D&D 5E Warlording the fighter

[I'm A Banana]

I think that that Guidance spell that I keep spamming makes my druid's skills and the skill checks of the party considerably more effective than anything a fighter could do.

I mean, would it hurt to allow battlemasters a maneuver that grants bonuses to skill checks?

Outside of combat, Help action > the Guidance spell.

"Thanks for the 1d4 when you could've been giving me Advantage."

Guidance has a niche use when you are trying to hit a really high DC or have to roll with a penalty or something, but in general another chance to roll a 20 is so much better than +5-20%.

It wouldn't hurt, but it's pretty redundant, and it's in-character for priests to offer divine assistance when you're doing a thing, while it's in-character for the fighter to say, "I oil up the rogue's leather so it creaks less." It helps with making those character types feel different. When all you need is good luck, your friends give you advice. If what you're doing is nearly hopeless - you pray for success (AND get your buddies to help!).

 

[epithet]

...
It's a sticky issue. For some Warlord fans, the absolutely adamant perspective that Warlords should never have "real" in-battle healing is, essentially, people saying they don't actually want "the Warlord" to exist in their game. [MENTION=31506]ehren37[/MENTION]'s post, while somewhat more nuanced, is essentially that: why should people who don't play Warlords, and particularly un-fans or even anti-fans of the class, get to decide what it can and can't do? But then for other fans, whether or not the Warlord can grant "real," in-battle healing is a total non-issue, they don't give a crap. Such people have explicitly weighed in as such, earlier in the thread, though I'm not going to go digging just to get a reference.

Something to consider, here, is that you have structured it as "a lot" of HP. What is "a lot"? I assume something like 4e's Healing Surge (25% of max HP) would qualify as "a lot," but would rolling one Hit Die be too much? What about a static value, but limited to a number of uses per short rest (e.g. Int or Cha mod heal, for half proficiency mod uses/short rest)? If neither of those alone is too much, would they be too much together? (Obviously if either one alone is too much then the combination would also be.)

Or is it not quite specifically the amount per use, but the total amount over the day? E.g. you don't want Warlord heals to ever overshadow the amount gained from just rolling Hit Dice, or some other such standard?

I apologize if this sounds like an interrogation. Most people acting as the "opposition" (that is, the people who don't know the Warlord or who need/want to be 'convinced' to 'accept' it or w/e) tend to be vehemently, adamantly opposed to even the thought of "real" healing from a Warlord. You, on the other hand, seem to be at least open to the possibility, simply skeptical about the execution, so I'm trying to determine how exactly you feel about the prospect of martial HP restoration.
...

I think for me there are two factors involved. First is, simply put, an issue of role-playing. I can role-play a scenario where someone is miraculously healed by magic, because hey... it's magic. It's much more difficult for me to role-play a situation where a non-magic-using Warlord persuades an ally to not be wounded any more. That just doesn't compute for me. I can totally wrap my head around a Warlord ability to let an ally use its hit dice outside of a typical short rest scenario, though. For example, the Warlord might spend an action motivating an ally, at the end of which the ally could spend one of its total hit dice to restore hit points. If its total hit dice are 5 or greater, it can spend 2; 3 if 11 or greater; 4 if 17 or more. I don't know how often the Warlord should be able to use a power like that, but it shouldn't be spammable in combat.

The second factor is that I think there are enough direct healing classes in the game. I suspect that there will be another one once the Mystic is fully hammered out.

I guess the answer to your question is that I think martial HP restoration should fit within the logic of the game world in a way that is consistent with existing structures. Look at the Fighter's second wind ability, the healer feat, the hit dice mechanic, and implement something that works like that. I think it shouldn't ever be similar to burning a spell slot to restore XdY hit points.

When I say "a lot" of hit points, I mean that I'm perfectly ok with the Warlord being able to keep an ally in the fight, stand them up from zero, and so forth. I'm just not able to wrap my head around instantly healing up to full from being critically wounded without using magic or mysticism. That's why I like THP as an alternative: it is similar in effect (better, in some situations) and I can role-play the fortification of THP as deriving from the motivation and conviction you get from the Warlord.

