>Battlemaster Fighter who stays with the party in the hopes of earning enough skill, fame, and wealth to gather an army of fighters, barbarians, War Clerics, and Paladins of Conquest and then proceed to conquer the world with them
Yay or nay for this as a character backstory (let's say the Battlemaster came from a very warlike culture, such as the Huns or Mongolians)
Battlemaster Fighter who stays with the party in the hopes of earning enough skill, fame...
Nolan Watson
Justin Ward
Sure. Sounds good to me. Some sort of neutral alignment I presume?
Oliver Gutierrez
IMO the kind of people who'd have that ambition would have been born into power. If you were the son of a steppe tribe chief then I could buy it, but as a lone adventurer who joins a party, it might be more of a stretch. Maybe he could start with smaller scale ambitions but keep scaling up every time he gains some power, like a kind of snowballing megalomania.
Nathan Rodriguez
>literally Temujin
Yes.
Cameron Edwards
Pretty much. Not "muahaha I'm going to kill everybody" kind of evil, but definitely a "might makes right" conquerer mindset.
Kevin Hall
>snowballing megalomania
Sometimes you don't even need the ambition, you just try and do something nice and suddenly people look up to you, and every time you try and make them happy so you can appoint the most competent among them as their new boss and go home you get a larger group. Eventually the bosses you set up report to you about shit and just oh fuck how did I get to be king.
Chase Jenkins
>the kind of people who'd have that ambition would have been born into power
Benjamin Rogers
Matthew Brown
Genghis Khan didn't up and suddenly decide "lol imma conker teh world". Most of the Mongol early campaigns can be characterized as retaliatory in nature. People kept doing stupid shit to them like killing their emmissaries.
Gabriel Gray
Hey, talk shit get hit.
He still united the Mongols tribes
Cameron Rodriguez
Let's give a role to each of those classes, shall we?
>Barbarians
Good front line shock troops, they'd form the center of the army the majority of the time and would be in the thick of battle.
>Fighters
Each have a different role depending on their type, but they'd generally form the flanks of the army and perform the more complicated maneuvers.
>War Clerics
Would be distributed evenly across the battlefield to boost morale and provide support for the troops using their god's favor.
>Paladins of Conquest
They wouldn't even be on the battlefield except in extreme circumstances, instead they would form the internal police of the empire, quelling rebellions and keeping the peace at all costs.
Blake Hall
>finally conquer the world
>have a massive army of the best soldiers anyone has ever seen, of every race and class imaginable
>they're all bloodthirsty as hell and pissed that the war is over
>there's only one thing left to do to keep this empire from splitting itself in half out of ambition and bloodlust
>we declare war on heaven and hell, siding only with the war gods and determined to slaughter every angel, demon, and god that would bring about peace
Brandon King
Shouldn't the fighters be at the front to take arrows tot heir shield and armor then have the barbarians come in second, either from behind the fighters or the sides to start chopping away while a more defense focused center holds the line.
Jace Walker
I'll admit there is a bit of bias in my thinking, that bias being that I've never cared for the Barbarian class all that much so who gives a shit if they die, am I right?
Zachary Reed
I'm personally not a fan of characters having grand goals that would force the rest of the party to tag along without then actually wanting to. Full campaign-length goals. In your case I would prefer the player to have a less grandiose goal. But if every party member is up for a "I must unite my people and rape the world" campaign I'm all in!
Hunter Rodriguez
Well, if the center of your army routs, you're in trouble.
Zachary James
When did artists forget how falconers hold birds? I've seen it accurately depicted on the Bayeux tapestry, yet people with access to fucking google images can't spend 30 seconds to find out how it works.
Pic related, that's how it's actually done.
Wyatt Campbell
>Hetalia
That really takes me back
Christian Foster
Me and a friend are playing characters that resemble OP's currently. I play a Greygore Boomhowler ripoff and he basically plays mage Griffith without the homoerotical subtext Do yourself a favor and make sure everyone wanna tag along before doing so. Our plans are constantly delayed by our Muh Barbarian Dragonborn Dumb-Roh-Daaaah that wants to do lolrandom shit and our "I love playing RPG vidyas" thief. They wanna do murderhobo stuff and we gotta refrain hard in order not to ruin their fun. Unless you play with people you don't care about, then absolutely do it because planning world domination is amazeballs
Levi Nguyen
Yay, but tbf that's very similar to the character I'm playing right now.
Blake Brooks
I had a variant necromancer wizard I made for 5e that replaced undead minions with human recruits. It was made to be exactly identical to a minion-mancer just with the fluff changed for balance reasons so it couldn't do anything a wizard couldn't do on the daily anyways.
It seemed cool especially when it started using greater "undead" (when necromancer normally gets create undead) to promote recruits to lieutenants and elites.
Unfortunately, standard necromancer only allows for huge armies of weak recruits instead of having more and more elites. But the class seemed fun to play if you could crunch some of the dice rolling down quicker for the army.
I'll post the off when I'm off mobile.