D&D 5E Warlording the fighter

[Tony Vargas]

Please believe me when I tell you that I ask the following question in all sincerity and without malice or animosity: What the hell are you talking about?

I'm talking about you repeating anti-warlord, edition-war-era talking points. And, championing them with the same tortured ill-logic as was used in the edition war. This whole exchange you've had over that action-movie example could have been re-posted from 2009.

I have, across several pages and at least a dozen posts, been talking about how the Warlord could be created as a class I'd like to play and to have in my group. I have actually used that exact terminology. Perhaps you are confusing me with another poster in this forum?

No confusion. You are intent on limiting this hypothetical Warlord class to what you would tolerate, and, such a class would not be a Warlord.

I also can't help but notice that you continue to insist on that, rather than being open to the possibility of a flexible class that would be a super-set of what you claim to want.

 

[El Mahdi]

It's interesting to me that you have such apparent disdain for temporary hit points. Your proposed compromise is hit points that are temporary, which appeals to you more than temporary hit points? Is it your position that the Warlord must be, fundamentally, "a healer" in the same way that divine casters are "healers" in D&D?

I do not have disdain for temporary hit points - whether apparent or otherwise. And my compromise wasn't Temporary Hit Points, it was, for lack of a better term, Volatile Hit Points - Hit Points that may or may not be permanent, based on a dice roll.

You really need to stop making assumptions about what people think or are implying, and instead stick to what they actually type in their posts - and nothing else.

Temporary Hit Points are simply not a feasible mechanic because of the rules specifically stating: "If you have 0 Hit Points, receiving temporary hit points doesn't restore you to consciousness or stabilize you." (And I know that Tony Vargas has mentioned this also, in multiple posts...)

We are trying to develop a Warlord class, or "Warlord the Fighter Class" (expand the Battle Master), or at least define the parameters of one within the constraints of 5E; not rewrite the rules of 5E. Getting WotC to take a look at a feasible Warlord option is a possibility; a long shot, but a possibility. However, getting WotC to rewrite aspects of the basic rules in order to accommodate a Warlord option? Not going to happen. People want an Official Warlord. One that can be used in official events, such as Adventurer's League. A concept that requires rewriting basic rules is an obvious no-go.

If it wasn't for that annoying little rule about Temporary Hit Points, I'd have no problem basing a Warlord's mechanics around it. It doesn't perfectly fit the narrative of what a Warlord is doing - at least not every time - but if it would make an official Warlord a possibility, I'd be all for it.

So, no disdain, just practicality.

And I'd give up the mind-reading gig if I was you. You're not very good at it...

 

[epithet]

Jester Canuk, Kamakatze Midget, and, you - you are, everytime you draw some edition-war-era line in the sand (and then claim not to know what you just did). This objection to martial healing that you're pushing, now is a perfect example.
Feel free to stop at any time.
...

So, with your edit, a clearer picture emerges.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I now have the impression that to you, a Warlord is a character that can be, if the player so chooses, built and spec'd to be as effective at instantaneous healing as a Cleric can be, but without the use of any magic. The Warlord is and must be a "Martial Healer" on par with the extant magical healers in the game. To limit the ability of the class to heal that much, or to characterise that healing as magic, necessarily means that the class is no longer a Warlord by your definition of the class.

Is that impression inaccurate?

The only other possibility I can see is that you're the one stuck in some sort of "edition war," and you are adamant that the only acceptable way to implement a 5e Warlord is to copy the 4e class as closely as possible.

I'm not drawing lines in the sand. I've considered your posts and embraced some of your reasoning - I believe it was you that suggested that the "heal" I was suggesting using hit dice was too cumbersome, and should be simplified, leading me to look at Second Wind as a more elegant means to that end. You do seem to be drawing lines in the sand, however: you clearly believe that the Warlord should be able to fill the healer role without using temporary hit points, and that any suggestion that differs from that absolute is "the position that the Warlord shouldn't exist at all."

 

[Tony Vargas]

If it wasn't for that annoying little rule about Temporary Hit Points, I'd have no problem basing a Warlord's mechanics around it.

That and not stacking...

...well, not stacking could be worked around, but then Warlords'd have to be giving out just huge piles of them at higher level...

getting WotC to rewrite aspects of the basic rules in order to accommodate a Warlord option? Not going to happen. People want an Official Warlord. One that can be used in official events, such as Adventurer's League.

Ironically, the former may be more likely than the latter. If the Warlord were incarcerated in some specific module that also changed the rules for temp hps or healing or whatever, for example.

At this point, new classes are most likely optional classes, not part of the Standard Game, and unlikely to be generally available in AL. Maybe available if they're in an AP, for the duration of that AP.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I now have the impression that to you, a Warlord is a character that can be, if the player so chooses, built and spec'd to be as effective at instantaneous healing restoring hps as a Cleric can be, but without the use of any magic.

I don't know if you're underestimating the degree to which a Cleric can be optimized for healing, or overestimating what'd be reasonable to expect from a Warlord. But, either way, no.

The Warlord is and must be a "Martial Healer" on par with the extant magical healers in the game. To limit the ability of the class to heal that much, or to characterise that healing as magic, necessarily means that the class is no longer a Warlord by your definition of the class.