 

[epithet]

Yeah, that'd be a reasonable compromise: "if the target ally has not taken their reaction..." kind of thing. Would encourage the Warlord to prioritize initiative and trying to actually lead the attack, which isn't a bad thing at all.
...
Warlords, at least in 4e, made their parties substantially more mobile. The shift, as you've noted, was one form of that, but tinkering with Initiative in one way or another was also an option. Things that affect Initiative in 5e are few and far between. It could be really neat if a Warlord class feature specifically interacted with that in a meaningful way, such as being able to swap places with an ally in the order, or having (say) Int-mod points which could be added or subtracted from allies' Initiative rolls at the start of combat (that is, before any players have taken their turns).

Similarly, a high-level Warlord ability might allow the party to re-roll Initiative in the middle of combat. This could be quite powerful, since there are special features of several classes which key off the phrase "when you roll Initiative." The Warlord could then act as a way to occasionally re-take/press the momentum of a fight; if it were keyed to a short rest, it could be seen as a moment of great inspiration for the whole party, but which requires everyone being on board together, and thus can't be demanded repeatedly without a break (though, of course, I'm sure people will still dislike it...) And really, I'm not even saying these would HAVE to be the thing to do. They're just one interesting way to explore the "planning," "coordination," and "inspiration" sides of having a Warlord in the party--even if they aren't the party face, they have a command presence on the battlefield and can make a substantial difference in a fight.
...

So perhaps the Warlord should be able to apply a second stat mod (say, Wisdom) to initiative rolls for himself and any allies within 30 feet for him when initiative is rolled. Also, you could give the Warlord an ability (maybe call it "vigilance") that makes any creature making a dexterity (stealth) check opposed by the Warlord's passive Perception to have disadvantage on the roll, and grant that if the Warlord isn't surprised, then no ally within 30 feet that can see and hear the Warlord is surprised, either.

I also really like the idea of the Warlord being able to compel a re-roll of initiative once per rest. It doesn't break the game, but it does potentially give the Warlord the ability to turn the tables in an "oh, crap" situation and, as you pointed out, dovetails nicely with the higher-level class abilities that restore resources when initiative is rolled.

I'm not sold on initiative swapping, though. I don't think having a Warlord in the party should mean that your lumbering, low-dex, spam-in-a-can juggernaut should be able to go first in a fight. Planning for characters that have initiative penalties is (in my opinion) one of the important elements of setting up for combat.

Other ideas: I think the Warlord should be able to use his reaction to negate a critical hit against an ally he can see within 30 feet, once per rest. Also, because it is important for allies to remain relatively close to the Warlord, anyone within his "coach bubble" should maybe get advantage on saving throws against area of effect attacks.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Outside of combat, Help action > the Guidance spell.

"Thanks for the 1d4 when you could've been giving me Advantage."

Outside of combat, you can do both.

I think for me there are two factors involved. First is, simply put, an issue of role-playing. I can role-play a scenario where someone is miraculously healed by magic, because hey... it's magic. It's much more difficult for me to role-play a situation where a non-magic-using Warlord persuades an ally to not be wounded any more. That just doesn't compute for me.

There's plenty of room for restoring hps via inspiration. It's not wounds disappearing. Heck, very little hp damage /can/ be modeling serious wounds, especially in 5e where you have overnight healing. A night's rest won't realistically make wounds, even minor ones, disappear, either, but it does get back all your hps. D&D has rarely had any detail when it comes to wounds. AD&D had an optional negative hp rule that included a minimum 1wk of rest, regardless of hps being magically healed, for instance. Most eds have had a spell like Regenerate to restore lopped-off limbs, even if limb-lopping was restricted to magical effects like a Sword of Sharpness, and never caused by hp loss.

Outside those corner cases, D&D hp loss is very abstract, and, in 5e, with overnight "healing," can't realistically model serious wounds. So there's no reason you can't be at full hps while still bearing some physical injuries - bruises, scratches, stable wounds in the process of healing, and so forth.

I can totally wrap my head around a Warlord ability to let an ally use its hit dice outside of a typical short rest scenario, though. For example, the Warlord might spend an action motivating an ally, at the end of which the ally could spend one of its total hit dice to restore hit points.

That's actually a perfectly good mechanic, and I'm glad you don't object to it. That doesn't make the above objection valid, though.

The second factor is that I think there are enough direct healing classes in the game. I suspect that there will be another one once the Mystic is fully hammered out.

There are more than enough classes that heal with magic, certainly. There are no classes that restore allies' hps in combat without magic, however.

