Mike Mearls Happy Fun Hour: The Warlord

[FlyingChihuahua]

Its called catering to the homebrew. As DMs develop their world, they fill in their own blanks and change things to fit their idea of how the game should work, and then get really upset when the rules contradict their well-rationed and extensively researched homebrewed setting. This get exasperated with edition changes and suddenly (for example) dwarves can be wizards (which contradicts 7000 years of history in my homebrewed world, including the cause of several major wars). As the rules develop (and move away from the defined lore of the homebrew) the reflexive action is then to wish the game rules were "less flavorful" or "flavored like they were previously" and turn the game towards a toolkit of generic fantasy rules that can be used to assemble their homebrew games rather than contradicting their ideas on races, magic, gods, and a host of other topics..

Kinda off topic from the current discussion, but I do feel like you could do something with the "dwarves suddenly gaining magic" thing. Like maybe the sorcerous dwarves could be in hiding or something like that, because they fear that if their talents were discovered that they would be captured and experimented on.

I dunno, just an idea that maybe doesn't even work in your world because magic just straight up doesn't work there, I'm just trying to say that, within changes, there is opportunity.

 

[Jester David]

And that's ignoring the fact that forums are not even representative of D&D players as a whole.

Agreed.
Right now the majority of D&D players are new. So they have zero affection for the 4e warlord. And, as evidenced by sales, most established D&D players had limited interest in 4e. And, of course, only a minority of 4e fans would have strong feelings regarding the warlord. And of the now small percentage of 4e fans who switched to 5e and liked the warlord, not all will care if they're using an official one or not.

There's probably a disproportionately strong demand for an official warlord on this forum.

Or the fact that Mearls & company have been asked for a Warlord multiple times, or the reason behind the subject of the current Happy Fun Hour.

That assumes he's doing that because of expressed interest.
If so, that means the warlord apparently came after the "giant soul sorcerer", "pact of the Kraken", and "rogue acrobat" in terms of demand.

If Mearls really thought the warlord would be a workable class:
a) He wouldn't have done it in Happy Fun Hour. He'd have done it for Unearthed Arcana.
b) He would have actually done the class in Happy Fun Hour rather than a subclass.


But, again, none of this matters.
Because posters would rather argue about what a theoretical official class could look like rather than make the class they want a reality.
Because they'd rather disagree with how Mearls did the subclass than copy down the rough design, and work it into something they could add to the game.

 

[cbwjm]

Mearls likely is doing the warlord fighter subclass because of expressed interest. I don't know how he chooses which subclass to work on, but it is entirely possible that he waited until after doing the giant soul sorcerer simply because he had no ideas for the warlord or because giant soul sorcerer was more interesting. Only Mearls could really answer that but it is a given that someone tweeted or commented on YouTube asking for the warlord as a fighter subclass.

 

[Yaarel]

The fact is, Mearls seems to be ‘threading the needle’, designing a warlord within the 5e system, in a way that meets the needs of 4e warlord players.

• effective healer (emphasizing preemptive healing before reaching physical wounds)
• granting extra-attacks (not yet present in warlord, but already part of 5e)
• mobilizing allies and hostiles (within tactical focus)
• buffing attacks and defensively (applied thoughtfully within tactical focus)

A nice touch.
• atwills (equating to nonmagical cantrips) allow persistent flavor of tactics



If Mearls can make the warlord tradition work as an archetype on the fighter chassis, that is fine. It becomes the go-to choice for a ‘smart’ fighter.

 

[mellored]

Merls knows warlord fans are not happy with the current warlord options (battlemaster, pdk). He wants the warlord fans to be happy with 5e.

Merls wants to avoid adding class. (Though he seems to have no problem pumping out sub-classes.)

 

[Yaarel]

The 5e innovation of overhealing, is a nice touch. It expresses the flavor of warlord healing.

 

[Yaarel]

Merls wants to avoid adding class. (Though he seems to have no problem pumping out sub-classes.)

Apparently, Mearls feels a subclass can handle the warlord tradition. Later playtesting will confirm if this is so or not.

Mearls created a psionic class and seems to avoid psionic subclasses of other classes, even tho a psionic wizard tradition moreorless equals a 3e psion. A psionic bard or cleric makes a good psychic healer.

In this case, Mearls seems to want psionics to feel *mechanically* different from other mages. So he feels the psion works best as its own class with its own mechanical system. It seems.

But in the case of the warlord, he feels the mechanics for the warlord are normal, thus works fine as a fighter archetype. His brainstorm demonstrates that the mechanics that warlord fans desire, are in fact normal 5e mechanics.

I agree, Mearls genuinely wants 4e fans to feel good about 5e.

 

[cbwjm]

The 5e innovation of overhealing, is a nice touch. It expresses the flavor of warlord healing.

I thought that was a pretty inspired mechanic that highlights the difference between the healing of the warlord and the healing of other classes. I hope the warlord (and other subclasses in the HFH) come to UA and/or makes it into official supplements.

 

[Jester David]

Mearls likely is doing the warlord fighter subclass because of expressed interest. I don't know how he chooses which subclass to work on, but it is entirely possible that he waited until after doing the giant soul sorcerer simply because he had no ideas for the warlord or because giant soul sorcerer was more interesting. Only Mearls could really answer that but it is a given that someone tweeted or commented on YouTube asking for the warlord as a fighter subclass.

Based on his tweets, it does sound like he did the warlord by request. But in the first video, he makes it clear he's taking suggestions. I imagine there were a few fighter requests
I imagine he picked the warlord warlord for much the same reason he's did the "acrobat" for the thief: it's an idea that has a history in the game and has enough "meat" to design abilities quickly (and segues into good discussion for balance) but isn't likely to make the cut for an actual book.

Realistically, if there was a lot more interest.... then wouldn't the warlord video have significantly more views than the earlier ones? They all seem to be around 8k (except the first).

From the intro in the first video, he's designing a subclass for each of the classes as a way of showing how to homebrew for each class and discuss its design. This isn't for a product. This is just him giving an overview of how to homebrew.

 

[Yaarel]

I assume, anything that goes to playtesting, if successful, becomes canon as a book.