Mike Mearls Happy Fun Hour: The Warlord

[cbwjm]

The ‘lazy lord’ is a salient favorite of the fanbase, is mechanically interesting, and probably makes a great subclass. The lazy lord is more like a coach. As someone who ‘leads from behind’, the lazy lord is a vivid archetype. Moreso than the other warlord subclasses, the lazy lord is especially the ‘tactician’.

Even so, I wouldn't use a specific way people built a warlord as a design consideration. If they can still build a warlord in that same manner, that's fine, but I wouldn't use that as a basis for a subclass.

 

[Yaarel]

Because it helps to distinguish between nonphysical hit points and physical hit points, I do the following.

All hit points from Constitution are physical. All other hit points, especially from class, are nonphysical. It is impossible to reduce physical hit points unless nonphysical hit points are at zero, and the character unable to effectively defend themselves because of fatigue and sloppiness.

(It works even better if characters start off using the Constitution *score* for hit points at level 1. This makes less fragile low level characters. But most characters have a moderately high Constitution anyway, generally a +2 toward physical hit points.)

 

[Yaarel]

Even so, I wouldn't use a specific way people built a warlord as a design consideration. If they can still build a warlord in that same manner, that's fine, but I wouldn't use that as a basis for a subclass.

Out of curiosity, why not?

It seems to me, the way players build a warlord evidences the desire of the customer. The goal is to make a product that satisfies the desire.

 

[smbakeresq]

Remathilis is correct, using 5e framework a warlord would be built off the Paladin chassis in a nonmagical/nondevine way. Paladin is sort of a warlord with inspiring healer granting THP, save bonuses, Aura of Life, etc.

I still think 5e should use HD more to heal, even with spells. This makes a larger hit die more important then just the roll for HP and some out of combat healing, the side effect would make Durable feat more valuable. Since activating HD to heal is an untapped source, this could be used for Warlords. Its also limited, which is good.

From the old 4e, I always greatly preferred Bravura, especially with Brash Strike and such, risking something to get something.

 

[Yaarel]

Remathilis is correct, using 5e framework a warlord would be built off the Paladin chassis in a nonmagical/nondevine way. Paladin is sort of a warlord with inspiring healer granting THP, save bonuses, Aura of Life, etc.

Heh, if a nonmagical paladin became the chassis for a warlord, then it would actually better justify the *paladin* as deserving its own class.

So, warlord or tactician, the ‘neutral’ paladin? (True neutral, true good, true evil, lawful neutral, chaotic neutral.)

It is thinkable because the 5e paladin inspires by means of *ethics* (alignment) rather than by means of religion. So, there is conceptual space for nonmagical inspiration.

 

[Obryn]

Further, unlike all the other classes released so far, there isn't a non-4e version of the class to look at for a guide on how to mimic without the ADEU structure.

Not quite true. 13A has the Commander class, which is another solid chassis to start from - and arguably a better one, since 13A doesn't have an emphasis on tactical combat.

 

[mellored]

A cleric, beyond healing hp, provides status-removal (lesser/greater restoration), information (divination, commune), transportation (word of recall, wind walk), even resurrection (raise dead, revivify). How does a warlord even begin to compete with those features "nonmagically"?

Status removal -> Prevent status in the first place. (reroll a failed save).
Information -> skills
transportation -> bonus to overland travel.
resurrection -> Prevent death in the first place. (THP, bonus AC).

Also, they tend to be more offensive support than clerics. (bonus to-hit, damage, attacks, and probably spells too).
Closer to a twin-haste spamming support sorcerer than a cleric. Clerics should keep their niche as best healer.


But yes, it's a new idea that doesn't have decades of people refining it.
Though you still find plenty of aruments over weather the barbarian should be a fighter sub-class. Or what a ranger is supposed to do.

For me, he looks a lot more like a non-magical/non-divine paladin, but that's another topic.

More or less. Butnot as focused on defense.
Or a non-magical bard.
Or a non-magical ranger. (the boy scout/nature guide kind, not the hunter/sharpshooter kind).

Probably all of them, depending on the sub-class.

 

[Yaarel]

I see modern police officers as a kind of ‘paladin’. So, a nonmagical paladin doesnt bother me.

Plus, the reallife paladins of Charles the Great, seem more like D&D warlords.

 

[Jester David]

A survey can ask the question, How important is the warlord class to you? And then compare the results of the other questions according to those who have a strong interest.

If the warlord fan base is split on any topic, an archetype can be build for each preference.

Right... but that's favouring a disproportionately small percentage of the fanbase. There are almost as many new fans of D&D as old, and of the old fans most probably were indifferent to the warlord.
Why make a class and then purposely cater it towards a small minority?

Isn't the best design to make the class as popular with as broad an audience as possible so the most people will play it? What's the point of making content that the majority of the fanbase is not interested in?

The ‘lazy lord’ is a salient favorite of the fanbase, is mechanically interesting, and probably makes a great subclass. The lazy lord is more like a coach. As someone who ‘leads from behind’, the lazy lord is a vivid archetype. Moreso than the other warlord subclasses, the lazy lord is especially the ‘tactician’.

But, of course, the lazy lord or "princess warlord" is a fan build that doesn't appear in any books. So making it a major basis of the basis of the class feels a little odd.
Given the majority of D&D fans don't ever visit the forums, it stands to reason the majority of warlord fans will have no idea what the lazylord is.

(It was also popular because it focused on breaking the warlord, by making the secondary stat the primary one granting bonuses higher than normal making it unusually strong. But it was also a late edition build. A noteworthy thread on the subject being in 2010 and also dipping into bard.)

Status removal -> Prevent status in the first place. (reroll a failed save).
[...]
resurrection -> Prevent death in the first place. (THP, bonus AC).

Right, but it's not going to negate them. Even with a cleric or a bard at the table, a character can still die or be turned to stone. Sometimes the dice are just cold.

The whole point of lesser restoration and greater restoration and raise dead is getting the character back after something bad happens, and the warlord simply cannot replicate those effects. They'll never have full symmetry with a cleric/bard /druid / sorcerer/ warlock that is specced to be the "healer".

So... why try and fit into that design space? The warlord is a square peg and the 5e leader role is a round hole, and it's doing a disservice to the squareness of the peg to shave down its sides and make it less square just to cram it into that hole. Let it embrace its squareness.

It feels a little like trying to make a wizard a tank. Sure, you can get it to work a lot of the time, and it can hold its own under ideal circumstances but it will never be remotely as effective as even a half-assed fighter.
Seems more effective to focus on making the warlord something else than a replacement cleric for an edition that doesn't really need more replacement clerics.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Not quite true. 13A has the Commander class, which is another solid chassis to start from - and arguably a better one, since 13A doesn't have an emphasis on tactical combat.

I've played one. It's a very focused design, but it could inspire a litterally military sub-class, and definitely provides some possible mechanics, in particular the way the abilities are use-limited. Instead of recharging or cooling down, you build up to them as the Battle progresses....