I certainly see no problem with removing some of the magical-healing classes from the game, if you think there are too many. The Ranger and Paladin both cover narrow genre archetypes and could be modeled to some degree with multi-classing and Backgrounds, for instance.

I guess the answer to your question is that I think martial HP restoration should fit within the logic of the game world in a way that is consistent with existing structures. Look at the Fighter's second wind ability

The fighter's Second Wind outright restores hps, in combat, with no action. That seems a pretty adequate precedent. So the Warlord's exhortation is enough to get anyone to 'dig deep' the way normally only fighters can. Second Wind, IIRC, is 1d10 (the figher's HD size) + fighter level. Maybe the warlord could restore target's HD size + Warlord's Level?

I think it shouldn't ever be similar to burning a spell slot to restore XdY hit points.

Spell slots are a pretty specific mechanic, and I wouldn't expect a non-caster to use them. Even psionics aren't quite using spell slots.

For instance, an hypothetical Warlord in-combat hp-restoration ability might be able to affect a given ally once between rests, normally, with any additional uses requiring the ally to succeed on a save and spend a HD. Nothing like slots, but still a limited resource (and it's distinct from slot-based healing, as it'd actually be /better/ for standing up allies in combat at low levels, while not being as good at extending the length of 'day' the party could handle).

When I say "a lot" of hit points, I mean that I'm perfectly ok with the Warlord being able to keep an ally in the fight, stand them up from zero, and so forth. I'm just not able to wrap my head around instantly healing up to full from being critically wounded without using magic or mysticism.

I think the word 'healing' is the main problem. Restoring hps in D&D has generally been called healing, but actually healing an actual wound takes days or weeks or longer, IRL - even a scratch won't heal completely overnight - and, in a medieval setting, is far from certain (you could as easily die of an infection as heal a scratch completely). 5e's overnight healing means that returning to full hit points cannot possibly represent completely healing even minor wounds. There's simply more to hps in 5e than just wounds & the lack thereof.

When it comes to regenerating limbs (just a missing finger, or presumably, other permanent sorts of maiming wounds), sure a mechanic that just restores hps - HD, any possible Warlord mechanic, Cure Wounds, long rest, etc - simply isn't up to the task.

That's why I like THP as an alternative: it is similar in effect (better, in some situations) and I can role-play the fortification of THP as deriving from the motivation and conviction you get from the Warlord.

THP are a great mechanic, and the Warlord is well-suited in concept to granting those, as well as restoring hps. It should absolutely do both, and do both well.

So perhaps the Warlord should be able to apply a second stat mod (say, Wisdom) to initiative rolls for himself and any allies within 30 feet for him when initiative is rolled. Also, you could give the Warlord an ability (maybe call it "vigilance") that makes any creature making a dexterity (stealth) check opposed by the Warlord's passive Perception to have disadvantage on the roll, and grant that if the Warlord isn't surprised, then no ally within 30 feet that can see and hear the Warlord is surprised, either.I also really like the idea of the Warlord being able to compel a re-roll of initiative once per rest. It doesn't break the game, but it does potentially give the Warlord the ability to turn the tables in an "oh, crap" situation and, as you pointed out, dovetails nicely with the higher-level class abilities that restore resources when initiative is rolled.

All possibilities. The Warlord had a number of features, feats and exploits that affected initiative.

I'm not sold on initiative swapping, though. I don't think having a Warlord in the party should mean that your lumbering, low-dex, spam-in-a-can juggernaut should be able to go first in a fight. Planning for characters that have initiative penalties is (in my opinion) one of the important elements of setting up for combat.

Guileful Switch was about the only exploit that did that, and it was errata'd to make it less abuseable. I'm sure it could be done in a reasonable way, even in 5e's action economy.
One thing arguing against it, though, is that 5e lacks the Delay action (it strikes me as an oversight or over-simplification, but maybe it's for the sake of the DM's convenience & slightly faster combat)...

Edit: or 5e just doesn't call it 'Delay' so no problem, really.

Other ideas: I think the Warlord should be able to use his reaction to negate a critical hit against an ally he can see within 30 feet, once per rest.

That's a fine idea. It's unfortunate that 5e dropped the 'interrupt' terminology, since it raises the potential to mis-understand 'Reactions' as actions that must happen after the trigger is resolved, which is clearly not the case - this kind of ability could run afoul of that misunderstanding.