Characterizing anything a hypothetical Warlord class may do as 'magic' is a non-starter, yes, it's contrary to the basic concept.

Constraining the choices available to the player of a warlord so much that it couldn't functionally take the place of other traditional 'leader' classes, in combat, without putting the party at a severe disadvantage, would also be unacceptable.

you clearly believe that the Warlord should be able to fill the healer role without using temporary hit points, and that any suggestion that differs from that absolute is "the position that the Warlord shouldn't exist at all."

There is no former healer role in 5e with no specific requirements to fill it. But, yes, a Warlord that can't fulfill the iconic functions it was able to in it's earlier incarnation is not a warlord. Bestowing temp hps, alone, is inadequate for those purposes, while the player option of restoring hps would be part of achieving it. So would temp hps. Excluding temp hps would be nearly as limiting as depending upon them entirely. Both would be absolutes. The choice of either or both being open to a player choosing a hypothetical Warlord class would, obviously, not be an absolute. It would be an option.

 

[epithet]

...
Temporary Hit Points are simply not a feasible mechanic because of the rules specifically stating: "If you have 0 Hit Points, receiving temporary hit points doesn't restore you to consciousness or stabilize you." (And I know that Tony Vargas has mentioned this also, in multiple posts...)
...
If it wasn't for that annoying little rule about Temporary Hit Points, I'd have no problem basing a Warlord's mechanics around it. It doesn't perfectly fit the narrative of what a Warlord is doing - at least not every time - but if it would make an official Warlord a possibility, I'd be all for it.
...
And I'd give up the mind-reading gig if I was you. You're not very good at it...

I have, repeatedly and recently, suggested at least two mechanical means for dealing with unconsciousness at zero. One an aura, the other a reaction. I keep making the suggestion, because I acknowledge the "annoying little rule" and the importance of the Warlord's ability to deal with that situation.

I also am curious how you rationalise the ability of an inspiration-based healer to restore hit points to someone who is unconscious, and not able to be inspired.

If I was good at mind reading, I'd play poker instead of D&D. I keep trying, though. Someday...

 

[El Mahdi]

That and not stacking...

...well, not stacking could be worked around, but then Warlords'd have to be giving out just huge piles of them at higher level...

True. Good Point.

Ironically, the former may be more likely than the latter. If the Warlord were incarcerated in some specific module that also changed the rules for temp hps or healing or whatever, for example.

At this point, new classes are most likely optional classes, not part of the Standard Game, and unlikely to be generally available in AL. Maybe available if they're in an AP, for the duration of that AP.

You're probably right. I don't play adventurer's league, and I'm not interested in it (it's never been my thing - same with RPGA); so an official Warlord isn't a big deal for me. I'd be happy with a UA treatment, but for those who do play AL and are fans of the Warlord, hope springs eternal.

 

[epithet]

...
... Warlords'd have to be giving out just huge piles of them at higher level...
...

About that--rather than give a huge pile of THP once, wouldn't it be better to give a decent sized pile and refresh it often?

 

[epithet]

I don't know if you're underestimating the degree to which a Cleric can be optimized for healing, or overestimating what'd be reasonable to expect from a Warlord. But, either way, no.
...

All right then... if a Warlord has other options for dealing with allies at zero, and the ability to grant "huge piles" of THP, then why would "Second Wind" levels of healing ability break the Warlord class?

 

[Tony Vargas]

I have, repeatedly and recently, suggested at least two mechanical means for dealing with unconsciousness at zero. One an aura, the other a reaction. I keep making the suggestion, because I acknowledge the "annoying little rule" and the importance of the Warlord's ability to deal with that situation.

That's pointless, the mechanic already exists: give him back some hps.

I also am curious how you rationalise the ability of an inspiration-based healer to restore hit points to someone who is unconscious, and not able to be inspired.

There you go with the edition-war talking points again.

Just as in 2009, no rationalization is required. Unconsciousness doesn't make someone deaf. Witness the effectiveness of alarm clocks. Heck, even today, doctors advise family to talk to comatose patients, because they believe they can hear them (there is even evidence that that they probably can, and even that it aids in recovery).

About that--rather than give a huge pile of THP once, wouldn't it be better to give a decent sized pile and refresh it often?

That'd be a matter of resource allocation and how the two hypothetical abilities balanced. There's probably some point at which a large 1/day grant of temp hps is balanced with a smaller short-rest or much smaller at-will temp hp grant. The latter two would run into action economy issues, while the former might leave an ally ready to face another combat before the next short rest (which is the issue I was considering), for instance, so it's not a simple evaluation.

All right then... if a Warlord has other options for dealing with allies at zero, and the ability to grant "huge piles" of THP, then why would "Second Wind" levels of healing ability break the Warlord class?

Why would letting an Inspiring Word mechanic simply restore hps break the Walord?
It wouldn't. Hp restoration is mechanically sound.

'Second Wind' isn't a great mechanic, but the number of hps it restores isn't unreasonable at lower levels. It eventually becomes trivial, of course, and 1/rest is obviously very limited.

There's a lot of design space left open in 5e, so I can understand the impulse to try to narrow it down a little, but widely-used, Standard-game, mechanics like regaining hps or gaining temp hps probably aren't the best place to start. Edition war hot-button topics notwithstanding.