D&D 5E How many fans want a 5E Warlord?

[TwoSix]

Well, I just read it.

And the older I get, my perception of time seems to change. I swear, 4 years ago can feel like yesterday.

No argument there! And good choice, both books (Name of the Wind and Wise Man's Fear) are excellent.

 

[ChrisCarlson]

You complain that a Warlord telling another character what to do is unfair, despite the fact that isn't how it works.

Then you complain that a character who doesn't do what a Warlord tells them is penalizing the Warlord.

And you wonder why there are questions about your intentions here in this thread...

I get it now. I was a fool to have dared express a view counter to your painfully correct one. And now you will do language gymnastics, contextless parsing and semantic word games, as well as ad hominem character assassination, to make heretics like me look bad. Bravo to you, sir. Consider me no longer interested in discourse with the likes of you.

Good day.

 

[Jessica]

Nothing you just said aligns with my perception or experiences. Now what?

Do you want a cookie?

 

[Jessica]

I get it now. I was a fool to have dared express a view counter to your painfully correct one. And now you will do language gymnastics, contextless parsing and semantic word games, as well as ad hominem character assassination, to make heretics like me look bad. Bravo to you, sir. Consider me no longer interested in discourse with the likes of you.

Good day.

Buh-bye

 

[mellored]

there are level limits around the spells Magic Intiiate allows so it's not the same as having access to all schools in any way.

Exactly. Eldrich Knight + Magic initiate is not a wizard not because it can't cast enough magic. It's too limited in size and scope.


To make the battlemaster more of a warlord you would need something like...
*You can use the maneuvers at-will, (but no bonus damage).
*As a reaction, you can add a maneuver to an ally's attack.
*You know more maneuvers.
*There are higher level maneuvers (possibly 1/short rest).

And to balance it, you would need to remove some of the normal fighter power, like heavy armor, second wind, 3rd and 4th attack, and action surge, and a d8 hit die.

 

[mellored]

i think we have produced evidence of a much bigger problem. There is no non-magic charisma character.

There is no non-magic mental (int, wis, or cha) based character.

 

[Imaro]

Exactly. Eldrich Knight + Magic initiate is not a wizard not because it can't cast enough magic. It's too limited in size and scope.

You made the argument it was the same thing... not me??? I gave a single example (in the hopes that it would clarify what I was looking for from you when I asked what is the battlemaster missing that a warlord should have)... I wasn't giving a rundown of all the specific differences between an EK and wizard. Oh and part of the difference is that the Wizard gets more spells (even taking the MI feat)... so yeah, can't cast enough magic is a difference.

To make the battlemaster more of a warlord you would need something like...
*You can use the maneuvers at-will, (but no bonus damage).
*As a reaction, you can add a maneuver to an ally's attack.
*You know more maneuvers.
*There are higher level maneuvers (possibly 1/short rest).

And to balance it, you would need to remove some of the normal fighter power, like second wind, 3rd and 4th attack, and action surge.

1. I don't think being able to use the maneuvers at-will (even without the bonus damage) would ever be balanced.
2. How does the Warlord grant the ability to do things you normally can't, I thought he was about making you better not making you different?
3.Martial Adept Feat
4. So not only will they be at-will... but higher in power level as well... I've seen a BM in actual play and his maneuvers seemed powerful enough without these types of add-ons.

 

[El Mahdi]

Because it's asking the community if they want one. I answered, 'no'.

Again, Wrong. It's specifically asking how many DO want one.

Do you find pedantry and semantics often serve you well?

If you're asking if I find accuracy in communication important, the answer would be yes.

I just went back and re-read your OP. It makes no reference to only seeking advice as to your proposed houseruled warlord or the thread in which it is posted. It merely mentions them and offers bonus XP for mentioning them. Which would lead any competent reader to understand this thread does not solely focus on your homebrew. But on warlords in general.

One, this response has nothing to do with the question I asked.

Two, nowhere have I said that this thread's purpose was "only seeking advice as to [my] proposed...Warlord"...

And it's not a houseruled Warlord. It's a proposal to WotC for a Warlord, with ENWorld community feedback to inform the direction.

Lastly, this thread - or more specifically, the poll - focuses on exactly what it says it focuses on: "How many fans want a 5E Warlord?"

Everything else (actual posting) is civil expression of opinions, discussion that can help convince some that maybe a Warlord is worth trying, debunking misconceptions and inaccuracies that people have about Warlords, and through continued discussion keep the thread - and subject - prominent on the boards.


By the way, Thank You for aiding the cause as concerns that last aspect, with your 30+ posts on the subject.

Perhaps you should not have said that if you didn't want dissent, or if you only wanted people who are slavering over your awesome warlord homebrew and want it to be published by WotC as much as you do.

As I've said, I have no problem with dissent. Dissent is good. I enjoy Dissent. Good, civil, dissent helps me analyze and solidify my own ideas. I find good dissenting conversation strengthens and energizes me. Good dissent also helps show me where my thinking might have gone wrong. Good, civil dissent is beneficial to all involved.

But that's not what you're doing.

You are not engaging in good, civil, dissent and discussion. You are instead expressing not just your opinions about a Warlord, but expressing that the Warlord should not even exist. That those who want it Can't Have It.

That's an active attempt to derail the conversation and the endeavor to influence WotC into including one.

That is the opposite of civil and energizing, and is instead unfriendly and enervating.

I've found ENWorld to - usually - be a great place for good, civil discussion.

Why do you feel the need to thumb your nose at that...?

 

[El Mahdi]

Consider me no longer interested in discourse with the likes of you.

Good day.

No problem.

Good Day also.

May our shared hobby bring you fun and friends.

 

[El Mahdi]

Do you want a cookie?

Buh-bye

Dude! That really wasn't necessary...