Also, because it is important for allies to remain relatively close to the Warlord, anyone within his "coach bubble" should maybe get advantage on saving throws against area of effect attacks.

That's getting back to the Commanding Presence, close burst range of inspiring word, and wargame 'command radius' - and, yes, it makes some sense. It'd be simpler to have one such rather than have each ability operate differently - it would, of course, be more flavorful and potentially address some realism concerns to have different abilities function differently.

 

[epithet]

I was under the impression that 5e simply didn't require a "delay action." You can always lower your initiative, but that's your new initiative and you don't get it bumped back up to its previous level on the next turn. If you want to keep your place in the initiative order, that's when the held action becomes useful. You burn your reaction, but you're back at the top of the initiative order next round.

 

[Tony Vargas]

I was under the impression that 5e simply didn't require a "delay action." You can always lower your initiative, but that's your new initiative and you don't get it bumped back up to its previous level on the next turn.

That'd be a delay. Maybe I just missed it because it wasn't called 'Delay.' I was wondering what the point of cutting it was. Anyway, if initiative is fluid, there's little reason for the Warlord not to mess with it, even to the point of having Guileful Switch, again.

 

[El Mahdi]

First, before I get into the meat of my post, I just want to say I'm still working on putting together all the ideas that have been expressed so far, and coming up with an initial concept. Unfortunately, my ability to concentrate on it has been significantly impacted for the last couple of weeks, but I seem to be rebounding now. I was capable of occasional posting, but the concentration required for the other has been out of my grasp for a bit.

(The "distraction" I spoke of a while ago was me taking care of a very sick dog; care that required IV medication or port flushes every four hours, along with a significant dressing change at regular intervals and periodic oral medications. Unfortunately, two weeks ago he lost his fight. He was the smartest and most empathetic animal I have ever known, and literally saved my life a few years ago, so it's been emotionally difficult lately. It's been a rough couple of months.)

Anyways...

I think for me there are two factors involved. First is, simply put, an issue of role-playing. I can role-play a scenario where someone is miraculously healed by magic, because hey... it's magic. It's much more difficult for me to role-play a situation where a non-magic-using Warlord persuades an ally to not be wounded any more. That just doesn't compute for me. I can totally wrap my head around a Warlord ability to let an ally use its hit dice outside of a typical short rest scenario, though. For example, the Warlord might spend an action motivating an ally, at the end of which the ally could spend one of its total hit dice to restore hit points. If its total hit dice are 5 or greater, it can spend 2; 3 if 11 or greater; 4 if 17 or more. I don't know how often the Warlord should be able to use a power like that, but it shouldn't be spammable in combat.

Why not usable in combat?

For me, the perfect example is Sarah Connor (Linda Hamilton), motivating Reese (Michael Biehn) near the end of the original Terminator. They're moving through the automated/robot manufacturing plant being pursued by the Terminator. Reese is wounded and barely staying on his feet when he finally falls, slack jawed, eyes rolled up in his head, he's done, unable to continue - zero hit points. Sarah yells at him like a drill instructor or squad sergeant - "Move it, Reese! On your feet, Soldier!" - and up he goes. He's back in the fight - not 100%, but enough to stand, move and fight again. Of course he dies a minute later while fighting the Terminator, but that's beside the point.

IMO, a Warlord is very much like a squad sergeant or company/field officer. The examples that best work for me are Mel Gibson and Sam Elliot in We Were Soldiers. They know their men. They know what to say to keep their soldiers fighting, to get them back in the fight, even when they may be on death's door.

The second factor is that I think there are enough direct healing classes in the game. I suspect that there will be another one once the Mystic is fully hammered out.

This is true, but there are none that do so without magic except the Bard - and they can only do so outside of combat (during short rests). It's part of the Warlord's premise: non-magical hit-point restoration during combat.

I guess the answer to your question is that I think martial HP restoration should fit within the logic of the game world in a way that is consistent with existing structures. Look at the Fighter's second wind ability, the healer feat, the hit dice mechanic, and implement something that works like that. I think it shouldn't ever be similar to burning a spell slot to restore XdY hit points.

Again, why?

The Warlord "does" something (yells "Move it, Soldier!", or "I didn't give you permission to die!", or "You're our only hope...", etc.) and the character in question rebounds (regains HP).

