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

[JohnLynch]

This is all skirting awfully close to claiming I'm arguing in bad faith. Not a fan of that.

That was not my intent at all. What I'm saying is two people can have different definitions of what constitutes balance. Neither of them are necessarily wrong (in so much as I define balanced as using these two options two players will be equally effective). Two people can look at the exact same rule, interpret it exactly the same and come to opposing conclusions as to whether something is balanced. This can come down to different preferences, playstyles and experiences.

And I didn't just say, "it's unbalanced because I think so...". I said it was unbalanced in 4e, and the same could result in 5e, based on reasons which I took the time to spell out. Reasons you avoided quoting or responding to.

I actually conceded you had a point. This is why I have consistently said "unless you think it was unbalanced in prior editions..." I understand your point in regards to the theoretical unbalancing builds a warlord can take. However in my actual play experiences I never seen it be unbalanced. I have never seen someone be grossly superior at the table when coupled with a barbarian as opposed to someone who simply built a barbarian. That doesn't mean your wrong. However I'm not saying your wrong to say that the warlord is overpowered. I'm simply saying I disagree.

I'm deliberately looking to not argue with you. Your either using a different metric to me (perhaps using purely math rather than math + table experience) or your experiences has simply been different. Either way I'm not looking to invalidate those experiences or your opinion. Nor am I looking to assert my opinion as fact. I'm simply discussing the issue (as oppose to arguing the issue). Apologies if that has caused frustration on your end. I'm actively seeking to take a less antagonistic approach than I might have on the WotC forums in the past.

To some, it will never be "warlord-y enough". No matter what you give this proposed class.

Until it has too much of a good thing. Then for some it will be almost good enough.

Sure. However we also have some people who feel the same way about wizards. We can devote time talking about those people just like we are for the warlord. Or we can take a less extreme approach and talk about people who have more reasonable desires. Of course how we define reasonable is the sticking point. I think it's clear that many are not asking for fighter+Battlemaster++ but are instead asking for weaker than a fighter in direct combat with the difference made up by expanding the limited options available to the Battlemaster. If you think a lazy lord is unbalanced than that will by it's very nature come across as unreasonable. Although I would liken that to someone saying casters (except the warlock) are unbalanced because their balance relies on a daily mechanic when compared with non daily classes so therefore they are going to be unbalanced in any situation except a narrow window. It's not necessarily incorrect. But it's not a viewpoint I agree with either.

 

[steeldragons]

Sorry, nope. Temp HP are not healing.

This is just semantic nonsense.

1) a warlord "heals you for 2d8 HP with his inspirational blabbity blab."
2) a warlord "grants you 2d8 temp HP with his inspirational blabbity blab."

Either way, you are getting 2d8 HP...either free and clear or "back."

With temp HP that aren't used, being "temp" and all, they go away [if you haven't used them] and at the end of battle, the PC is left with "Amount of Damage taken - Temp HP granted."

With the healed HP, at the end of battle, the PC is left with "Amount of Damage taken - HP healed."

They are the same thing. No, with temp HP, a warlord can't "heal" you outside of combat...but maybe they can grant some "temp HP" until you can get some serious healing. What part of "War-Lord" says "this guy should be able to heal me, permanently, whenever he wants?"

 

[JohnLynch]

What part of "War-Lord" says "this guy should be able to heal me, permanently, whenever he wants?"

No-one has said they want this. What they've expressed a desire to have is a warlord that can heal on par with a cleric. That is quite a ways short of "heal whenever you want".

 

[steeldragons]

No-one has said they want this. What they've expressed a desire to have is a warlord that can heal on par with a cleric. That is quite a ways short of "heal whenever you want".

No. It's not. If you want to be literal about it, I'll rephrase.

What part of "war-lord" says "Heal the equivalent of what a cleric can do. So, at the least, allowing the permanent return of HP an equivalent number of times to a cleric's allowed spell slots, if not actual spell slots for the warlord themselves?"

 

[MechaPilot]

No. It's not. If you want to be literal about it, I'll rephrase.

What part of "war-lord" says "Heal the equivalent of what a cleric can do. So, at the least, allowing the permanent return of HP an equivalent number of times to a cleric's allowed spell slots, if not actual spell slots for the warlord themselves?"

To be fair, what part of "cleric" says heavy armor and a mace?

 

[Hussar]

No. It's not. If you want to be literal about it, I'll rephrase.

What part of "war-lord" says "Heal the equivalent of what a cleric can do. So, at the least, allowing the permanent return of HP an equivalent number of times to a cleric's allowed spell slots, if not actual spell slots for the warlord themselves?"

Because a warlord like a cleric or any other healer class should extend your adventuring day.

Note there are multiple ways of doing this either through straight up healing or damage mitigation but it's still about extending that day.

Which temp hp don't do very well for the reasons you listed.

 

[JohnLynch]

H

No. It's not. If you want to be literal about it, I'll rephrase.

What part of "war-lord" says "Heal the equivalent of what a cleric can do. So, at the least, allowing the permanent return of HP an equivalent number of times to a cleric's allowed spell slots, if not actual spell slots for the warlord themselves?"

Well to take things as step further when some people are saying they want a warlord what they're saying is they want a non-magical alternative to the existing healing classes that is comparable in the job of healing when compared to these magical classes.

 

[steeldragons]

Because a warlord like a cleric or any other healer class should extend your adventuring day.

Note there are multiple ways of doing this either through straight up healing or damage mitigation but it's still about extending that day.

Which temp hp don't do very well for the reasons you listed.

The reasons I listed leave you with exactly the same HP whether the warlord is giving you Temp HP or healing. You adventuring day has been extended by exactly the same amount. So, in what way do temp HP "not do [that] very well"? Since your original assertion is "Temp HP are not healing."

 

[Guest 6801328]

I have a question: why is the Warlord contingent so keen on cleric-level healing that has to be non-magical? Is it for playing in campaigns without magic? Otherwise why is that aspect so vitally important?

 

[I'm A Banana]

Because a warlord like a cleric or any other healer class should extend your adventuring day.

Note there are multiple ways of doing this either through straight up healing or damage mitigation but it's still about extending that day.

Which temp hp don't do very well for the reasons you listed.

That isn't quite what "healer classes" do in 5e, though.

The primary purpose of healing in 5e is to remove negative statuses in the midst of combat without having to roll for it.

That includes the "dying" status, but even 1 hp of healing does that (cure wounds is optional). Bring a potion of healing. It also includes stuff like calm emotions, and lesser restoration, but most things that impose any status in 5e have mundane ways of overcoming them if they would limit your combat actions. Not everything, but most things.

Now, the battlemaster still can't do much of that (even something as simple as re-rolling a save or something might go a long way to adding that!), so I think your central point about the battlemaster not being very heal-y still stands. But when we're asking for a warlord to also be a healer, I think it's important to look at the very substantial differences between healing in 4e and 5e, and to make sure the expectations are calibrated accordingly. You don't need a leader/healer/whatever in 5e. Having one around might be nice, but we are not looking at a fundamental party role, here, we're looking at a character that can get an unconscious character to stand up using a class ability instead of a potion of healing.