Lets design a Warlord for 5th edition

[Zardnaar]

Tell Mike that.

Maybe feats don't count?

Maybe gear doesn't count?

A lot of things don't seem to count in 5e's design principles - afterall, it's all just a starting point, and we're'll going to change it anyway.

Seems I understand 5E design principles better than a few people lol. I know roughly how they scale things, I can see patterns in the spell design and short rest vs daily powers and sustained damage vs nova damage.

You also over rate spells in 5E, cantrips are comparable to martial attacks (which warlord gets) and if they have a healing word ability at level 1 that is better than than the healing word spell (1d8 vs 1d4 and it scales).

You can also find non magical abilities i the MM that would make good options for the WL. A 1/3rd caster WL would get cantrips at level 3. Low level spellcasters are not that great in 5E, 2 or 3 daily spells to cover 6-8 encounters do not go far.

Most classes get a few abilities level l. Healing word X3 and 2 minor abilities is not that bad for level 1. Tactical Warlord int to initiative and damage or damage granting.

It would be funny here if one of the 4E fans makes a warlord so front loaded you can have a better warlord by dipping 1-2 levels onto the battle master than taking more levels in Warlord.At will attack granting level 1 lol, say hi to Bob he is a Warlrod 1/Battlemaster 3+.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Seems I understand 5E design principles better than a few people lol.

Sometimes I think he's intentionally going for that.

You also over rate spells in 5E, cantrips are comparable to martial attacks (which warlord gets)

Everyone gets to hit things with weapons. Cantrips let you hit things with your primary caster stat, ignoring all others, in essence, and they scale rather smoothly, even when MCing, as well as doing a wider range of damage types and secondary effects than weapons. Weapon attack scale with extra attack, which the Warlord shouldn't get (in the chassis, anyway), and which, incidentally, for some reason, MCing borks. I mean, I'm sure they're /meant/ to be comparable, but they are different in a number of ways...

and if they have a healing word ability at level 1 that is better than than the healing word spell

Then you kinda hafta wonder why they'd be designed like that.

Low level spellcasters are not that great in 5E, 2 or 3 daily spells to cover 6-8 encounters do not go far.

Not /that/ many encounters per/day should be going so pear-shaped that support needs to bring out their best resources. So not a huge problem, on that end. (On the other side of the caster spectrum, not every encounter needs to be pwn'd by a fireball, some you can just use cantrips and make popcorn.)

It would be funny here if one of the 4E fans makes a warlord so front loaded you can have a better warlord by dipping 1-2 levels onto the battle master than taking more levels in Warlord.At will attack granting level 1 lol, say hi to Bob he is a Warlrod 1/Battlemaster 3+.

Try thinking outside the 4e box on the topic of action grants sometime. And, for that matter, outside the 3.x MC-optimization box.

 

[TwoSix]

And, for that matter, outside the 3.x MC-optimization box.

Considering Paladin 2 and Warlock 2 are already in the game, I would agree that MC optimization is also not something the devs are keeping in the box.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Considering Paladin 2 and Warlock 2 are already in the game, I would agree that MC optimization is also not something the devs are keeping in the box.

One of the odd impulses I have is to make the Warlord pretty MAD by having different gambits key off different stats in different ways. It'd have the side-effect of making poaching gambits with a level-dip a PitA.

Also on the topic of gambits or maneuvers, they need to be level gated, to avoid the BM front-loading/back-boring problem, but it'd be kinda lame to level-gate them exactly like spell levels using a cleric or warlock or something as a template. My thought was by Tier, so maneuvers would be Apprentice Tier, 'gambits' heroic, etc up to 'Doctrines' at legacy - that does mean that things that functions could be spread over two or three spell levels for a Bard/Cleric/Druid would all fall into one list. :shrug:

 

[Zardnaar]

Sometimes I think he's intentionally going for that.

Everyone gets to hit things with weapons. Cantrips let you hit things with your primary caster stat, ignoring all others, in essence, and they scale rather smoothly, even when MCing, as well as doing a wider range of damage types and secondary effects than weapons. Weapon attack scale with extra attack, which the Warlord shouldn't get (in the chassis, anyway), and which, incidentally, for some reason, MCing borks. I mean, I'm sure they're /meant/ to be comparable, but they are different in a number of ways...

Then you kinda hafta wonder why they'd be designed like that.

Not /that/ many encounters per/day should be going so pear-shaped that support needs to bring out their best resources. So not a huge problem, on that end. (On the other side of the caster spectrum, not every encounter needs to be pwn'd by a fireball, some you can just use cantrips and make popcorn.)

Try thinking outside the 4e box on the topic of action grants sometime. And, for that matter, outside the 3.x MC-optimization box.

And you're barking up the wrong tree if you think cantrips are actually that good. 2d10damage at level 5 is pathetic damage. Its maybe better than using a bow or crossbow that is about it. Fighters buy comparison are dealing between 1d8+6 X2 through to 2d6+4 X2 minimum

I'm also not opposed to a warlord using cantrips via a subclass like the hypothetical 1/3rd caster.

The exception of course is the warlock.

I don't need to think outside the box. 5E doesn't have at weill action granting because its obvious how blatantly stupidly overpowered it would be and the Battlemaster for example is also the best fighter. Rogues exist in 5E, and even without them there are things like hunter rangers.

