Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Gradine" data-source="post: 7042903" data-attributes="member: 57112">You couldn't really fake any of the main classes I was talking about without heavy modifications. The closest is maybe Spellthief, but that's condensing an entire class concept into a single, extremely high level ability. As far as I'm concerned, Warlord is way better supported in 5e right now than Spellthief. I'm not trying to speak for anyone other than myself for why a dedicated Warlord class is low on my own personal wishlist. And my reason is that Warlords basically already exist, just in an unrecognizable form from the 4e version.Which is the dirty secret about converting 4e classes to 5e; you can't. I mean, you can obviously, but in 5e terms you either have to give it full spellcasting, including cantrips, or you have to trim a whole hell of a lot out of it. Even taking into account subclasses (which account for, at most, an additional 4-5 unique abilities). 4e characters could simply do a lot more things, a lot more often, than 5e characters. This is why WotC will never be able to make Warlord fans happy, despite giving them the class twice (just under, frankly, better names) as fighter archetypes. It's the same thing with the spell-less Ranger. They're operating under an entirely different design philosophy; 5e characters simply do less than 4e characters do, and less often. Even spellcasters, really. Well, inside combat, anyway.I only played three characters in 4e. Two were Fighters (a mobile Eladrin spear fighter, and a dwarven tank). The third? A Warlord. The character I would have the easiest time replicating in 5e? Honestly, my Warlord. Easily. Even with just the PHB I could create a character that covers his shtick way more easily than what either of my Fighters were doing. But nobody complains about recreating the 4e Fighter. Or Rogue. Or Barbarian.Any new attempt at a 5e Warlord would either be a hodgepodge of what we already have, and it would still wouldn't be good enough, or, at best, a new set of abilities that still would represent a very limited amount of the things the 4e Warlord could do. At best, it would be an interesting class that would almost certainly get torn to shreds.Personally, I'd rather see something new.</blockquote>

Verification