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

[Yunru]

Doesn't really work that way though. First of all you're assuming I guessed exactly which character would take the 100+ damage, but you don't. In a typical party you need to have 125 THP granting to equal that 25 HP healing. Certainly you need a lot more than 25, or you need to be assured that everyone in the party is taking a pounding, and even then most likely if damage is spread out that much then healing would serve equally well or better.

There's also the question of just exactly how durable THP really are. Actual hit points are permanent, and this is true in all situations. At least in the game I play in a 'long rest' isn't something we just get automatically, our characters just finished trekking for a week in the barrens without getting one, THP would be long gone in that situation, healing would remain.

The real problem is you can't reliably state what the equivalence factor is, it is highly dependent on the table, which rules are being used, etc. I'm pretty sure that's why 4e used mechanically similar healing for most leader classes.

TempHP are just as permanent, nay more permanent than regular hit points. Sure HP restores over a long rest - so does whatever was used to grant the TempHP. Sure TempHP is gone after you take damage - so is regular HP.

TempHP, however, is completely unaffected by your Hit Point Maximum. It remains even if you Hut Point Maximum is reduced. It can be applied even if your at your Hit Point Maximum. The only thing that it can't do better than HP is get you back up from 0HP.

Your example's also completely wrong. Let's take the classic Inspiring Leader. It lasts until it is depleted and can be reused on a short or long rest. Only way a healer can put up that level of output on the described trek is if they're a Warlock.

 

[TwoSix]

Beyond that, nothing forces you to use a specific class to represent the archetype you want to play. In 4e if you wanted to be a defender and also a 'ranger' you could simply be a fighter and take a background/feat that granted access to the Nature or Dungeoneering feats (conveniently Warrior of the Wild does that and ALSO makes you mechanically eligible to use Ranger class options if you so choose). You could even pick a theme that made you a 'beastmaster' if you wished. Said character is in any thematic sense a type of 'Ranger' and would be recognized in-game as such to whatever degree the narrative cared about it, but would also be mechanically a very good defender. I suspect 5e can do the same thing, and surely it was also possible to some extent in earlier editions (although 3.x tended to hurt you on the needed skills).

Not to mention 4e also had hybrid classes, for when your character concept really needed to leverage abilities from several different classes. Honestly, I think 4e is the single best edition for being able to build a character that looked the way you want, since almost any build can at least carry their weight (unless your measuring stick is some of the high-DPR builds enabled by certain degenerate item combinations.)

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

I made a 4e wizard who charged enemies with a large weapon, and could out damage most other players.

Though that might say more about OP charging was in 4e then anything about the classes.

Charging got to be stupid potent IF your DM simply gave you every item that granted some advantage to charging (and you took lots of feats that worked with it too). So it CAN be something a little silly, OTOH the DM doesn't have to give away any old item either, especially if you use the more updated item rarity rules. A Barbarian with 1 or 2 charge related items is pretty good, quite potent, but not totally ridiculous, and a wizard with the same two items should really stick with spell casting. OTOH you could call this an example of role flexibility

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

TempHP are just as permanent, nay more permanent than regular hit points. Sure HP restores over a long rest - so does whatever was used to grant the TempHP. Sure TempHP is gone after you take damage - so is regular HP.

Not necessarily in the example I gave. While THP may last "to the next long rest" if you are going by the most commonly-used healing rules that probably wouldn't apply at most tables in the situation I cited. Admittedly it gets to be hard to talk about what happens in all variations of a game, but "hard conditions prevent full rests" is pretty common, and many GMs also don't grant full healing to max HP even if you DO get a full rest, making 'real' healing that much more useful.

TempHP, however, is completely unaffected by your Hit Point Maximum. It remains even if you Hut Point Maximum is reduced. It can be applied even if your at your Hit Point Maximum. The only thing that it can't do better than HP is get you back up from 0HP.

Reductions of HP maximum are practically unknown, whereas being reduced to 0 is something I see in almost every session we play. Its practically a standing joke that the thief will go down at least once per session.