Having a support class that can double opr triple the damage other support classes can deal is not remotely balanced and as much as you like to falsely claim the designers of 5E do not care about balance they at least tried (they may bhave missed a few things here and there). You can easily look at how damage scales on cantrips, the cleric class (an extra 1d8 at level 8) and the striker classes to realise how out of whack at will attack granting is. There is a reason the Battlemaster can't do it at will. Letting a arlrod borrow a Rogue at will at level 5 (1d8+3d6+4) is a lot betetr than the clerics 1s6+2 or 3 and getting an extra d8 at level 8.

Hell its better than striker classes with daily spell slots using hex and hunters quarry.

If you can't see the problem with that (its basic math) you really need to go an play 4E there nothign more one can really tell you. Its the equivilent of letting CoDzilla from 3.5 into a 4E game. I want to play 4E with you guys some time I want to create my own class, I had this level 6 Druid in 3.5 with natural spell and you should really let me port it into 4E, you just need to think outside the box.

Its not me you have to convince there anyway its Mearls, hell you have to convince him to create the warlord as a new class.

 

[Hussar]

How is your fighter at 5th level doing d8+6 damage? Even with a 20 stat, it's +5, and that's only possible if you played a variant human and dumped both ASI's into Str.

A sword and board fighter with protection style is dealing, probably d8+3 x2 at 5th level. Which is no better than the 2d10 for a cantrip.

You really, REALLY need to stop laser beam focusing on optimized characters when trying to make a warlord [MENTION=6716779]Zardnaar[/MENTION]. That's NOT where the balance point is.

 

[Zardnaar]

How is your fighter at 5th level doing d8+6 damage? Even with a 20 stat, it's +5, and that's only possible if you played a variant human and dumped both ASI's into Str.

A sword and board fighter with protection style is dealing, probably d8+3 x2 at 5th level. Which is no better than the 2d10 for a cantrip.

You really, REALLY need to stop laser beam focusing on optimized characters when trying to make a warlord @Zardnaar. That's NOT where the balance point is.

Its a basic sword and board fighter with 18 strength and the duelist fighting style no feats used and just using the Basic D&D rules and the ASI at level 4.

I do not use min/maxed Rogues either 1d8+4+3d6 is reasonably easy to do at level 5. My min/maxed rouges would have fighter levels and use feats like sentinel.

 

[Tony Vargas]

And you're barking up the wrong tree if you think cantrips are actually that good.

Oh, there not as good DPR (excepting the Warlock, as you say) as extra attack, but without that feature they still scale. No reason for mist warlord sub-classes to have extra attack so their weapon attacks aren't going to be scaling like that...

I don't need to think outside the box. 5E doesn't have at weill action granting because

it doesn't have a lazylord yet. And, seriously, there's plenty of freedom to write up any such thing in a way that is w/in 5es loose tolerances.

Having a support class that can double opr triple the damage other support classes can deal is not remotely -

...I'm sorry to interrupt but there are some 'spirit guardians' calling you...

the designers of 5E do not care about balance they at least tried .

Its not that they don't care, it's that the standard isn't balancing optimized corner cases.
And that balance isn't the primary goal. Realizing concepts and evoking the classic game are higher priority. The Warlord should get by on the former, and balance of the numeric sort you're theorycrafting is antithetical to the latter.

Rather, when 5e gets around to considering balance, it's spotlight balance - and action grants put the recipient in the spotlight as much or more than the grantor.

I want to play 4E with you guys some time I want to create my own class, I had this level 6 Druid in 3.5 with natural spell and you should really let me port it into 4E, you just need to think outside the box.

No worries. You can have a homebrew feat to use implement keyword invokations while 4e wildshaped.
But you'll have to pay your own way to Santa Clara.

 

[Tony Vargas]

How is your fighter at 5th level doing d8+6 damage? Even with a 20 stat, it's +5, and that's only possible if you played a variant human and dumped both ASI's into Str.

Dueling style, obviously. When comparing DPR, the S&B fighter has dueling style & and ASI to STR, when asserting fighters can still 'defend' it has protection style and Sentinel feat, when asserting fighters are OK out of combat he has charlatan background good CHA instead of max STR and the Actor feat, fighters don't have good enough saves? That same ASI went to WIS.

I hope we cleared up any misconceptions, there.

 

[Zardnaar]

Oh, there not as good DPR (excepting the Warlock, as you say) as extra attack, but without that feature they still scale. No reason for mist warlord sub-classes to have extra attack so their weapon attacks aren't going to be scaling like that...

it doesn't have a lazylord yet. And, seriously, there's plenty of freedom to write up any such thing in a way that is w/in 5es loose tolerances.

...I'm sorry to interrupt but there are some 'spirit guardians' calling you...


Its not that they don't care, it's that the standard isn't balancing optimized corner cases.
And that balance isn't the primary goal. Realizing concepts and evoking the classic game are higher priority. The Warlord should get by on the former, and balance of the numeric sort you're theorycrafting is antithetical to the latter.

Rather, when 5e gets around to considering balance, it's spotlight balance - and action grants put the recipient in the spotlight as much or more than the grantor.

No worries. You can have a homebrew feat to use implement keyword invokations while 4e wildshaped.
But you'll have to pay your own way to Santa Clara.

Spirit guardians is daily effect not at will. Its also a level 5 ability.

One can have warlord attacks scale or look at multiple attacks.