Mike Mearls Happy Fun Hour: The Warlord

[smbakeresq]

Anyone who played a video game can tell you that the holy trinity is tank, healer, and damage. If the Cleric is literally the only actually effective healer in the game, it is an absolutely essential class for every single party. The whole point of the Warlord was to make the Cleric non-essential, or in 5E, allow Clerics to spec as anything but a healer without screwing over the party.

The tank, or defender, was a concept built around damage prevention and target redirections. If the Warlord did that, it would just be identical to the fighter. There are also dozens of situations, situations which are encountered frequently, in which damage absolutely cannot be avoided and no amount of buffing damage will make up for or prevent those situations.

Also, any number of monster abilities can render a PC inoperative in a single action and if there is only one class in the game that can reverse or prevent that-- then the party absolutely MUST have that class and any other class invented that is supposed to be an alternative but has absolutely no way of reversing these effects or restoring HP may as well not exist. It isn't an alternative at all-- it is simply and flatly a trap for inexperienced players who don't know better.

So whether you like it or not, whatever the Warlord does, it must be able to be a support class option that can do all of the essential support options that a Cleric or Bard can do. Of course, it doesn't need to have the turn undead ability or offensive spell-casting abilities of the cleric nor the illusion magic or superior skills of the Bard.

You don't need to play a video game for that, its been around in D&D way before video games were a thing. Video games took the idea from D&D and its ilk.

Otherwise you are along the right path. It should never be a replacement for a dedicated cleric. Bards are the 5th wheel type class that can cover for another class partially, Warlords should be along that rail but with a more (much more) martial bent.

 

[smbakeresq]

No bards, ardents or shamans?

Your table must've really liked what the warlord brought.

Older group that has been playing D&D since basic. Bards yes, but ardents and shamans no, they just didn't hook anyone. The pacifist cleric we had was a pacifist cleric of Asmodeus who healed you on the theory if you stayed alive long enough eventually you would be corrupted, its was just a matter of time.

 

[Tony Vargas]

That's my idea, is that no class should be as good a healer as the cleric options. None, its should be their thing.

In 5e, the cleric optimized for healing presumably still edges out the Bard/Druid/Pally similarly optimized, sure. But not by such a margin that the standard-issue versions can't stand in for eachother.

Rather like how the Fighter is meant to have the 'best at fighting' (with weapons, before magic) crown, but having Barbarians & Paladins in your party instead of fighters (and a Warlock instead of an Archer) will hardly cause you to lose every combat, or even any combat you wouldn't have lost with the fighters just as badly.

It should never be a replacement for a dedicated cleric. Bards are the 5th wheel type class that can cover for another class partially,

Bards were that, in 3.x and earlier. Bards in 4e were full-function 'leaders' and Bards in 5e didn't back off from that at all, but, like the Cleric & Druid, were significantly powered up. They can stand in well enough for Cleric as a party's sole support-contributor - the party may have an easier time in social challenges, and a harder time taking on undead, but it's not like going bard instead of cleric when you have no one else to fall back on for support would be suicide. (I know, it's not like the Empowered DM can't block even the most determined suicide attempts, either.)

 

[cbwjm]

Nonsense. Druids & Paladins have been healing since 0e, Rangers since 1e, Bards since 2e, they could all use WCL in 3e, and they all heal in 5e.

The Band-Aid Cleric's niche-protection stayed functional right through the TSR era, because the others just couldn't keep up with the healing needs of a party the way a cleric could, particularly at lower levels (only the cleric & paladin could heal at 1st level, and the paladin just a few points, while a cleric with good WIS could cast CLW three times). Since 3.0, the cleric has been marginally better at healing, but there have been many alternatives that could shoulder that burden in its stead, should no one wish to play the Cleric (or, in 3.x, if the Cleric insisted on going all CoDzilla on the campaign).

Bards from 1e (I assume that access to druid spells meant access to healing), skipping 2e, and then back to healing from 3e onwards.

