The Warlord, about it's past present and future, pitfalls and solutions. (Please calling all warlord players)

[Garthanos]

The healing aspect of the Warlord while certainly there wasnt really its true forte or focus central to the Warlord class is its ability as an enabler for the team, including creating extra opportunities for allies and enhancing and creating team coordinated maneuvers.

 

[Blackwarder]

Gibberish... that isnt the warlord class you are nit picking a name rank and there could be higher level extensions of the Warlord which does it differently. But I am holding skepticism on your claims over all purely because you seem rather clueless about the class.

[/SARCASM]Rubbish... Just because I don't like what you wrote and dont agree to what you said I'll be rude and abrasive and question your knowledge of the subject matter instead of engaging in a civilized discourse simply because I'm always right and those who see it otherwise are always wrong...[/SARCASM OFF]

Warder

 

[Garthanos]

[/SARCASM]Rubbish... Just because I don't like what you wrote [/SARCASM OFF]

Warder

Im an astronaut the moon is made of blue cheese ... trust me.

OK sorry most of the post wasn't actually irrational but sure had a low confidence start.

 

[Garthanos]

Actually I think the Cleric (the heavily armored spell casting healer with a mace?) is the class that has the least representation in myth/legend and fantasy fiction - even the Turpin some claim the Cleric was based on didnt have miracles associated with him.

 

[MarkB]

I'm a great fan of the warlord, and for me the core of the class is "I help you be more awesome". The class works well as a healer, and the one I play in 4e is built to maximise that aspect, but I don't think it's essential to include that side.

What the class should be doing is granting extra tactical opportunities to his allies, helping to deny such opportunities to his enemies, and mitigating the effects of enemy attacks.

I'd like to see options to grant allies extra attacks, to make enemies vulnerable to allies' attacks, to boost allies' defenses and saving throws, and to help allies gain positional advantage on the battlefield, all whilst being on the front line in combat.

 

[Garthanos]

Thematically: Needs to be -

1) A cool-headed warrior who leads from the front, with poise in the face of all manner of adversity.
2) A tactician that can tactically change the scope of battle in real time.
3) A strategic magician who can dictate the terms of a fight before the enemy even knows they are in one.
4) A bastion of courage who instills hope and bulwarks morale when normal men fail and demoralize their side.
5) Someone who knows wish buttons to push to provoke surrender and has the mental acumen to draw up terms of surrender and make the other side understand they are lucky to have those terms and wise to accept them.

Resource-wise: Needs to be able to -

1) Heal morale damage.
2) Prevent, or at least buff resistance to, fear effects.
3) Improve the overall action economy of his side; immediate actions allowing ally attacks or strategic advance, withdraw, or maneuvering.
4) Have skill in warfare based non-combat resolution; parlays, treaties, strategic use of troops (such as recon teams). This needs to have overlap here with other general knowledges and general parlance. Perception and spatial awareness is likely key here as well. The ability to buff others in his areas of expertise; or allow them advantage in their own wouldn't be the worst idea.

I like this take on it... one of the things i think is NEXT operates in BIG ways that are in keeping with the Warlord ... bolstering the action economy is a biggy and in general his abilities had a real multiplicative effect, I hear the Marshal was inadequate because it exactly wasnt - the Warlord actually followed through on its potential and brought out an archetype and enhanced the team in ways that hadnt been done before.

(And not just fear bolstering his allies vs any attack would be appropriate by appropriate timed forewarning)

 

[Roland55]

As for myself, the warlord can work as a bit of a litmus test. It basically needs 3 things:

(1) Exist. It's one of the key classes of 4e, and essential to my vision of modern D&D
(2) Help its allies in a very direct fashion - more than just auras.
(3) Heal.

Pretty much, missing any of these is a (further) indicator I'm not that interested in Next as a whole because it's not what I want from a new edition of D&D.

-O

"...one of the key classes of 4E."

That's good enough for me.

 

[tuxgeo]

There are many good suggestions in this thread already, so there's not much I can add to it; but I'll try anyway.
I'm going to start by paraphrasing the suggestions of [MENTION=6696971]Manbearcat[/MENTION], because his is the best post so far:
The Warlord should lead from the front (or at least some Warlords should, though maybe not the lazy Warlords); influence the scope of battle; improve preparation for contingencies; instill hope; Heal morale damage; defend against fear effects; Improve the action economy; effect advantageous negotiation.

Generally, I think the Warlord should give the effect of improved tactics, though it might not be necessary to spell out how in each case: so, for example, the Warlord has ways to grant (combat) advantage, even if only once per encounter, but it might not be clear exactly what happens when he does so; or, for another example, the Warlord can insert allies into flanking position, though how he does it may not be clear; or he can extract allies from surrounded conditions, again with the means unclear; or he can augment the strength or effectiveness of an allied attack, or help to remove a condition, or bolster allied defenses, but we don't need to know exactly how he does any of those, because his tactical expertise must be fairly abstract to apply broadly enough.

Such things are the essence of the concept of the "leader" role that 4E systematized; and for that reason I think the Warlord class (perhaps by a different name?) should still be a class in 5E Next.

However, if that class is going to get a different name, what should the name be? Neither "Provoker" nor "Convoker" will work; "Cohort" simply means battle-comrade; "Proconsul" is a political/diplomatic position; "Veteran" needs to be available to all classes, and to unclassed NPCs; "Marshall" is a higher position, dealing more with strategy than with tactics; "Ensign" is naval and commissioned, not land-based; "Sparkplug" captures the spirit but refers to technology that didn't exist in medieval times; and "Coordinator" has too many syllables (5).
"Hotspur?" "Goader?" "Dean?" "Valiant?"

Better suggestions than those might help. . . .

 

[I'm A Banana]

It seems really odd to me to hang your opinion of an entire game based on whether or not some dude can scream HPs back at you. In either direction. I mean, everyone's got their thing, so it's not a problem, it just seems odd to me. Like, "I hate this one Wizard spell, and thus it all sucks."

I get wanting a non-clerical healing option. Next already has a feat that lets anyone cast cure wounds. I get wanting a non-magical healing option. Next already has the "healer specialty" that allows that. I get enjoying the "military commander" archetype. I imagine that would fit well in Next's manuever system (or elsewhere). I get liking HPs as abstract measures of luck and chance -- Next EXPLICITLY says that's what they are (I've got some issues with them being that, personally, but I get the other side of that coin).

So if the warlord is an archetype you tap by saying "Okay, inspiring tactical leader-type warrior who helps the whole team perform better!" I don't think scream-heals is a necessary part of that. Anything from temp HP to defense bonuses to "you can fight below 0 hp" kinds of mechanics can all represent that, and can functionally do the same mechanical thing that healing does (but with a better psychological exploit and fictional match).

If the warlord is, to you, only "You instantly gain back lost HP without magic," then I imagine Next could support that (it's really just a math trick)...but I'm less convinced that it won't be in some Advanced-level module that talks about how different kinds of healing and defense can be used to identical mechanical effect but different play-style considerations. I mean, maybe...they're staying silent on the Warlord, but I imagine they've been thinking a lot about it internally. But to me, it seems weird to reduce the warlord to that purely mechanical exhibition of what encouragement could look like. Personally.

 

[Garthanos]

Inspirational healing has many presentation forms...
Oh my god no you cant, gushing streems of tears, dont you dare die on me we need you!
Get the hell back on your feet soldier what do you think this is a party you are a big damn hero...
Trust in god and you will be redeemed (yup to me its the best representation of in combat clerical healing)