D&D 5E 5e Warlord Demand Poll

[Hussar]

The point is that you've been doing this for TWO YEARS and it hasn't done anything. Because WotC isn't going to pay attention to a few dozen posters on a message board.
You've done this for two years and there's no warlord coming for the fall book. Do you really think doing it for two more is going to have any more of an impact?

My point is that you can either be slightly happy or miserable. You can look through the 3PP options, find the one you like least, and make do. Get that partial happy. Or you can bitch to strangers online and get irate.
By continuing this conversation you've effectively said that you'd rather be unhappy. That your happiness and playing a character you want is less important than arguing online.

If you *really* want a warlord class then you're just going to have to do something different. Because this tactic hasn't worked so far.

But... I was told in no uncertain terms that I was absolutely wrong that people were trying to shut down the conversation and telling me to shut up. Funny that...

As far as my "happiness", I've pointed out several times that I am actually pretty hopeful that we will see a warlord in the fairly near future. Next year or so. They keep baby stepping towards it. First we got the Battlemaster and the PDK and Mastermind to test bed the mechanics. Snuck those right into the game without so much as a whimper. Then, recently, we have a full blown 4e style leader with the Mystic Avatar subclass. And, lo and behold, not so much as a twinge or whimper from the fandom. Well received apparently.

So, now, we have all the mechanics, and people have no problems with them being non-magical, and, we have a proof of concept that we can have leader inspired classes in 5e without anyone losing their collective poop.

Maybe one more step - another magical "leader" class, then the Big Book of Crunch in the fall, and then, by this time next year, the Myrmidon, or whatever name they finally settle on, will make an appearance.

 

[Corwin]

The thing is, and this was the point I was making to [MENTION=37579]Jester David[/MENTION], saying that we should be content with 3pp is kinda pointless.

I'd just like to commend you for being content with 3PP yourself, and not unreasonably demanding some "official" witch hunter from WotC. I wish more people were like you.

 

[tuxgeo]

Well, yeah. Exactly. < snip >
They don't need to make a Monster Manual 2 or a Fiend Folio just because people need higher level opponents and more bad guys. They can leave that to the Tomb of Beasts.

I'm sure you meant "Tome of Beasts."
I'm also sure Baur wanted to present all of those beasts in a pre-tomb state, so the PCs could have the glory and excitement of putting them into their tombs.

 

[Hussar]

I'd just like to commend you for being content with 3PP yourself, and not unreasonably demanding some "official" witch hunter from WotC. I wish more people were like you.

Dude, I have no problems with 3pp. None whatsoever. Good grief, I haven't run a WotC published adventure in... well... ever. I've always played 3pp.

But, the argument that we should be content with 3pp is just so annoying. It's just another way of telling fans to shut up and go away. "Well, if you want it, design it and put in on DM's Guild" is the new toy for those who want to gate keeper the hobby. And it's the perfect argument. You don't actually have to address the issue at all.

"You don't like X, then just write it yourself and put it on DM's Guild". Easy, facile, pointless rhetoric that serves no purpose and is just trolling.

Hey, why not do it yourself if you are so certain that a DM's Guild Warlord will solve the problem? I mean, it works both ways. You keep posting in these threads what other people should do. Why not do it yourself? Then, whenever someone asks for a warlord, you can just post a link to your work on DM's Guild and tell them that they should be satisfied with your work.

Why is it okay to tell me to write it myself and shut up, but the reverse doesn't work? Why not?

 

[Corwin]

But, the argument that we should be content with 3pp is just so annoying.

But my point was that you are not like some posters here on this forum, who immediately invalidate anything that isn't WotC published. Who shun 3pp, or even mock the recommendations for them, as worse than having nothing at all.

 

[Jester David]

I'm sure you meant "Tome of Beasts."
I'm also sure Baur wanted to present all of those beasts in a pre-tomb state, so the PCs could have the glory and excitement of putting them into their tombs.

I've been writing "tome" and mentally correcting it into "Tomb" for my Yawning Portal review, my brain just did that automatically.

 

[Jester David]

But... I was told in no uncertain terms that I was absolutely wrong that people were trying to shut down the conversation and telling me to shut up. Funny that…

I'm not telling you to shut up. I'm asking you to consider if this conversation is worth having. If finding or working on your own version of the warlord might be a more effective use of your time and energy...

As far as my "happiness", I've pointed out several times that I am actually pretty hopeful that we will see a warlord in the fairly near future. Next year or so. They keep baby stepping towards it.