I don't know how much the warlord needs to heal, its inspiring word was there because it was a member of the leader role and they all pretty much had their own version of healing word. I think it should have some healing, not sure it needs as much as the cleric. As is, we'll see how much Mike Mearls puts in. He did say that he wanted the subclass to have healing.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Bards from 1e (I assume that access to druid spells meant access to healing)

At 2nd level spells, which the 1e Ranger and Bard didn't get until relatively high level.

I don't know how much the warlord needs to heal, its inspiring word was there because it was a member of the leader role

Since 4e, everyone has been able to self heal pretty fast (in 4e everyone had second wind), so it's established that you don't need magic to heal, even instantly, even in 5e (fighters still have 2nd wind, PDKs do instant, non-magical, healing). So there's no reason to take healing away from Warlords. Similarly, healing remains critical to support an adventuring party, so every reason to keep it.

Rather, in 5e, support has expanded and gotten less formal, and support characters uniformly gained in versatility and power that, in 4e, would have trampled on other roles.

. I think it should have some healing, not sure it needs as much as the cleric. As is, we'll see how much Mike Mearls puts in. He did say that he wanted the subclass to have healing.

He's using the EK as a template, so likely less healing than the ranger. (1/3rd caster vs 1/2)

 

[chunkosauruswrex]

Was anyone watching the stream or do we need to wait for youtube

 

[Kinematics]

I just finished watching it. Very interesting.

Here's the link to the twitch replay: https://www.twitch.tv/videos/238420670

Anyway, it felt like he was pulling ideas from my initial idea writeup on page 4, but he took it in slightly different directions. He seemed to take more inspiration from Final Fantasy Tactics (which is certainly a good source). I can write up a summary for continued discussion.

 

[Kinematics]

Three general categories of utility/power:

Inspiring/Insightful Heal
Can heal or boost damage
Overhealing becomes temporary hit points
Does not do condition removal (eg: no Lesser Restoration equivalent)
Spread dice across tactical focus (see notes on dice)
Applies only to area of Tactical Focus

Tactical Smarts
Add your Int bonus to weapon damage rolls

Cunning Plan
Tactical Focus (TF) – Choose four 5'x5' squares that you can see within 100'. Each must share a side with one other. That set of squares is your tactical focus. You can change this area once per turn. (method not specified) Grows with level.

Allies must be able to hear you to gain specified benefits.

Cantrip-like abilities
Use these as part of an attack action (don't want to use bonus action, doesn't want to interfere with two-weapon fighting). Only one active at a time?

• Enemies can't make opportunity attacks (OA) allies moving out of the Tactical Focus area.
• Hitting an enemy in the TF area can be moved 5'. (no saving throw)
• Ambush: As a reaction (by the Warlord) when an enemy enters a TF square, you/allies may move half your speed. Does not use allies' reaction.
• As part of move, can swap positions in TF area using 10' of movement.

Spell-like abilities
Once per battle, lasts for one round. Maybe reactions?

• Get Down! – Characters can move out of an AOE. (exact distance you can move not specified; not guaranteed that you can leave AOE area)
• Call Down Death – Bonus on damage against targets in TF area.
• Control effects: Force movement, charm someone, etc.
• Spot Weakness: Drop AC, or give accuracy
• Negate Cover (not full cover)
• Defensive Formation: Allies gain AC bonus while in TF area.

~~~

As far as dice, he converted the spell pool of the Eldritch Knight into an abstract pool of dice that could be used per long rest, to 'fuel' powers. Most likely going to be mainly directed at the healing/damage section. The exact usage is not defined, but the table should give a guide to how much can be pushed into that ability.

Level	Uses	Dice
3	2	2d10
4	3	2d10
5	3	2d10
6	3	2d10
7	5	3d10
8	5	3d10
9	5	3d10
10	6	3d10
11	6	3d10
12	6	3d10
13	6	5d10
14	6	5d10
15	6	5d10
16	6	5d10
17	6	5d10
18	6	5d10
19	6	7d10
20	6	7d10

 

[Yaarel]

The cleric is inappropriate for some settings, and inappropriate for some players.

Healing is a fundamental aspect of the D&D game.

I strongly oppose any cleric monopoly over healing.

There should be as many classes that heal, as there are classes that deal damage.

 

[Yaarel]

I support classes that heal: Bard, Druid, Paladin, Cleric, and Warlord.