D&D 5E I don't actually get the opposition for the warlord... or rather the opposition to the concept.

El Mahdi said:

[/SIZE][/FONT]First off, SCAG does not count. No matter how much you may want it to be, it is not Core. If somebody has to buy an accessory/supplement other than the PHB, it is not Core. I do not have it. I can’t reference it. I won’t reference it. It’s not core, so it’s irrelevant.

Click to expand...

Then we'll just have to disagree on that point.

Inducing a Saving throw. Yes, Bardic Inspiration can give a bonus to saving throws, but most effects that characters would be able to use it for – specifically ongoing effects – only allow a save “at the end of the character’s turn.” Bardic Inspiration also can’t help with an immediate save for an immediate effect; unless the Bard’s player was prescient enough to give a pep talk in the last ten minutes. Exploits like Inspiring War Cry induce an immediate Saving throw, just like a real leader giving a sudden cry of warning or exhortation at the moment of danger.

Click to expand...

That's a reasonable thing to add.

Battlefield manipulation/movement of enemies. All 5E has is Pushing Attack (basically just 3E’s Bull Rush), and a knockdown in the form of Trip Attack. It’s missing things like: Pin the Foe (movement denial), Denying Smite (attack denial), Own the Battlefield (tactical forced movement), Warlord’s Gambit (baiting an enemy into a trap), and Break the Tempo (tactically intercept an enemy and disrupt their move).

Click to expand...

Grapple is movement denial available to anyone.
I don't know what denying smite is, but giving someone disadvantage to attack happens.

There's no martial forced movement of enemies. There are magical versions though (command, dissonant whispers). Not sure there should be really.

There is no warlords gambit. Closest thing is reckless attack. That would defiantly be cool to have. "enemies have advantage on attacks against you, allies have advantage on attacks against the enemy".

I remember somewhere there was an ability to jump into the middle of an enemies movement. Maybe in the Mystic UA. Though i think most warlord interrupts should not transfer. It adds to turn order confusion, and tended to be a bit OP.

Coordinate movement between allies. Yes, 5E has maneuvers that let you grant movement to an ally; but it doesn’t have exploits like Guide the Charge or Rabbits and Wolves that grant movement and allow coordination of that movement (simultaneous and tactically).

Click to expand...

You can use maneuvering attack multiple times in a turn, letting everyone move.

There's no way to get someone to move+attack as a reaction. Not sure there should be. Giving out too many actions is what made warlord a bit too strong.

Demoralize/Incite enemies. There are no exploits such as Stir the Hornet’s Nest in 5E. While the 4E version just gives an attack and damage bonus, a 5E version should give the enemy disadvantage for being irrationally angry that affects not just combat, but also checks and saves – the real narrative spirit of the exploit. Another one is Force Retreat – which mechanically is just another forced movement exploit, but in 5E should be an enemy Morale check or an actual retreat (not just forced movement of a few squares).

Click to expand...

Martial Frightened already happens. Which prevents movement towards you, and disadvantage to ability checks.

Save penalty might be too strong. It's pretty rare and limited.

And these are just from the 4E PH1, and only hits the high points. Since I’m being a stickler for Core, I’ll stick to just that one book to keep it fair.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the list.

I also won’t count against your claim, things that could/should be addressed in 5E that aren’t addressed in 4E, such as:
-Better/more-appropriate mechanics to represent/model the larger effects of actual Leadership.
-Maneuvers that affect Initiative.
-A real ability to gain tactical/strategic information (unlike the abysmally weak/virtually useless Know Your Enemy).
-Something that actually reflects being a Student of War (rather than only providing proficiency with one type of artisan’s tools).
-The ability to affect travel/marching speeds.
-Command functions for the Mass Battles supplement.
etc...etc...etc...


The Warlord is far from all there in 5E.

Click to expand...

I agree there's room for a new stuff and more flavor defined mechanics.

Like a battle plan, that gives a bonus at the start of the encounter.

Caution: If one of you is not surprised, no one is surprised.
Reposition: When you roll initiative, everyone can move X'
Ready: +X to initiative.
Bulwark: When you roll initiative, everyone takes the dodge action.
Battle Plan: Come up with an order of initiative. Swap initiative around to go in that order.
ect...

Click to expand...

mellored said:

...I agree there's room for a new stuff and more flavor defined mechanics.

