D&D 5E Yes, No, Warlord

ZickZak said:

Right. Thanks.

So people who don't wanna build the warlord from the classes we have want what really? What are the unique options warlord would bring? (If you care enough to answer)
Thanks

Click to expand...

That's something else you could find quite a lot of up-thread and in the first 'How many fans want a 5e Warlord?' thread. Very quickly, so as not to bore everyone who's heard it many times: the things the Warlord could do in it's one previous incarnation, which had 6 'builds,' plus two oddball variations (an 'archer' that was official, and an action-granting specialist that fans devised), and 339 distinct 'exploits' (maneuvers). That could include, broadly: restore hps and/or grant temps or other buffs via Inspiration, grant buffs and/or transfer actions via tactics, use strategies to literally & figuratively out-maneuver enemies, and use combat maneuvers of his own when not directly aiding allies, possibly with tactical or inspiration 'riders' affecting allies and/or enemies.

Plus anything that might fit the concept that 5e might be better-able to handle than prior editions - 5e has such an open, concept-centric design style that could be quite a lot, too.

For more detail, feel free to peruse this thread, 'How many fans want a 5e Warlord?' , and/or the Warlording the Fighter thread mentioned above.

ZickZak said:

How exactly do they heal then if it isnt a spell?

Click to expand...

Good question.

Wounds don't have to disappear for their effect to be mitigated, and not all damage is physical.

Wounds themselves aren't usually what kill, it's the resultant loss of homeostasis (primarily, inability to maintain blood pressure/circulation). If a wound stops bleeding, its effect is largely nullified (which is why First Aid - Self Aid/Buddy Care in the military - saves lives and even gets people back into the fight).

Wounds are not only cuts. They can also be severe hematomas (bruises) or just intense pain (which can also be life-threatening - pain leading to hypovolemic shock and loss of homeostasis), among other things. But this specificity is not part of the game.

The D&D definition of Hit Points is "a combination of physical and mental durability, the will to live, and luck."

The mechanics of the game do not go into a granular level of what kind of damage is taken. Any mechanics that do are optional and outside the conceits of the game. D&D Hit Points are abstract - and they were defined that way for a reason.

However, for verisimilitude purposes, Inspirational Hit Point recovery can be explained as stimulating a sympathetic nervous system response. That response triggers adrenaline, norepinephrine, and serotonin.

Adrenaline and norepinephrine raise blood pressure, heart rate, and increase release of glucose to the muscles (physical durability).

Seratonin immediately raises mood, promotes blood clotting, and also assists with raising blood pressure (mental durability, will to live, and physical durability).

In other words, Inspirational Hit Point Recovery gives your mind and body a reason to fight, and augments functions of the body to regain homeostasis long enough - possibly - for the body to maintain homeostasis after the spike in neurotransmitters has worn off.


Warlord Inspirational Hit Point Recovery is consistent with the games definition of Hit Points, and consistent with the logic behind Hit Point recovery due to Short and Long Rests. (If Inspirational Hit Point Recovery doesn't affect wounds, how then does taking a nap affect wounds?)

Warlord Inspirational Hit Point Recovery is also consistent with fictional tropes. D&D is a system replete with fictional tropes hard baked into the system. Inspirational Recovery is no less or more rational than the tropes already incorporated into the game.

And, Warlord Inspirational Hit Point Recovery is even consistent with some real-world examples.

Conclusion: There is no rational reason for Inspirational Hit Point Recovery to not be in the game. It is a rational reason for personal choice on whether to use it or not - but not to keep it out of the game for others.

mellored said:

They could still have plenty of indirect healing (THP, DR, +to AC) to extend the day.

Spending a hit die to get someone off the ground seemed like the minimal amount of HP healing possible. (since THP, DR, or +to AC doesn't help when your unconscious).


What about spend a hit die and gain +Cha as THP?

Click to expand...

You can't use Hit Dice if at 0 HP.

According to the rules, barring magical healing, the only way to recover from 0 HP is to make three successful death saving throws (stabilizing yourself - your body reasserting homeostasis), have someone stabilize you with a DC 10 Wisdom (Medicine) check, or by using a Healers Kit - even then, you can't use your Hit Dice until after 1d4 hours, at which time you regain 1 HP.

A Healer (Healer Feat) with a Healing Kit can immediately bring a character to 1 HP - at which point, if they take a Short Rest, they can use their Hit Dice.


Using Hit Dice for a Warlord Inspiration Hit Point Recovery mechanic runs into the same problem as using Temporary Hit Points.

El Mahdi said:

You can't use Hit Dice if at 0 HP.

According to the rules, barring magical healing, the only way to recover from 0 HP is to make three successful death saving throws (stabilizing yourself - your body reasserting homeostasis), have someone stabilize you with a DC 10 Wisdom (Medicine) check, or by using a Healers Kit - even then, you can't use your Hit Dice until after 1d4 hours, at which time you regain 1 HP.

A Healer (Healer Feat) with a Healing Kit can immediately bring a character to 1 HP - at which point, if they take a Short Rest, they can use their Hit Dice.


Using Hit Dice for a Warlord Inspiration Hit Point Recovery mechanic runs into the same problem as using Temporary Hit Points.

Click to expand...

I would consider that a feature, not a bug. If you were to make inspirational healing grant real HPs (rather than using the--IMO--superior THP mechanic), preventing it from working on 0 HP creatures is a decent compromise. So leaving the rules as-is works out.

El Mahdi said:

Good question.

Wounds...

Click to expand...

Thanks.
-
THP, defenses, maneuvers, tactics, inspiration - we have that all, but transferring actions is something I don't see happening for balance reasons. If we're talking about allowing someone to attack outside of their turn.
So none of that is something unique I would look for in a new class. I understand the healing but healing by magic or words I don't see a reason to differ unless you play non-magic campaign for some reason.
It just seems it's all about the sheer amount of maneuvers in the 4e, aka combat. And combat here is way simpler especially talking about interrupts like radiant armor, combined fire and what not.

ChrisCarlson said:

Why does the warlord need to be able to revive someone who has been beaten unconscious? I've yet to see a decent argument in defense of this that didn't just boil down to, 'cuz previous'.

Click to expand...

ChrisCarlson said:

why is it "essential" that a 5e warlord be able to do so? The claim seems based on precedent, yet the real precedent people keep touting, to give the warlord pre-4e legacy and validity, is a class that could not do it?

Click to expand...

ChrisCarlson said:

Saying that the battlemaster isn't a real warlord is no different than saying the illusionist isn't a real illusionist because illusionist used to be a class. So what? Not in 5e it ain't.

Click to expand...

I think the difference between the warlord and the illusionist (or assassin) is pretty straightforward. I've not seen any illusionist fan starting a thread saying that they think the 5e illusionist sub-class of wizard doesn't do the job (likewise for assassins and rogues). Whereas I've seen plenty of warlord fans stating that they think the battlemaster sub-class of fighter doesn't do the job.

And that's the only difference that's required. D&D is a leisure activity. People play it for fun. If there is an option that they think would be fun, that has been part of the game in the past, and whose presence would be quite consistent with the rest of the game's framework, then that is sufficient reason for, in principle, introducing that option. (In practice there are development and publishing costs, and also marketing issues. But those don't bear on the questions of principled design.)

When it comes to the warlord, part of the rationale of the class is that it can provide healing - including in-combat, bring-back-allies-from-the-brink-of-death healing - more or less on a par with a cleric or other magical healer. Given that including such an option in 5e would be quite consistent with the rest of the game's framework, that people want it is a sufficient in-principle reason for including it.

If people wanted stand-alone illusionist or assassins, that would settle that question too. But I've not seen any evidence that they do.

mellored said:

How about this as a compromise on healing...


Level 2: Inspiring word: As a bonus action, an ally can spend a hit die.

Click to expand...

As [MENTION=59506]El Mahdi[/MENTION] has stated, this is underpowered. (Because HD in 5e don't play the same functional role as surges in 4e.)

ZickZak said:

How exactly do they heal then if it isnt a spell?

Click to expand...

