why do I have proficiency with 3 musical instruments?&nbsp; Sure, I don't have to use them, but, it really doesn't fit too well does it?&nbsp; And I can counter charm magic?&nbsp; I suppose I can see that.&nbsp; Kinda.&nbsp; Seems a bit strange that my Drill Sergeant type can counter Harpies, but, okay.&nbsp; And, of course, I have to be very careful about the spells I choose...I really don't see the issue here with just creating a Warlord class - either as a subclass or a thing in and of itself.&nbsp; Everyone seems to agree that most of the mechanics for a Warlord exist, spread across three or four classes.&nbsp; IOW, if it's not a problem that we have non-magical healing (fighters get that already), granting extra actions (Battlemasters get that, so do wizards, and I'm sure others do too), granting advantage or other buffs (casters, some thieves, Battlemasters) in the game, then why on earth is it a problem to combine those elements into a single class?Those that want it, can use it, and those that don't, won't.&nbsp; Easy peasy.To me, the real problem is more with people who are trying to claim that this or that &quot;isn't D&amp;D&quot;.&nbsp; It's an utterly nonsensical statement.&nbsp; Gunslingers aren't part of D&amp;D?&nbsp; Let me introduce you to Murylynd, one of the original D&amp;D characters.&nbsp; Never minding Mystara.&nbsp; Or, heck, right now we've got Zeitgeist on En World for 5e.&nbsp; Guess that's not really D&amp;D either.&nbsp; It might not be something you happen to like, but arguing that it &quot;isn't D&amp;D&quot; is just yet another way people are trying to justify their personal preferences to play gatekeeper for everyone else.Instead of telling me what's not D&amp;D, how about you keep your nose in your game and let me have what I want for my game?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Hussar, post: 7040896, member: 22779"] The problem with using the Bard for a Warlord is that it comes with a number of goodies that really aren't very "Warlordy". I mean why do I have proficiency with 3 musical instruments? Sure, I don't have to use them, but, it really doesn't fit too well does it? And I can counter charm magic? I suppose I can see that. Kinda. Seems a bit strange that my Drill Sergeant type can counter Harpies, but, okay. And, of course, I have to be very careful about the spells I choose... I really don't see the issue here with just creating a Warlord class - either as a subclass or a thing in and of itself. Everyone seems to agree that most of the mechanics for a Warlord exist, spread across three or four classes. IOW, if it's not a problem that we have non-magical healing (fighters get that already), granting extra actions (Battlemasters get that, so do wizards, and I'm sure others do too), granting advantage or other buffs (casters, some thieves, Battlemasters) in the game, then why on earth is it a problem to combine those elements into a single class? Those that want it, can use it, and those that don't, won't. Easy peasy. To me, the real problem is more with people who are trying to claim that this or that "isn't D&D". It's an utterly nonsensical statement. Gunslingers aren't part of D&D? Let me introduce you to Murylynd, one of the original D&D characters. Never minding Mystara. Or, heck, right now we've got Zeitgeist on En World for 5e. Guess that's not really D&D either. It might not be something you happen to like, but arguing that it "isn't D&D" is just yet another way people are trying to justify their personal preferences to play gatekeeper for everyone else. Instead of telling me what's not D&D, how about you keep your nose in your game and let me have what I want for my game? [/QUOTE]

Verification