Like a battle plan, that gives a bonus at the start of the encounter...{etc.}

Click to expand...

I disagree on some of your points, but you have some nice ideas in your post also.

Going over these threads and the multitude of ideas that have been floated throughout, I've realized some things.

One, there are a lot of ideas that are real stinkers.

Two, there are some nuggets of pure gold in there also.

I really hope WotC is paying attention to these threads. If one pays attention, these discussions are an awesome resource towards a workable 5E Warlord - whatever form it might take. Honestly, it's one reason why mine isn't done yet. These ongoing discussions keep revealing things I hadn't considered, and have continued to evolve and refine my approach to it - but it's definitely getting closer to being finished.

More and more, I'm leaning toward the personal opinion that an actual, dedicated Warlord class may not be the answer, but I'm making one anyways. Having the aspects of the Warlord spread out among other classes - diluted, as you've described it - isn't necessarily a bad thing as long as those aspects are accessible in a way that can build the Warlords that people want. (Warlords [plural] because there are many ways to view and play a Warlord.) But, there are those that want an actual, dedicated Warlord class; so I'm making that too.

For my games, I'll go with what I call the Warlord Suite (designated below), and probably not use the actual Warlord Class. But the class will be there for those that want it in their games.

This is how I'm approaching it currently:

A full Warlord Class. - Pretty much a straight port of the 4E class, interpreted into 5E mechanics. That doesn't mean every Power/Exploit, but it does mean making sure to include all the major mechanical/narrative expressions (you were correct that there is a lot of redundancy in the 4E Warlord Exploits).

This is about 75% done. What's taking the lion's share of time is writing/converting the maneuvers. Once this is done, the following parts should go quite quickly.


The Warlord Suite

Leadership Feats. - Rewriting/reinterpreting Inspiring Leader Feat (maybe - I haven't made up my mind on this yet), and writing/adding a Charismatic Leader Feat, a Wise Leader Feat (perhaps named Strategic Leader), and an Intelligent Leader Feat (perhaps named Tactical Leader).

A Revised Battle Master (Fighter Archetype). - Rewriting the Rally maneuver (and a few others), and adding maneuvers for the missing Warlord elements.

A Revised Valor Bard. - Adding in-combat Inspirational Hit Point Recovery, and adding some tactical/strategic maneuvers.

A new Rogue archetype: The Bravura. - A tactical/strategic, and somewhat leader, Rogue archetype. Mechanically, a bit different from the 4E concept; but conceptually and narratively on target (at least I hope so). I'm playing off the root of the name, and taking a little direction from Game of Thrones. The word Bravura means, among other things, highly skilled but flashy - a showy, intricate Master. One of the roots of Bravura is Bravo - a barbarous, thuggish, rogue - an unscrupulous swashbuckler. So, a Bravura is a step above a Swashbuckler - a fencer and master swordsmen, but also steeped in the philosophy and study of tactics and strategy. For me, a perfect example of a Bravura is Syrio Forel - the Waterdancer, First Sword of Braavos that trained Arya Stark and bought her time to escape the Lannisters. It will definitely keep the "high risk, high reward" philosophy of the 4E build.

A new Wizard tradition/Sorcerer origin: The War Mage. - A tactical/strategic arcane leader, specializing in spells usable on the battlefield as well as commanding military forces.

A revised War Domain Cleric. - Adding in some tactical/strategic and leader elements to the War Domain.

And lastly:

Prestige Class: The Consul. - Advanced leadership aspects that any class can take (if they meet the prerequisites), but especially add to a Battle Master, Bravura, War Mage or War Priest character. Requires training at some kind of academy/university* or personal tutoring by another Consul (in my campaign world, a modified Forgotten Realms, this takes place at The Pandidakterion of Arrabar). Acquiring the prestige class means sponsorship by and acceptance into the College of Consuls. One benefit of the prestige class is access to the learning institution's libraries/archives, and discourse/advice with/from other members of the College and its leaders/mentors (research, aiding knowledge checks, etc).


I think this will bring all of the parts of the Warlord into 5E, and fix the accessibility issues, along with enabling the concepts/builds that even 4E wasn't very good at. Some builds would require some multi-classing, but not the Frankenstein approach one would need right now - and it would be multiclassing that makes sense.

