I find the notion of the 'officer' class highly distasteful.
So you focus on that one way of seeing the Warlord?
So, being human, I recognize that the first time I have to sit down at a table with a Warlord I'm going to be pretty grumpy about it, perhaps largely as a result of my impressions for forum discussions.
IMX, people are much smaller jerks in person than on line. I expect you'd do fine.
When everything about the class...from its name to the description of its abilities to the agency dilemma posed by non-magical healing to the illustrative scenarios described by its proponents (e.g., the Patton-yelling-at-the-private example)...paints a portrait of a class that has authority/command over other player characters, then it's hard for me to just pretend that fluff doesn't exist.
And I suspect it's the same for proponents, or they wouldn't be arguing so hard for that fluff.
The mechanics just have to be sufficient to cover the full range of concepts the Warlord has done, (and probably should do, in addition, in a game where there are so few martial classes to cover concepts), as long as nothing is lost, in that sense, there's no problem with moderating the fluff to keep it as suitable for all such concepts as possible - and thus, hopefully, not cause players to go crazy bossing other players around or crushing their character concepts just because they picked Warlord. I can be pretty hopeful about that, having played and seen the class in play for the ed's full run without any such things happening, ever.
My first reaction to that is that if you really don't like everything else 5e, why are you playing it? Will introducing the one class that you do like fix it?
For myself, I run 5e to support D&D, the RPG that started it all for me. I want to see the game I love succeed, even if the current incarnation may have technical weaknesses that a past one didn't. It's not the details of the rules that make it D&D.
I'd be more likely to start playing (ie, as a player), if there were an interesting class. So far the Druid was the nearest miss, for me. I'd played Vancian characters to death long since, never cared for the Monk in concept (I probably like it less than you do the Warlord), am cool to divine concepts, and don't care for heavily-DPR-focused options. So far, that leaves out, well, everything in 5e. All the definitive non-casters are focused all but exclusively on DPR, most of the casters are Vancian or close enough as makes no difference, and that leaves the Monk, which never had any business being there in the first place.
I hesitate to say "why don't you stick with 4e?" because that question is clearly overused as a kind of "love it or leave it" denigration
Yes, it is.
I love almost everything about 5e. It's by far my favorite edition. I'm an old grognard and it encapsulates a lot of what I loved about AD&D
It's a blast to run, and nostalgic as one could reasonably want from a modern game. Just wish it was less dissapointing, for me, from the player side.
Furthermore, I don't believe that "more options are always better; you can always ignore the parts you don't like." I like games with fewer options.
I never played 4e, but when I've picked up the books I think, "Ugh...too many tables and choices and races and maneuvers and rules."
Nod. I can sorta see how you'd get that impression (really not many tables though). But, unlike 3e (which IIRC, you also have limited exposure to), or casters in any edition where you had a complex web of choices that you had to plan 20 levels in advance or dozens of choices for each spell level that you re-chose each 'day,' 4e class choices were apportioned out as you leveled, picking a few things at 1st, and one or two, plus possibly re-training, as you leveled. PH1, you rarely picked from a set of more than 5 powers for any class, at any given level, mostly 4. As it expanded - and you really only see the impact if you check out the CB tool - more were added. So lots of choices, but fairly easy, and spread out of 30 levels.
It actually worked out to be very newbie- and casual-player friendly. Freaked returning and long-time players the heck out, though.
I do not want 5e to be that. I'm not trying to keep "bad" options (or my perception thereof) out of the game to be spiteful or mean, I genuinely do not want the game to bloat with options.
Fair enough, and you have the Standard Game - or if you want really austere, the Basic Game - for that. All those 'bad' or 'too many' options need never impact you.
It'd still be nice to keep the Advanced Game focused on the best stuff from each edition, first, before going off into making entirely new contributions to the cannon, and for the pace of introduction to remain relatively slow (1 'cruch' book a year, at the most, for instance).
I like analogies, so here's another one: I would really hate to see the table on modern weapons in the DMG become a mainstream thing. Just because the devs figured out a way to balance laser rifles so that they're really no more powerful than bows, I just don't want to see players running around with them.
The idea is that you'd never see those in a Basic or Standard game. Those versions stay relatively 'pure,' while the DMG and later advanced-game elements could be more inclusive or experimental.
Would the inclusion of the Warlord (or laser guns) ruin it completely? No...but it's a step in that direction. If the Warlord, what else? Gish? Hexblade? Warden? No and no and no and no thank you.
What 'ruins the game' is different for different people. I find the Monk and Psionics about as nice to have in the game as you find Warlords and laser rifles, respectively. The psoincs:laser analogy is particularly apt, since both are sci-fi bits. They'd ruin the game for me if I let 'em. I don't.
