D&D 5E I'm Not Sure We Need a Warlord - Please put down that rotten egg.

[MENTION=6801216]ChrisCarlson[/MENTION] - This horse has been well and truly beaten to death. EVERY single one of your "don't tell my PC what to do" things EXIST IN 5e. Battle masters can force you to take extra movement. They can force you to make extra attacks. Paladins force you to take saving throw bonuses. Bards force you to regain HP faster. Masterminds force you to have advantage on attacks.

So, why would it be problematic to have any or all of those things in a Warlord character? The only reason I can see for your "no warlords" schtick is because it's from 4e. Because, the thing is, almost everything that warlords HAD in 4e EXISTS in 5e. Just not in a single class.

So, you hate 5e that much?

It is okay to want a warlord or not want a warlord. 5E is working, and moving on.

Pickles III said:

More than a bard casting Heroism?

Click to expand...

Explain how casting the spell heroism is a fundamental functionality of the bard class?

Hussar said:

Nice. Subtle. I complain that there are no mechanics supporting the trope and now I'm just a bad role-player.

So, it's not only that warlord players are all power gaming munchkins, but, we're incapable of role playing as well. :/

Click to expand...

Nice. Subtle. I admit that I've played (and enjoyed playing) multiple warlords in 4e and now I'm a power gaming munchkin incapable of role playing. :/

Hussar said:

[MENTION=6801216]ChrisCarlson[/MENTION]EVERY single one of your "don't tell my PC what to do" things EXIST IN 5e.

Click to expand...

To the extent some posters here demand of this mythical all-in-one-kitchen-sink warlord class? Show me.

Hussar said:

Battle masters can force you to take extra movement. They can force you to make extra attacks.

Click to expand...

No they can't. And even if they could it doesn't represent the core functionality of the class. Your BM can always do something else instead for the other 90% of their day.

Hussar said:

Paladins force you to take saving throw bonuses.

Click to expand...

No they don't. But even if they did, would your character even know a passive effect like that was occurring? And if you did, and didn't like it, can't you just go stand over there?

Hussar said:

Bards force you to regain HP faster.

Click to expand...

No they don't. And how is this even an argument? Please consider what you are saying here. Baffling.

Hussar said:

Masterminds force you to have advantage on attacks.

Click to expand...

Do they? Are you sure?

Hussar said:

So, why would it be problematic to have any or all of those things in a Warlord character? The only reason I can see for your "no warlords" schtick is because it's from 4e. Because, the thing is, almost everything that warlords HAD in 4e EXISTS in 5e. Just not in a single class.

Click to expand...

Edition warring? And not even very adeptly done.

But to your larger point. Maybe the devs know something you don't. Maybe they split it up for a reason. Maybe we don't have an all-in-one-kitchen-sink warlord for a reason. <shrug> Seems like it was done on purpose, no? Wonder why that is?...

Hussar said:

So, you hate 5e that much?

Click to expand...

Trolling? Really? Lame. But I suppose inevitable from someone without a valid argument.

Hussar said:

[MENTION=6801216]ChrisCarlson[/Because, the thing is, almost everything that warlords HAD in 4e EXISTS in 5e. Just not in a single class

Click to expand...

Probably a reason for that.

Hussar said:

[MENTION=6801216]ChrisCarlson[/MENTION] - This horse has been well and truly beaten to death. EVERY single one of your "don't tell my PC what to do" things EXIST IN 5e. Battle masters can force you to take extra movement. They can force you to make extra attacks. Paladins force you to take saving throw bonuses. Bards force you to regain HP faster. Masterminds force you to have advantage on attacks.

So, why would it be problematic to have any or all of those things in a Warlord character? The only reason I can see for your "no warlords" schtick is because it's from 4e. Because, the thing is, almost everything that warlords HAD in 4e EXISTS in 5e. Just not in a single class.

So, you hate 5e that much?

Click to expand...

Yeah, it's a worldview thing Hussar. The content of the responses by some of the people involved demonstrate this...and it's notoriously hard to change a person's worldview.

cmad1977 said:

Probably a reason for that.

Click to expand...

Maybe. But, you can't have it both ways. You can't on one hand tell Warlord fans that they already have everything they need to make a warlord in 5e, simply use the multi classing rules, and then on the other hand complain that the things that make something a warlord are so over powered and bad that they shouldn't be in the game.

Which is it? Can I make an approximate warlord in 5e or not? And, if I can, then obviously it's not a problem for all these elements to exist in a single character. Thus, creating a class devoted to those things wouldn't be a problem. It's simply streamlining a process and cutting away cruft that shouldn't be added onto the character (why is my warlord singing? why is my warlord a better swordsman than the paladin or ranger? why is my warlord casting spells? why does my warlord have a divine oath? etc)

I started this thread to try to identify the niche that warlords can fill. I'd say that the following niches aren't really necessary:

• Forced movement - just not a real thing in 5e
• In combat healing - it was never really necessary for a warlord to be a healer anyway, IMO
• Status mitigation - so few monsters have ongoing effects, that it's just not that needed to have a class focused on dealing with it.

However, I do see several niches that a putative warlord can work with:

• Action economy management - adding actions/attacks. This already exists in the game and can be easily balanced. Both Battlemasters and Beastmaster Rangers provide the mechanics - give up an attack to allow an ally to make an attack with some bonus.
• Out of turn actions - this is a big one. Being able to allow another character to do something out of turn is a primary focus of a warlord class
• Buffing the party - easy one to balance. If clerics/druids can cast Guidance/Resistance at will and grant a d4 to skills and saves, then another class doing the same thing, or perhaps granting advantage, isn't breaking anything.

Those three elements are enough to hang a class around. I'd probably go with a rogue chassis, replacing sneak attack which increases every other level, with a small suite of at will effects which increase, probably on a similar curve. The two subclasses focus on Int or Cha respectively and the Int warlord focuses on adjusting action economy while the Cha warlord focuses more on buffing.

I'll have to spend some time writing this up.

Hussar said:

Maybe. But, you can't have it both ways.

Click to expand...

I would return the warning. You can't on one hand tell people you like 5e and want a 5e-ized warlord, and on the other hand expect a faithful-to-4e-ported warlord.

Hussar said:

Which is it? Can I make an approximate warlord in 5e or not?

Click to expand...

Approximate to what?

I remember when I believed that the game devs have well-considered reasons to make the decisions they make.

Ah, my naive childhood days!