Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 7041017" data-attributes="member: 22779">The other issue I have here is the actual theory crafting that goes on.Let's look at the example of the wizard/sorcerer casting two fireballs.&nbsp; Ok, that's pretty powerful.&nbsp; However, there are two issues.1.&nbsp; Anyone can already do this simply by taking a couple of levels of fighter - Action Surge allows two full spells in a turn per short rest.&nbsp; Since we haven't seen huge amounts of complaints about this, I would assume it's a rather moot issue.2.&nbsp; Even if two fireballs go off, so what?&nbsp; Fireball is doing about 30 points of damage, half on a save.&nbsp; In the example, it was two groups of enemies getting blasted.&nbsp; If your encounter for your 5th/6th level party can be ended by each opponent taking 30 points of damage, how difficult did you actually expect this encounter to be?&nbsp; We're talking CR 1/4-1/2 opponents here against a 5th or 6th level party.&nbsp; Yes, with bounded accuracy they could deal some damage, but, by and large, this was going to be a pretty light encounter anyway.&nbsp; Is it really such a big deal that it ends on round 1 instead of round 2?People in this thread have admitted to not playing 4e and having virtually no direct experience with seeing a warlord in play, yet they are criticizing the designs as being over powered or whatever.&nbsp; I'm sorry, but, if you've never seen it in play, and have only tangential knowledge of what's being talked about, why do you think your opinion should carry any water?&nbsp; Warlords in 4e were not overpowered.&nbsp; They simply weren't.&nbsp; So, the presumption that warlords are coming from any sort of power gaming position is patently false.&nbsp; Warlords simply provided a very different play experience that some people really enjoyed.&nbsp; Considering this thread is talking about adding stuff to the game that is distinct from what is already in the game, I'd say that warlords should get a pretty open welcome.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Hussar, post: 7041017, member: 22779"] The other issue I have here is the actual theory crafting that goes on. Let's look at the example of the wizard/sorcerer casting two fireballs. Ok, that's pretty powerful. However, there are two issues. 1. Anyone can already do this simply by taking a couple of levels of fighter - Action Surge allows two full spells in a turn per short rest. Since we haven't seen huge amounts of complaints about this, I would assume it's a rather moot issue. 2. Even if two fireballs go off, so what? Fireball is doing about 30 points of damage, half on a save. In the example, it was two groups of enemies getting blasted. If your encounter for your 5th/6th level party can be ended by each opponent taking 30 points of damage, how difficult did you actually expect this encounter to be? We're talking CR 1/4-1/2 opponents here against a 5th or 6th level party. Yes, with bounded accuracy they could deal some damage, but, by and large, this was going to be a pretty light encounter anyway. Is it really such a big deal that it ends on round 1 instead of round 2? People in this thread have admitted to not playing 4e and having virtually no direct experience with seeing a warlord in play, yet they are criticizing the designs as being over powered or whatever. I'm sorry, but, if you've never seen it in play, and have only tangential knowledge of what's being talked about, why do you think your opinion should carry any water? Warlords in 4e were not overpowered. They simply weren't. So, the presumption that warlords are coming from any sort of power gaming position is patently false. Warlords simply provided a very different play experience that some people really enjoyed. Considering this thread is talking about adding stuff to the game that is distinct from what is already in the game, I'd say that warlords should get a pretty open welcome. [/QUOTE]

Verification