My attempts in these threads, and my suggestions, is to figure out exactly what the Warlord proponents want to see if something can be designed that provides the necessary mechanics, but with a flavor that fits into the design aesthetic of 5e. Warlord, as proposed, does not feel like a good fit with the rest of 5e*
Well, the Warlord's not in 5e, so that's inescapable, in a way. The Standard Game is very successful at evoking a 2e sort of feel, and, while I could imagine a 2e Warlord...
[sblock]#8 Dec 01, 2009 17:05:51
Tony_Vargas
Joined Sep 2001
14013 Posts
View All Posts
View Profile
Block User
OK, here's a quick shot at a 2e Warlord.
The Warlord is a member of the Warrior group and gains levels/HD based on the Paladin/Ranger column of Table 14, attacks per round as per table 15, and proficiency per table 34.
Warlord
Ability Requirements: Strength 13, Constitution 10, Intelligence 9, Charisma 14
Prime Requisites: Strength, Charisma (The Warlord gains a +10% bonus to earned experience if his prime requisites are all 16+).
While Warlords do not need Dexterity per se, it is desirable to avoid damage on the battlefield, or if the Warlord wishes to use a bow or other missile weapon more effectively.
Warlords can be of any alignment, but tend more towards law and towards neutrality with respect to good and evil, since leading men in battle demands discipline and a certain callousness or dispassion with respect to sentient life. Even so, chaotic warlords can be found leading loosely-organized bands of warriors through sheer charisma, and heroic ones fight unavoidable wars for the greater good.
While not quite the master of arms that the Fighter is, the Warlord considers himself to wield more than the weapons he grips in his hands. To the Warlord, soldiers and other allies are as much weapons to be forged and wielded with skill as are swords and arrows, and the terrain of a battlefield or fortifications of a castle as much defenses as a good shield or strong armor. Anytime a Warlord is entitled to make an attack, he can command an ally to attack in his stead, granting that ally a damage bonus equal to his 'Loyalty Base' adjustment for Charisma (table 6). Each ally can only be so commanded once per round. If the Warlord is entitled to multiple attacks, he can use each to direct a different ally to attack, if he so desires or attack, himself, in addition to commanding an ally.
Warlords are followed by their men not just because of their innate charisma or authority of rank or station, but because their tactical brilliance allows their allies to perform better than they would acting on their own initiative. Whenever a warlord directs an ally in battle, and the ally carries out the action as ordered, the ally gains a +1 bonus to any attack or check involved - if the warlord's Intelligence score is 15 or higher, the bonus is increased to +2. This includes, but is not limited to, the Warlord using one of his own attacks to command an ally to attack. The player of the Warlord cannot simply 'command' his allies to do whatever they were going to do anyway, though, the order must be meaningful - to change targets, use a specific spell, take advantage of an enemy weakness, or so forth. If the advice is particularly good, the action may well receive a circumstantial bonus from the DM, as well.
Warlord's keep their men drilled and alert. When the Warlord rolls initiative for his party, he subtracts 2 from the roll, making it more likely his side will act first. When the Warlord's party rolls for surprise he deducts 1 from the die, so his party is less likely to be surprised. When a Warlord of at least 7th level leads a party into an Ambush he may make a saving throw vs Paralyzation to spoil the ambush, even if successful, though, his party must still roll for surprise.
Warlords attract a body of men at arms to serve with them, just as fighters do, but do not need to set up a stronghold to do so. Many Warlords choose to serve as a general for an established king or lord (such as high-level PC fighter) or lead itinerant bands of mercenaries, instead.
Finally, Warlords are able to inspire their men to great feats of courage and endurance. NPC allies of the warlord add his level to their morale. Even more remarkably, the Warlord's inspiring leadership can rally men from the very brink of death.
Lead the Attack: With a valiant charge, the Warlord can inspire his allies to attack with increased ferocity. To use this ability, the Warlord must chose a specific enemy and charge that enemy before any other ally has attacked it. The Warlord's allies gain a +2 bonus to attack the same target until that target is killed, surrenders, or flees the combat. Each ally retains this bonus only so long as he attacks the designated target, if he turns his attention to a different enemy, he loses the bonus.
Inspiring Words: A Warlord of at least 3rd level can inspire a wounded comrade to renewed vigor and efforts. The warlord sacrifices one attack he is entitled to this round and instead Inspires an ally who can hear him. The chosen ally regains 1d8 hps per attack the Warlord foregoes that round. If the warlord is entitled to multiple attacks, he can use each to heal a different ally, or heal one ally and command him or another to attack (or attack himself). Each time an ally is healed with Inspiring Words, he must make a Saving Throw vs Death. If he fails the save, his wounds are too severe to be healed by Inspiring Words for the rest of the day. The ally does not have to make a this save if he has taken temporary damage from non-lethal combat or damage from non-physical sources, like Illusions, fear, or other forms of psychic trauma - such 'damage' can always be healed by Inspiring Words.