Why does it need to be any different or more complicated than that?

When I say "a lot" of hit points, I mean that I'm perfectly ok with the Warlord being able to keep an ally in the fight, stand them up from zero, and so forth. I'm just not able to wrap my head around instantly healing up to full from being critically wounded without using magic or mysticism. That's why I like THP as an alternative: it is similar in effect (better, in some situations) and I can role-play the fortification of THP as deriving from the motivation and conviction you get from the Warlord.

Temporary hit points won't cut it because of one inconvenient little 5E rule: If you have 0 hit points, receiving temporary hit points doesn't restore you to consciousness or stabilize you.

Essentially, there's no way Sarah Connor is getting Reese back on his feet if all she can inspire are temporary hit points.

Now that can most certainly be houseruled, or even expressed as an exception in the Warlord description (specific beats general), but to avoid confusion it would likely require errata/rewrite of the description of Temporary Hit Points to add the exception there also. Probably something WotC would like to avoid, and by extension something that we should avoid in proposing a workable Warlord.

In order to have a successful shot at getting WotC to make a stand-alone Warlord class, or even expand the Battle Master archetype, proposals should probably not require changing any of the game's rules.

Also, the amount of healing a Warlord can produce will probably not be enough to bring a character from Zero to Full. I don't think that was possible, practical, or at least very common, even in 4E (though I could be wrong). Additionally, by limiting how often the Warlord can do this (using an action economy resource tool like bonus actions, reaction, or something like superiority dice) can keep this scenario from happening also.





P.S.: To those are interested, I'm working on putting the ideas voiced in this thread into the form of both a stand-alone class and an expanded battle master archetype. The intention is not for houseruling purposes (though of course anyone can use them that way), but as an idea and feedback generation device, and hopefully something that WotC might look at and consider.

 

[I'm A Banana]

Outside of combat, you can do both.

Aye, their stacking is nice! Just pointing out that guidance is not so good as to be a must-have for someone who wants to help out their buddies with a skill check. Help is better and you don't need to be a caster to do it, so there's nothing lacking in a Fighter's purely non-magical ability to give their allies a boost to noncombat activities (and, as mentioned, Help during a fight is an action, which means fighters are better at that in a fight than any other class is thanks to Action Surge).

 

[Tony Vargas]

Aye, their stacking is nice! Just pointing out that guidance is not so good as to be a must-have for someone who wants to help out their buddies with a skill check. Help is better and you don't need to be a caster to do it, so there's nothing lacking in a Fighter's purely non-magical ability to give their allies a boost to noncombat activities.

I don't see how an action anyone can do is particularly relevant - except as a baseline: any bonus a hypothetical warlord might pass out to allies should either be better than 'Help,' or, like Guidance, effectively 'stack' with it.

Or, are you saying Clerics don't 'need' Guidance to represent a little divine, well, guidance, to help their allies, because they should just use the Help action and re-skin it as praying for guidance, instead since that's better? I trust the same logic doesn't apply to Bardic Inspiriation, since it impacts the action economy differently?

Clearly, anything along those lines a Warlord (or mc-like warlord-lite fighter archetype) might get should take that into account, either being better than Help, if (like Help) it takes an action and can't be done in advance, or compatible with it, or perhaps being a bonus action or reaction or possible to apply in advance...

(and, as mentioned, Help during a fight is an action, which means fighters are better at that in a fight than any other class is thanks to Action Surge)

I think what it really means is that you don't see Help used a lot during a fight, when most characters have better things to do with their actions. Once the fighter, specifically, has multi-attack, the bar for doing anything else with his action is raised pretty high. Just another reason the Fighter isn't the best foundation on which to build a Warlord.

Also, the amount of healing a Warlord can produce will probably not be enough to bring a character from Zero to Full. I don't think that was possible, practical, or at least very common, even in 4E (though I could be wrong).

Zero-to-full wasn't easy for any leader class to pull off, but if you blew multiple actions and powers in one go, you could probably do it. There were utilities that triggered two surges, for instance, that on top of an attack with a surge or other substantial hp-restoring rider, and the usual leader surge-trigger minor, and, yes, you could manage it, very infrequently. At low levels, it could be pretty easy to boost Inspiring Word to the point that it gave a whole surge worth of bonus healing (at low levels, when PCs might still have single-digit surge values, especially). So, possible, not that practical, and certainly not very common.