Now, that might also tell us we could stick THP on the thief, but what about when the battle master goes down? You can't simply stick THP on one guy out of 5 and call it equivalent to healing actual damage that you KNOW has already happened.

Your example's also completely wrong. Let's take the classic Inspiring Leader. It lasts until it is depleted and can be reused on a short or long rest. Only way a healer can put up that level of output on the described trek is if they're a Warlock.

I have no idea what you mean. Clerics have healing resources that are recharged on short rests, and on long rests. I don't see any inherent difference. Since we don't have an exact definition of this inspiring leader any comparison to other classes is simply speculation and if it would show one option to be superior, how do I know that's how it will actually work? Maybe there's an amount of THP granting that balances out some other amount of permanent healing, but I return to my earlier statement, that number is highly dependent on the exact rules being used, the exact situation, and the builds of each character being compared.

 

[Yunru]

Except all Temporary Hit Points last until after a long rest, they're depleted by damage, or a condition specified by the thing that grants them; we know what Inspiring Leader does since it's printed in the PHB; and a character going down every session means either someone's not doing their job right, or you're playing a harder-than-guideline campaign.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Except all Temporary Hit Points last until after a long rest, they're depleted by damage, or a condition specified by the thing that grants them; we know what Inspiring Leader does since it's printed in the PHB; and a character going down every session means either someone's not doing their job right, or you're playing a harder-than-guideline campaign.

Actually I think our game is in-general rather easy. There have been some dangerous combats, but most of them are pretty cut-and-dried. The thief (in particular) still tends to go down about once a session. The fighters rarely go down, we've lost 3 clerics killed outright, and the wizard, my character, did get hit pretty hard a couple times several levels back, but he's taken only modest damage lately (as has cleric #4).

And again, its easy to say THP last until 'X' when using the default healing rules, but if you aren't using the default healing rules then its less clear that they have to last that long. In fact I don't think as a DM I would have them lasting more than a day, no matter what. They are after all TEMPORARY, and if they're representing inspiration, which we will assume is a mental state, being inspired, that doesn't just sustain itself day after day then you have to begin to wonder why bother with THP as at that point they're narrative justification is no better than 'true' healing by inspiration. At which point you run smack into [MENTION=42582]pemerton[/MENTION]'s primary objection, that they're just extra rules clutter (which I tend to agree with).

 

[Yunru]

Temporary Hit Points are unaffected by any healing rules, except to state that they are unaffected by any healing rules. So I don't see how not using the standard healing rules matters at all.

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

Yes, you can make a gimmicky character that goes against the grain. But that doesn't change what they're made for, and they'd be doing a better job doing their own thing

As for Warlords being a character? No. They're not there just to fill the demand. Let's work at it this way

I want a leadership character. One who doesn't necessarily fight on the front lines, but is still there and can pinch in, but is mostly directing, advising people the best tactics. I want an Alexander the Great

Also I don't want him to be magical because magic is cheating. I don't want him to be a bard because he's not using music. I want someone who's sheer guts and charisma makes people put out 110%

Though I can see way some have an issue with that. The class is telling them what their PC is inspired by and its not a magical effect. Your LG Warlord is a major inspiration to my CN rogue who can barely tolerate him?

 

[Yunru]

Though I can see way some have an issue with that. The class is telling them what their PC is inspired by and its not a magical effect. Your LG Warlord is a major inspiration to my CN rogue who can barely tolerate him?

So what's the trouble, the class, or the character that doesn't play nice with the group. Besides, it's not like you have to be inspired.

 

[mellored]

Though I can see way some have an issue with that. The class is telling them what their PC is inspired by and its not a magical effect. Your LG Warlord is a major inspiration to my CN rogue who can barely tolerate him?

And my heavy metal loving barbarian can barely tolerate your country music bard.
He think's magic is an abomination as well....


It seems like there's some other reason why some people are so anti-warlord, that has nothing to do with the class itself.

Besides the name, which is a reasonable objection.