D&D 5E Why is There No Warlord Equivalent in 5E?

[UngeheuerLich]

I would argue the 1e Fighting Man was closer to a Warlord than to a 5e Fighter. They grew to be leaders of mundane men and commanded cohorts. As domain building and underlings fell from favour, the Fighter lost all that leading ability, leaving only 'I swing my sword' behind. The Warlord is just a return to those roots, but this time synergizing with the other PCs.

Instead of having a Warlord class itself, I wouldn't mind the Fighter being improved and fleshed out by more Warlord traits as part of their base class features. A Fighter would not longer be seen as just a town guard or a random soldier, they would be Sergeants and Captains and could make use of their commanding presence and military education in social situations. Reclaim the old status of Lord!

Sorry that I did not answer that. That is what I wish for.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

What if you want to be a player for once


People literally keep saying and have said in this thread that it is a fighter subclass.

I have gone through the first 13 pages of this thread and did not read a single post, that said: "the warlord should jsut be a fighter subclass". So can you point to one of those posts?

 

[TwoSix]

Seems kind of OP at least at lower levels.

Which really seems par for course. Warlord fans want to be able to cause the damage of a barbarian/fighter/ranger/paladin while healing like a cleric, while having high cha and/or int for skills, while buffing party initiative, attacks rolls and positioning allies. All in the 3-4 rounds of combat a typical encounter lasts.

When you don't have spells, that seems like a pretty fair ask. That's no more than what a paladin is providing, after all.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

What if you want to be a player for once

Then convince your DM. If you can’t sell it to someone you know personally, then you have no chance of convincing anyone else.

 

[Shardstone]

I too vote for turning the Fighter into a Warlord.

 

[Minigiant]

I have gone through the first 13 pages of this thread and did not read a single post, that said: "the warlord should jsut be a fighter subclass". So can you point to one of those posts?

First page
Post #7

 

[UngeheuerLich]

When you don't have spells, that seems like a pretty fair ask. That's no more than what a paladin is providing, after all.

The paladin provides 5hp per long rest...

 

[UngeheuerLich]

First page
Post #7

Nope. No mention of subclass. Tray again.

 

[Clint_L]

Warlords were a niche class in 4e (sorry, but you know it's true) and they were expressly designed to work with that system, with its emphasis on role over class. 5e is designed on the idea that each class is significantly self-contained. I'm having trouble conceptualizing a class that goes a lot further than the battle master does as a leader/support role, while still being good autonomously. And I don't see much point in trying to come up with a class that doesn't work within 5e design principles.

 

[TwoSix]

The paladin provides 5hp per long rest...

I was speaking more holistically, not about 1st level specifically.

That being said, paladin is a little weak at 1st level for my taste. Although it's not like 1st level balance is actually important, anyway.