Tony Vargas
Legend
They do further illustrate that neither the mechanics nor the mere use of a word like 'command' are reasons to stonewall the addition of a class.Can I just comment that some of the new psionic discipline fit damn well for a warlord.
Especially mantle of command, courage and fury.
As supernatural powers, of course, they're in no way suitable to building a warlord, just as spellcasters weren't a suitable substitute for psionics, in the first place.
In 4e the Ardent was a Psionic Leader, and the Warlord a Martial Leader, so in the sense that the Avatar is a good enough take on the Ardent to evoke the Leader-Role functionality it had, that's an apt metaphor.that discussion already happened. Those, and the Avatar, are apparently a different Leader class called an Ardent, which was basically a Psionic Warlord as far as I can tell.
4e's is still the only vision we have of the Warlord, and it'd be too easy to get caught up in the Leader functions as defining the Warlord, entirely, when fitting a class to a role also meant constraining it. The Warlord had exploits that hinted as functions that would have impinged on both Defender and Controller. 5e doesn't need to worry about constraining it's designs so much.
Last edited: