Mike Mearls Happy Fun Hour: The Warlord

[Tony Vargas]

Too much toe stepping- a magic warlord is just a bard lite for example and takes space away from future bards.

Seems flatly irrelevant in the context of 5e. You've got 1/3rd wizard fighters and 1/3rd fighter wizards as sub-classes. They don't just step on eachother's toes, they stand in the same shoes.

 

[Hussar]

Seems flatly irrelevant in the context of 5e. You've got 1/3rd wizard fighters and 1/3rd fighter wizards as sub-classes. They don't just step on eachother's toes, they stand in the same shoes.

Kinda sorta. Sure there is som overlap but not a lot.

And generally it’s two similar subclasses. Not a subclass acting as a replacement for a base class. IOW an eldritch Knight doesn’t replace a wizard even though they might share spells.

A caster warlord we already have. It’s called a bard. Because the conceptual space of a caster warlord doesn’t really tie into any genre archetypes that bards don’t already cover.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Kinda sorta. Sure there is som overlap but not a lot.

And generally it’s two similar subclasses. Not a subclass acting as a replacement for a base class. IOW an eldritch Knight doesn’t replace a wizard even though they might share spells.

Well, that's all a caster Warlord would reasonably be: some 1/3rd-caster faux-MC martial archetype in an otherwise non-magical class, like an EK.

A caster warlord we already have. It’s called a bard. Because the conceptual space of a caster warlord doesn’t really tie into any genre archetypes that bards don’t already cover.

Bard hasn't really wiggled free of it's old idiom, but if not a Bard, an Artificer, or a War Cleric. There's plenty of full-caster support options already, they're just in no way Warlords.

As far as sub classes go though, while wizards got a bunch in the phb, clerics too for that matter, we’re what under 4 years into the edition and nearly every class has six or more subclasses.

It’s not it takes that long to rack them up. Ten subclasses is only base plus two or three supplements.

10 was Mearls's number. I'm not going to argue the number, just that the Warlord wouldn't have any trouble meeting it.

At least 8 solid sub-classes just in heroic-level 4e, plus a bunch of Paragon Paths, plus fairly obvious 5e-style faux-MC sub-classes. Could have 20.

Would probably be pretty darn good with only 4 or 5. Tactial & Inspiration could be the first two to harken back to the PH1, but I feel like a Bravura and Lazy archetype would be a fun starting place. The Big Damn Hero on one extreme, the sidekick on the other. Contrast.

 

[Hussar]

I feel you are conflating build with archetype. Lazy lord is just a mechanical build not something that can actually be role played. There’s no difference between bravura and lazy. They do identical things, just flavoured slightly differently.

 

[Yunru]

I feel you are conflating build with archetype. Lazy lord is just a mechanical build not something that can actually be role played. There’s no difference between bravura and lazy. They do identical things, just flavoured slightly differently.

Clearly you've never played either.
There's more difference between the two playstyles than there is between the Barbarian and Cleric.

 

[Hussar]

Not really. In one you attack and cause a rider. In the other you give up the attack to cause a rider.

Meh. That’s not enough to build an entire subclass out of. A single subclass can cover both quite well.

Lazy lord isn’t an archetype. It’s just a way you could play any tactical or inspirational warlord.

 

[Lord Twig]

Personally I think the whole non-magic support role is ridiculous. I also think non-magic healing is silly. It's like wanting to be a brain surgeon without surgical tools. "I don't need your science crutch! I can fix his brain with my bare hands and some soothing words!"

Magic is what allows dragons to fly. Magic is not a crutch, it is the science of D&D. It is the physics of Faerun.

Instead of assault rifles, kevlar armor and night vision googles, D&D fighters have magic swords, rings of protection and goggles of night. Instead of calling in air strikes you have flying wizards throwing fireballs. If someone goes down, instead of a medic using modern medicine to stabilize them before calling for an evac, you have a paladin laying on hands.

Don't tell me that instead of a modern medic you can just have your grizzled sergeant yell at you to 'walk it off' and it is just as good.

Non-magic rangers are equally ridiculous. Why wouldn't they use magic? It would be like refusing to use a compass to tell direction "because that's cheating". The ultimate survivors would use every tool at their disposal, and magic is just one of those tools.

Ultimately I would say if you want to run a non-magic game, D&D is not the system you should be using.

 

[Azzy]

Personally I think the whole non-magic support role is ridiculous. I also think non-magic healing is silly. It's like wanting to be a brain surgeon without surgical tools. "I don't need your science crutch! I can fix his brain with my bare hands and some soothing words!"

That's nice.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Magic is what allows dragons to fly. Magic is not a crutch, it is the science of D&D. It is the physics of Faerun.

If you're claiming this, you're actually illustrating why "non-magical" Warlords are completely valid, ironically enough (I mean I assume that wasn't your intention).

How so? Because you're illustrating the difference between "magic" and magic.

Maybe a dragon does fly in D&D because of "magic", but it does not fly because of magic. You cast dispel magic on a dragon, or flies through an anti-magic zone or whatever, and it just keeps on trucking. Is it realistic in a real-world sense? Obviously not, but as you say, the underlying physics of D&D are magical in a sense. Dragons couldn't fly, probably could barely move around IRL, but in it's not because they are casting spells or outwardly using magic in D&D that they can, or even that magic is coursing through their veins (note many other "impossible" things can fly in D&D too) - it's because they can.

Likewise with Warlords in D&D. Yes, maybe there is some underlying "magic" to the D&D world, that, despite not closing the wound, despite not making a beautiful glow, despite not involving an incantation or components or whatever, a Warlord can increase the remaining HP of a character, get them to keep fighting. That is indeed absolutely analogous to the "magic" which means a dragon can fly despite not working with RL laws of aerodynamics and so on (first person to mention bumble bees has to buy us all a beer). But it's very different to the outward facing, obvious magic that a wizard or cleric uses, and somewhat similar to the "magic" that allows a bard to increase how much everyone heals on a short rest, or the Second Wind available to Fighters (which is obvious non-magical healing but arguably "magical" in the sense you are describing).

I mean, re: Mearls, it's always been an issue that, like a number of game designers, and even some writers, even some very successful ones (looking at you, George Lucas), he doesn't really understand his own premises in some cases, and seemingly isn't capable of taking on board explanations from other people (which I find weird but Mearls has consistently shown an inability to even process what people are saying on stuff like this - and it's not uncommon to find people who just can't process certain ideas). This seems to me to be pretty easy stuff.

Even if you really want to be difficult about it you could just allow Warlords to trigger HD usage with massive bonuses and call it an adrenaline surge or something - maybe also let them grant HD on a similar basis. Is that "magical"? Perhaps. But it's not magic.

 

[Pauln6]

That's nice.

I realise that many people struggle with the notion but non magical healing is as much pulling yourself together, summoning an Adrenaline rush, and ignoring the pain of those cuts, bruises, and strains as it is sealing up those wounds permanently.

I view barbarian damage resistance as brawling through the pain and ignoring broken bones rather than skin getting tougher.