In 5e it's probably out of the question: In-combat healing isn't so optimizeable, AFAICT. And, of course, you don't have three actions to play with every turn, and can't convert moves to minor (or bonus) actions or anything like that, so there's a lower ceiling to how much you can 'bring it' (whatever 'it' may be) in a single round.

Additionally, by limiting how often the Warlord can do this (using an action economy resource tool like bonus actions, reaction, or something like superiority dice) can keep this scenario from happening also.

One way in which a warlord or warlord-lite might differ from both casters and the Battlemaster, is in having a resource management scheme that relies as much or more on his allies as himself. Triggering HD is an obvious example: you can't help an ally spend HD he doesn't have remaining. Another thing that seems likely under the 5e action economy is that Warlord 'granted' actions (which, in 4e, often required a 'free action,' mainly as a way of confirming that they were voluntary on the part of the ally, who had to be able to act), might consume the ally's Reaction, a very limited commodity in the 5e.

 

[I'm A Banana]

I don't see how an action anyone can do is particularly relevant - except as a baseline: any bonus a hypothetical warlord might pass out to allies should either be better than 'Help,' or, like Guidance, effectively 'stack' with it.
...
Clearly, anything along those lines a Warlord (or mc-like warlord-lite fighter archetype) might get should take that into account, either being better than Help, if (like Help) it takes an action and can't be done in advance, or compatible with it, or perhaps being a bonus action or reaction or possible to apply in advance...

I've no objection to such a thing existing, merely an objection to the statement that the current situation is one where fighters are ineffective at helping party members. They are quite effective at helping party members. More effective in many situations (ie, a fight) than others. It's fine if we get a fighter that is even better at it, but that's different than saying that the current fighter fails at it.

Or, are you saying Clerics don't 'need' Guidance to represent a little divine, well, guidance, to help their allies, because they should just use the Help action and re-skin it as praying for guidance, instead since that's better? I trust the same logic doesn't apply to Bardic Inspiriation, since it impacts the action economy differently?

A fighter doesn't call upon divine guidance to help their allies, so the thing that represents calling on divine guidance should not be the same mechanic as giving a morale-boosting speech or some sound tactical advice (a la the Help action). A cleric's plea that the gods help you in your next endeavor could certainly be the Help action (adds a little of that "you don't need to cast a spell to be magical" thing). Bardic inspiration could work the same way if someone wanted it to, though its fiction as it exists is similar to the idea of a morale-boosting speech or word of encouragement (which, I think, is part of why it's not a full action - Help or casting a spell is a more intensive thing than a few words).

I think what it really means is that you don't see Help used a lot during a fight, when most characters have better things to do with their actions. Once the fighter, specifically, has multi-attack, the bar for doing anything else with his action is raised pretty high. Just another reason the Fighter isn't the best foundation on which to build a Warlord.

Depends on your play goals. If you want to play a character who helps allies more than you want to play a character who attacks in a flurry of blows, trading your extra attacks for the Help action is viable - you'll still contribute to success, and 5e's balance isn't so unstable that you'd be losing party effectiveness, and you get to be the character you want to play. If you'd rather pump out damage, that's your choice, too.

It's just not true that a fighter can't be an effective support character in play.

Or put another way, saying you want a more buffy non-combat fighter build is all well and good, but saying that the current fighter sucks at buffing and can't contribute outside of combat isn't going to pass the BS test.

Again, why?

The Warlord "does" something (yells "Move it, Soldier!", or "I didn't give you permission to die!", or "You're our only hope...", etc.) and the character in question rebounds (regains HP).

If the question is "why," the answer is pretty straightforward: because when a character drops to 0 hp, they aren't just temporarily overcome, they are suffering from an actual life-threatening wound, and shouting doesn't fix that. To fix that, you'd need some actual miracles.

There's ways to get at that without recovering HP (boars in 5e have an ability that lets them fight on after they've reached 0 hp, a "warlord" who didn't heal HP could give a similar trait to a PC), of course. Healing isn't necessary for that vibe, by a long shot. It's one way to accomplish it, though, and works if you're cooler with action-movie-style injury or with treating HP as plot points/luck/morale/etc. and almost never actual injury.