Search results

Overall, I'd say it's on the order of 50% for me, maybe a little lower, like 40/60. Of course, several of those were with the same group, so that might not necessarily count. I'm also counting one that was effectively done, we all could see the writing on the wall and it was just a matter of the...

You did notice that I have been vehemently opposed to the proposal given up thread where that was precisely what they wanted to do, right? That I have specifically cited both that I dislike it, and that there are folks who see that and immediately go, "Nope, nuh-uh, sorry, that's never going to...

But the flaw in your reasoning, as I have already said, is that this only works as an explanation if absolutely every single thing, without exception, is what the greatest number of people sincerely, deeply want. Do you know that? Do you know for sure that the greatest number of people is...

Eyup. The fundamental problem with the "it sells, therefore it must be what people want" argument is that it is treating a bundle of things as though it were a single unit. It is identical to something like "well European nations joined NATO in 1949, therefore those nations must approve of...

Serious answer: I would love to. I tried to.

I do not at all agree with you on that. Actual martial exploits are not like that. What is the "circle of power" Warlord exploit? My sources indicate no such power ever existed in 4e--so unless you've got some hidden source I don't have access to (exceedingly unlikely), you're just making a...

I don't want them to be better than magic. I want them to be different from magic, without "different from" necessarily meaning "worse than." That's part of what makes the Warlock chassis so useful as a starting point. It builds in customizability, but with tools that are class-specific. It...

What does "not tethered to the requirement of being a 'support class'" mean? Because in 5e it essentially always means "doing your support stuff is usually a waste of resources unless it's exploiting some rules quirk" (e.g. "whack-a-mole" healing.) What would you intend for such non-tethering...

I didn't, no. It was in the jump between the first unread posts and recent posts. This is literally just spellcasting, but with a "it's totally not spells! Everything else is identical but it's totally not spells you guys!" disclaimer. Like... it's there, verbatim. "It's Not Magic" is a word...

This is legitimately just a Paladin. You have not even tried to make it non-magical. You even literally made it a summoner of angels, for God's sake. It's literally Angel Summoner!

Certainly. My proposed "Strategies" would have to be written more or less from whole cloth, because while they are slotting into the design space that is filled by spells with the actual Warlock...they wouldn't be spells and should not work like spells. How many you learn, how often you refresh...

I would not personally say it is very close to 5e, but rather that it does the reverse of what 5e did. 5e said 4e was terrible, so it snuck in a few bits and pieces from 4e and then actively avoided keeping anything else, striving as much as possible to be "3e but not so thoroughly broken."...

Frankly, those changes alone make a big difference. Edit Especially if it's coupled with some of the other fixes I've seen mentioned around the net, as more than a few folks were of the impression that the existing Paladin genuinely fell behind other classes over time due to not having enough...

The vast majority of spells are completely unacceptable unchanged. Period. They would need to be changed so significantly, they would be barely recognizable. They cannot have any components, especially not material nor somatic ones. They cannot permit being counterspelled. They cannot cease to...

I have nothing further to say to you on this topic @Mephista. I don't believe you are engaging in this conversation in good faith. Particularly since you are demanding extremely detailed specifics when I explicitly said, repeatedly, that this is literally concept-draft-stage stuff, genuinely...

Here's hoping they addressed some of the issues with the Paladin, which was always a bit of a disappointment in 13A.

I never, ever said it was impossible in general. I said it was impossible if it must be shackled to the Fighter as a subclass. That's a world of difference.

That is the point. And no, Strategies are not spells. There would be a new list of them. That was kind of the point of specifying that. They would differ by not scaling as spells do...as you say, that's the whole point of warlock spells, which Strategems are not. They would simply be following...

I have not seen this myself. Then again, I haven't actually seen many people directly talk about any particular Warlord option (other than, perhaps, Level Up's. Because, y'know, EnWorld.) I disagree that the power budget is overtuned. However, I will agree that whatever a proper 5e Warlord...

Characters should not have to take feats in order to get their basic subclass competency. Imagine if Wizards had to take feats in order to actually get their subclass features. People would riot.