Rallying Call: Once per day, a Warlord of at least 5th level can rally his troops around him. The Warlord does not move or attack when using his Rallying Cry. Each ally who can hear him recovers hps as if the Warlord had used his available dice of healing from Inspiring Words that round to heal him, alone. If any affected ally is currently under a mind-affecting effect that a saving throw would have negated, he can also make a new saving throw. NPC allies who have been routed are immediately restored to good morale and return to the battle when they hear the Rallying Cry.
Faith in a Friend: Once per day, a Warlord of at least 9th level can inspire a close ally (fellow PC or henchman, not an ordinary hireling or temporary ally of convenience) to shake off the effects of a mortal wound or debilitating affliction long enough to return to the fight. The ally in question must be either at Death's Door, completely helpless, or have been (apparently) slain by an attack since the last time the Warlord acted, and the warlord must be able to see the ally, or the ally must be within the sound of his voice (though, obviously, he may not be conscious to hear it). The Warlord takes no other action for the round, and makes a saving throw vs Spells. If he succeeds, the effect or affliction that has rendered the ally helpless is removed; if he was (apparently) killed by a failed save, he is restored as if the save had been successful; if he was at death's door (or just 'apparently' killed by damage), he is restored to half his normal hps + 3d8 (though no more than his maximum hp total).
Fearsome Warcry: Once per day, a Warlord of at least 11th level can loose a terrible battle-cry that can break the morale of his enemies. Enemies with fewer than 4 levels/HD break and run automatically. Enemies subject to morale checks who hear the warlord must check morale immediately, with a penalty equal to the Warlord's Level + Reaction Adjustment (from Charisma, table 6). Enemies who succeed on their morale check or who are not subject to morale failure still take a -2 penalty to attack the Warlord and his followers while the Warlord still stands. Any enemy with more than twice the Warlord's HDs/levels is unaffected.
Oooh... level titles:
1 Hussar
2 Sergeant
3 Centurion
4 Hipparch
5 Tactician
6 Oberst
7 Brigadier
8 Strategist
9+ Warlord
Oh, I forgot race & level restrictions... unfortunately, they're in the 2e dmg, which I don't have handy, but I remember the 1e race/levels vaguely... so this is based on that, for 2e, up it a bit (or up it to match your house rules - many DMs did).
Race Warlord
-------- -------
Dwarf 9
Elf -
Gnome -
Helf-elf 5
Half-orc -
Halfling 8
Human U
*A Dwarf with STR of at least 17 can reach 10th level, one with STR 18 can reach 11th. A halfling with CHA at least 17 can reach 9th, one with CHA 18+ can reach 10th.
[/sblock]
http://community.wizards.com/content/forum-topic/2440786#379645201
(Been meaning to copy that off the WotC boards.)
... I don't think a good version of the actual Warlord would fit the Standard Game that well. Not as badly as all that, given that HD & overnight healing and a few other base mechanics are well-suited to it in theme as well as functionality, but just not the kind of nostalgia ride that's ideal.
As an addition to the Standard Game, though, that's not an issue. It's meant to be customized to feel very different by different DMs.
Just be happy that your preferred vision of the game /is/ so close to the Standard. Don't begrudge everyone who isn't so lucky the chance to get what they're looking from out of the Advanced Game.
But maybe I should explain it this way: just like I truly don't understand why "non-magical, non-supernatural" is so important, but I'm taking it on faith that it is and trying to accommodate it, please take it on faith that I (and I assume others) truly believe that the inclusion of some "options" will adversely affect the overall game. I know you don't understand how that could be true, but it doesn't necessarily mean that I/we are wrong, just that we look at RPGs differently.
Too very, very different things. Here's an analogy: the Peanut Butter Sandwich. When I say I like peanut butter, so it should be available in stores, I'm talking about something I want, that I will use, myself. OTOH, when you say that some food is just bad, and peanuts particularly so because you're fatally allergic to them, you're talking about something you'll avoid at all costs.
My eating a peanut butter sandwich in San Jose will not kill you in Boston. That's why wanting an option for personal reasons you'll have to take on faith is OK, and wanting to deprive everyone of that option for personal reasons we'll have to take on faith is not.
You need never play a Warlord, you need never play at a table with a Warlord, you need never use dice that were made in a facility that may also have been used to process Warlord and War- or Lord- related products.
And, again, we're talking one class that obviously has some traction with players (how much is undetermined, but, there is some traction for this). Not a huge issues. Do you have the same issues with the new Psionic classes, or the soon to be released Forgotten Realms book that is going to have new classes?