ZickZak said:

With the Second Wind the individual uses its own stamina. I struggle to imagine how something that isn't magical heals someone else mid-fight because you tell them to.

Click to expand...

I've talked about this in some of the other threads.

If you think of human endeavour and commitment in very individualist terms, then the warlord will seem silly. In Conan-esque fantasy, for instance, only weak and secondary characters (NPCs, in roleplaying terms) benefit from inspirational leadership. The true heroes carry all their capabilities within themselves.

If you think of human endeavour and commitment in more relational terms, then the warlord will seem essential. In Tolkien-esque fantasy, for instance, the protagonists are not fully self-contained. They have needs - for reassurance, or inspiration - that only others can provide. Applying this perspective to warlord healing, the beneficiary of that healing can't draw upon reserves of stamina until his/her friend and ally calls upon him/her to do so.

(Not far upthread [MENTION=59506]El Mahdi[/MENTION] gives a more bio-medico-psyhcological account of inspirational healing. Personally I prefer to think of it in literary/archetypical terms, but that's just me.)

I don't think anyone's saying Warlord isn't or wouldn't be a "good" concept. It works in 4e and the Marshall possibly worked in 3.5e.
The issue is Why do we need a full new class when we can already do all warlord stuff?

With a new class come new options for multiclassing (which IMO is very essential in this game to build a fun character and so far our group didn't find anything we couldn't make, except psionic classes) and balance issues.

On the side note: my main is an assassin type character. I took 3 levels of assassin and the rest monk. It's an archer. Monks do quite poorly in range or at least worse than any other martial class, but it's perfect and I won't make a thread just because I think I need assassin to have 20 levels and assassinate every round for 60 damage. It is easy to build as it is, from ranger, monk, fighter, whatever.

Same goes with Warlord: Bard, BattleMaster, Paladin & Cleric are all great choices to MC. Action transfering won't happen and non-magical healing I bet you could crunch the 1d4 bonus action heal to make it non-magical, possibly include adding target's HDs. The cantrip to "ress" people is on cleric's list.

Remathilis said:

Question: does warlord healing HAVE to be akin to healing word (at distance, bonus action) or can it be like cure wounds (action, adjacent target, maybe more potent?)

The latter might allow more leeway in description, which might be more palatable for non-fans of shouty-healing...

Click to expand...

I would be okay if it was more akin to Cure Wounds and adjacent. And maybe an ability that allowed the warlord and other players to draw upon their HD healing in-combat.

I voted no. I like the idea mechanically, but the flavor appears to be incompatible with 5e. Namely, the demand that the class needs to be able to heal like a cleric or inspire like a bard, but it absolutely can't be magical in nature. I suspect that's why half the arguments still seem to involve trying to leverage the existing 'mundane' healing mechanics (HD, healer feat, inspring leader) with no one being satisfied.

It doesn't seem worth it to revive the Martial power source in all of its old glory for one class. If I were to take a stab at a homebrew, I would just outright declare the thing magic, but vaguely so (tapping into the energy that surrounds battlefields or some such). From there I'd figure out a class mechanic that wasn't spell slot based, although I think it would be pretty cool as a half-caster.

New attempt to find compromise #241


Level 1:
Tactical Superiority: You gain a 1d4 superiority die which you can spend on a variety of maneuvers. You regain this die at the end of your turn. The size of the die and number of dice increase according to the level chart. You can spend more then 1 die on a maneuver.
*Tactical Adjustment: As a reaction, you can expend dice to add or subtract the die from an attack roll of a creature who is within 5'*your Int modifier, who can also see and hear you. If you roll multiple dice, only add or subtract the highest.
*Warlord Strike: When you hit an enemy, you can expend your dice deal extra damage equal to the total roll.


Level 2: Select one of the following.
*Field Medic: You gain the healer feat. You can expend superiority dice to use it as a bonus action. The creature regains additional hit points equal to the die roll.
*Inspiring Words: You gain the inspirational leader feat. You can expend superiority dice to use it as an action. Creature gain additional temporary hit points equal to the die roll.


Thoughts?