So, depending on choice of Primary Ability Score/Feat Choice, there will be Inspirational Leaders, Charismatic Leaders, Wise Leaders, and Intelligent Leaders.

Then there's class choice:

For a straight Martial Warlord - The Battle Master.
For a Bard Warlord - The Valor Bard.
For a Rogue Warlord - The Bravura.
For a Wizard/Sorceror Warlord - The War Mage.
For a Cleric Warlord - The War Priest.

Then the Prestige Version - The Consul.

And then:
-A Barbarian Warlord - multiclass with the Battle Master, or take the Consul Prestige Class.
-A Paladin Warlord - multiclass with the Battle Master or the War Priest, or take the Consul Prestige Class.-
-A Druid Warlord - multiclass with the War Priest, or take the Consul Prestige Class.
-A Monk Warlord - multiclass with the Battle Master, War Priest or War Mage - or take the Consul Prestige Class.
-A Warlock Warlord - multiclass with the War Mage, War Priest or Battle Master - or take the Consul Prestige Class.
-An Eldritch Knight Warlord - multiclass with the War Mage, or take the Consul Prestige Class.
-A Champion Warlord - take the Consul Prestige Class.
-Or even combinations never seen or heard of before - a Warlock Valor Bard, a Barbarian War Priest...

Etc.-Etc.-Etc.

El Mahdi said:

More and more, I'm leaning toward the personal opinion that an actual, dedicated Warlord class may not be the answer, but I'm making one anyways. Having the aspects of the Warlord spread out among other classes - diluted, as you've described it - isn't necessarily a bad thing as long as those aspects are accessible in a way that can build the Warlords that people want. (Warlords [plural] because there are many ways to view and play a Warlord.) But, there are those that want an actual, dedicated Warlord class; so I'm making that too.

Click to expand...

I would like to see more warlord fans in the testing phase. Although there is some bargaining, either way, I look forward to seeing your draft.

El Mahdi said:

More and more, I'm leaning toward the personal opinion that an actual, dedicated Warlord class may not be the answer, but I'm making one anyways. Having the aspects of the Warlord spread out among other classes - diluted, as you've described it - isn't necessarily a bad thing as long as those aspects are accessible in a way that can build the Warlords that people want. (Warlords [plural] because there are many ways to view and play a Warlord.) But, there are those that want an actual, dedicated Warlord class; so I'm making that too.

Read more: http://www.enworld.org/forum/showth...pposition-to-the-concept/page35#ixzz3rtCmqxNl

Click to expand...

I think that one important aspect of this is, people who want to build Warlords can do so in a timely manner. If I have to build a nine level character just to get the basic Warlord features, that's a non-starter. It has to be available by 3rd level, same as any other sub-class. It's a specialization, so, it's understandable, and probably a good thing, that it's not completely available at 1st level. But, forcing players to play past about 7th to get the basics is, IMO, a non-starter.

mellored said:

I havn't seen any reroll ability of any kind in 5e.

Click to expand...

In 5e that mechanic was displaced by Advantage and Disadvantage.

In fact you could do the 5E warlord with just 5 abilities:

1. Attack Action that grants (Dis)Advantage to a target of your choice on their next roll, after level 5 you can apply it to two targets because you get two attacks. If used on attack roll grants a damage buff.
2. Bonus Action that heals by spending HD (possibly with a CHA bonus to smooth the dice out), After level 3, it also removes conditions.
3. Encounter limited resource that allows them to move targets around the battle. Use as an attack rider.
4. Encounter Limited resource that triggers Opportunity Attacks from team mates (possibly using the same pool as above, uses INT as bonus damage)
5. Temporary HP buffer. Triggered on Rest. Because the pseudo-damage-reduction powers were replaced with resistance to damage and you have actual healing to use instead.

That's really all the warlord would do in 5e. All the other fiddly bits are just fiddly bits and rules artifacts of 4e. Even the scaling is obvious, just add the proficiency bonus where you need a variable.

Those are categories or examples of things the Warlord should have, not an exhaustive list of everything it should have. You're not talking just fiddly bits and system artifacts, but real variety, tactical depth, flexibility, customizability and meaningful choices being eliminated. It'd be like giving each caster only 5 first level spells on their list on the theory that, hey, you have slots, they'll scale, that's all you need.

We need more than 2% of the Warlord.