D&D 5E Evaluating the warlord-y Fighter

[Zalabim]

I disagree. Only having magical healing leaves room for people to decide for themselves. They can add martial healing to their games, or not. There's a choice. Which is important. That's the whole damn point.

You're welcome to disagree, but you'd be wrong. If all healing must be magical, that is a side. If that is the default, that side has been picked. Non-magical healing is ubiquitous and effective. All PCs have Hit Dice, and all characters are restored to full HP after a long rest. The default rules say that HP is not (just) meat. That's the default side. If you're in a group that wants to make healing more difficult, to make HP more like meat, then there's optional rules to that effect. As your group implements optional rules, it'd be well advised to disallow an optional maneuver (or whatever) that doesn't mesh with those optional rules. Optional rules aren't just for a different flavor. They change how the game is played.

I don't see why this is relevant. Magic users have long been able to restore hit points. By that logic the wizard should also get cure wounds because the artificer was a leader in 4e and that's now a subclass.

The wizard's artificer subclass can heal, actually. It's relevant because if the devs are working on a commander class to call back on the Marshal, the Warlord, and the Fighting-Man, then it needs to have the option to restore HP. Just an option. Non-magical healing is already a standard thing. There's no way to say the commander can't have any.

 

[Raith5]

No edition has ever been tailored to fit everyone's needs so what's the problem here?

You basically have a few people trying to turn a feature into a fault.

Sure but there is some design space left in 5e for a more wide ranging warlord archetype. I am not saying that every group would have to play or want to play it at their table, but aside from not enabling out of turn spam, 5e seems to have a lot of road to play with here.

Indeed, the whole modularity of and house ruling culture of 5e has enabled a far more open minded game. It also probably helps ensure that thread took on the tone of helping with home brew suggestions and ideas and did not denigrate into an edition war 10 pages ago!

 

[I'm A Banana]

You believe hp are not meat. Others would disagree. And that is the problem. The rules should NOT pick sides in that debate.

The core rules shouldn't. And they don't. You can play an inspirational leader just fine without magic or "luck healing." The Battle Master is solid.

But what's stopping a potential module from embracing the idea of narrative HP at least as regards this one inspirational fighter build (or whatever) that they present that has healing?

It doesn't even really require that big of an overhaul. Just introduce an option for battle masters to use their superiority dice to heal hp (perhaps as a bonus action on their turn). There's nothing about that which would break 5e.

 

[Jester David]

The core rules shouldn't. And they don't. You can play an inspirational leader just fine without magic or "luck healing." The Battle Master is solid.

But what's stopping a potential module from embracing the idea of narrative HP at least as regards this one inspirational fighter build (or whatever) that they present that has healing?

It doesn't even really require that big of an overhaul. Just introduce an option for battle masters to use their superiority dice to heal hp (perhaps as a bonus action on their turn). There's nothing about that which would break 5e.

A narrative hp rules module would be fine. It'd be a good idea actually, since there's no reason the bare or paladin or Cha cleric couldn't also give a rousing speech and heal people.

 

[Jester David]

You're welcome to disagree, but you'd be wrong. If all healing must be magical, that is a side. If that is the default, that side has been picked. Non-magical healing is ubiquitous and effective. All PCs have Hit Dice, and all characters are restored to full HP after a long rest. The default rules say that HP is not (just) meat. That's the default side. If you're in a group that wants to make healing more difficult, to make HP more like meat, then there's optional rules to that effect. As your group implements optional rules, it'd be well advised to disallow an optional maneuver (or whatever) that doesn't mesh with those optional rules. Optional rules aren't just for a different flavor. They change how the game is played.

Kinda. The rules go for faster healing because that's what the silent majority who doesn't care about meat/energy wanted. It's neutral in that regard, being designed that way for other reasons. Healing itself is left vague and somewhere in the middle, as you can make a solid case for both meat/energy.

But class powers don't really touch hit dice, leaving that purposely modular so people can adjust how they want. Class powers are largely separate from other healing to allow people flexibility. Classes and design that goes away from that in either direction is a poor idea. So I oppose warlord healing as much as I would a class feature that assumed slow meat healing.

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

That doesn't work as well in 5e, since there are no "surges" that would wear out. Characters will either always be able to benefit, or the healing would be limited some other way.

Just to touch on one point, Hit Dice are effectively healing surges. My warlord I'm working allows others to use their hit dice (with a bonus) with Rallying Cry.

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

A narrative hp rules module would be fine. It'd be a good idea actually, since there's no reason the bare or paladin or Cha cleric couldn't also give a rousing speech and heal people.

I disagree with anyone being able to do it. Martial abilities can and should still be unique to classes. Why can't the bard just take another action like the fighter's action surge? The inspiring leader feat assumes something more than just a high charisma to grant temp hit points. Martial doesn't mean anyone can do it if they roll high enough.

 

[I'm A Banana]

A narrative hp rules module would be fine. It'd be a good idea actually, since there's no reason the bare or paladin or Cha cleric couldn't also give a rousing speech and heal people.

Sure, they can multiclass into Battle Master like anyone else. When the Cleric or Paladin inspire people otherwise, it's usually more than just personal charisma at work.

 

[Staffan]

Just to touch on one point, Hit Dice are effectively healing surges. My warlord I'm working allows others to use their hit dice (with a bonus) with Rallying Cry.

Kind of, but not entirely. Healing surges also limited most other forms of healing - for example, the cleric's Healing Word didn't heal anything in and of itself, it just let the target spend a healing surge. 5e has a lot of healing that's separate from hit dice.

 

[Pickles JG]

More importantly: how not? Relegating all actual healing to magic IS picking a side, that is, "HP are meat." Not doing so is also picking a side, that HP are not (just) meat. I don't think it's possible for a game to remain absolutely agnostic about it. Insisting that the Warlord must deal only in mitigation and THP is, essentially, insisting that healing must mean the actual closure of wounds or restoration of lost élan vital--so someone doing that is still taking a side, even if they don't see it that way.

The natural healing rate is so fast that it supports the hp as fatigue interpretation. So WotC have picked both sides

However while they have all sorts of "meatier" resting variants in the dmg they have not provided similar suggestions fo r none magical HP recovery, despite it being something that exists in the RW.