I doubt that very, very, very much.

First we got the Battlemaster and the PDK and Mastermind to test bed the mechanics. Snuck those right into the game without so much as a whimper.

It could equally be argued those are filling the need for the class, not testing it's mechanics. I'm pretty sure that WotC released the PDK, said to themselves that was that, and didn't look back. They checked off the warlord and moved onto psionics.
They don't release so many new options that they can afford to use some as "tests".

Also… why the eff would they test them in a publish book rather than directly test them with an UA article dedicated to the class?
Plus, after so many years of D&D, I don't think they need to test mechanics anymore. At least not for something like the warlord, which likely uses pretty comfortably used mechanics. They need to test balance and the concept more, to see how people feel about the execution.

Then, recently, we have a full blown 4e style leader with the Mystic Avatar subclass. And, lo and behold, not so much as a twinge or whimper from the fandom. Well received apparently.

I don't think the hang-up about the warlord is that it was a 4e style leader. (I also don't see how the Order of the Avatar is "4e style" more than the other healer types we've seen.) It has more than a little in common with the 3e ardent.
We also don't know the overall reaction to the avatar, just that from the few dozen people here. From my glance, arguably, that order is another potential warlord replacement/dip…

I really don't think having a 4e style leader is remotely the hang-up you think it is. The edition wars are over. 5e is doing gangbusters and almost no one gives a crap about 4e anymore. There are just too many D&D fans around now that just weren't involved in the edition wars and have no side in that conflict.
That said, I don't think people want a leader "class" though. Subclasses are fine, but classes don't need one role or another. Characters have roles, not classes.

So, now, we have all the mechanics, and people have no problems with them being non-magical, and, we have a proof of concept that we can have leader inspired classes in 5e without anyone losing their collective poop.

Maybe one more step - another magical "leader" class, then the Big Book of Crunch in the fall, and then, by this time next year, the Myrmidon, or whatever name they finally settle on, will make an appearance.

Do they *really* need to warm people up to the warlord with incremental design? They're radically changing the psion into the mystic and they just dumped it on us with no real warning.... Why wouldn't they do the same for the warlord?

Also they're not going to put out two big books of player crunch published in subsequent years. We received zero new classes in both 2016 and 2017 and zero class options in 2016. Why would we get a whole new classes in 2017 and 2018?
With all the possible books they could do (high level monsters, environmental/locations, planes, magic items, campaign variants, even more monsters, epic heroes, other settings) why on earth would they release another book of class crunch?

At the very best - which is still unlikely - they might release more classes in 2019 and you could get a taste of the "myrmidon" in a Nov or Dec 2018 Unearthed Arcana. But, in all likelihood, we're not going to see more classes after November for multiple years.

Hard truth: the warlord isn't coming. Not in 2017. Not in 2018. Probably not in 2019 either. And at that point we're looking at a version of D&D that will have been around five years: longer than 4e, 3.0, or 3.5. It's hard to imagine what the game might be doing then...

 

[Sacrosanct]

If you've been following me, you probably realize I'm pretty pedantic when it comes to language. Yeah, it's one of my things, and yeah, sometimes I get hung up on it. Therefore, I feel the need to point out that "being content" is not the same as "accepting". They are not synonymous, and if someone says you should accept the reality of something, they are in no way saying you should be content with it. There are things every day that I accept that I'm not content with (traffic, TV programming, my pay check, etc, etc). In the context of D&D, if you're not content with the way something works, they come right out and actually encourage you to make those changes so that you are content. WoTC is not like Disney, which will sue the pants off you for even remotely using anything that resembles their IP, including making your own personal mural of Mickey Mouse in your child's bedroom. WotC is letting us use the IP and gave use the tools and avenues in which to maximize it. And before someone mentions AL, I'll point out a) Do you only play the game in AL, and b) even AL DMs will allow homebrew stuff if they review it and are OK with it. I know this because I've personally seen it. And the AL police did not break down the FLGS doors to arrest them.

But back to the language part. I really wish people would be more careful with their word usage. Intentionally taking people out of context or flat our changing what they've said does not help your position. Like always claiming people are telling you to shut up when no one has actually done that.

 

[Satyrn]

. . . Like always claiming people are telling you to shut up when no one has actually done that.

That's why I've always framed it as "feeling like were being told to shut up." Because it has felt that way at times.

 

[Darkness]

The poll has expired by now, a resolution still isn't in sight, the dead horse's bones have been ground into dust - but bickering still remains.

Good night, everyone.