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

[Tony Vargas]

The AD&D Dungeon Master's Guide was released in 1979 and includes diagrams showing how to use a square grid and a hex grid to determine how many enemies can attack a character and which ones of them you get a shield bonus against, etc. I can attest to grids being a well-known technique going right back to 1974.

I never saw a hex mat until around 83 or 84, when I started seeing people using them to play Champions. First I saw of grid mats was with 3.0 - but that's specifically the vinyl mats. I do recall a grid/hex pull-out sheet in an old Dragon Magazine before that.

And, of course, dungeon maps were almost always on a grid, and overland, hex.

So that was my experience. But, I wasn't gaming in the 70s, and I bow to your longer experience on that point.

 

[mellored]

The biggest is that for all of 5e's "looser" form of balance, most warlords end up tossing out bonuses that wreck bounded accuracy. Far beyond "grant advantage to attacks", we're talking stuff like "add warlord's Int bonus to hit or Cha bonus to saves" stuff which can easily get crazy when the warlord has a 20 (or higher thanks to magic) score, before adding in magical items or such.
Or warlords that toss out extra actions like candy, which allow for some sick combos. Or I see a warlord who is handing out class abilities (in the other thread) like giving everyone a minimum roll on rogue skills or a bonus that mimics barbarian rage. Or I see a warlord who can heal wounds, cure or mitigate conditions just by his voice and claim its nonmagical. I read about Insightful, Inspiring, and Bravada warlords and they all seem like "pick an ability score. Give it to your friends d20 rolls" rather than interesting archetypes that changes how the character is played. Above all, I'm not seeing what a warlord brings to the game other than "battlemaster, but more powerful" or "bard, but nonmagical." Nobody has convinced me that there is a way to MECHANICALLY do a warlord that isn't going break the game in one or more ways.

i think your combining all the suggestions into a single class that can use all of them every turn and last for a minute.
and yes that would be overpowered. so would a caster who could cast all his possible spells at the same time. but that's not what's being suggested.

the bardlord, like a caster, would needs to choose, either by feature or by action, weather to give +to-hit, OR +to save OR +to-healing OR grant an attack OR.... just like a cleric needs to choose between bless OR cure woulds OR guiding bolt. not all at once.

and it's not more powerfull then a battlemaster. it's "more dice, less attacks" then the battle master. and "more dice, less spells" then the bard.

i still don't understand how you went from saying they where too weak to need their own class, to now they are too OP to be a class.

 

[Eric V]

In my book, I could easily live with the following:

• A New Class. What with bards and paladins being magical and fighters being fight-y, I think the cry for a new class is warranted. Not necessary per se, but I could see a lot of value in it, which is something that I wouldn't say about artificers or psions, necessarily.
• The Class focuses on Cha, then Int, maybe. If we're makin' a new class, we might as well give it the high ability scores that people are lookin' for. I'd be content with an ability score section that read "Make Charisma your highest ability score, followed by Intelligence." Maybe these replace your STR or DEX on attack rolls or AC! I'm in. You could even switch 'em up or whatever. No pony in that race, happy to see Int given a little more love in 5e.
• The class is non-magical. No spells. I think no daily-limited abilities (we're lookin' at a short-rest-recharge class). No supernatural light shows.
• The class gets most of its "nova damage potential" from buffs. The most straightforward and literal example of this would be "give an ally Sneak Attack damage or something like it on an enemy of your choice." "Something like it" might include an enemy debuff ("next person to hit this guy knocks him prone!") or an ally buff ("next person to hit this guy gains 5 temp hp"), maybe, but either way it's based on what allies do, with you enabling it.
• The class does not grant others actions at will. Action-granting is a short-rest-recharge thing, something that consumes a resource, something that is limited. You can be pretty lazy in this class with the above bullet point. You can still help allies take a move or an attack action a few rounds out of the fight, though. At high levels, get the whole party to join in.
• The class can keep an ally going, including waking up an unconscious ally. The class does this without healing hit points. Temp HP, die hard mechanics, damage mitigation, punishment mechanics ("if you hit my friend, he'll get an AC buff, so go ahead."), saving throw bonuses. They should be at least as good at a paladin as these things. Being a damage-remover should be an easy auto-pilot choice.
• Archetypes: The class in general is an "Inspiring Leader," the lady giving the rousing speech and fighting at the front lines who can tell those fighting with her where their efforts might be needed most because, like a high-Int wizard, she sees the battlefield at a remove. She's a clever reader of the battlefield and her presence makes everyone fight a little bit harder. Her class options might include mounted cavaliers, knight-protectors and samurai in shining armor (but without the paladin's supernatural vibe), nobles trained in the arts of war, tactically-minded military commanders, and maybe even an area-effect-specialist magical general.

My understanding is that that's not warlord enough for a lot of warlord fans.

Actually, this would be pretty good except I'd want actual hp restoration to be consistent with the official definition of hp in the game, with maybe an alt explanation for people who see hp=meat (which I believe you are, yes?)

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

But this is an interesting topic, and I hope no one minds the digression:

So what about the opposite, the character who uses a one-handed or hand-and-a-half weapon, but takes a hand off it now and then to grapple someone or cling to a much larger enemy (a classic), do you think that's doable? Or is the shield necessary to make the build viable?

If it's something you don't see in genre, then not being able to do it is NBD. If it's something you see all the time, then you can feel the lack. Conversely, if something's very prominent in the game, but almost unheard of in genre, it's poor emulation.

I don't think the shield is necessary, or Shield Mastery, it's just something you could do if you wanted to excel. Honestly, I've got a Paladin/Sorc who is a pretty effective controller even with only two attacks and Str 16, thanks to Bounded Accuracy, high AC, and a handful of paladin spells like Sanctuary. He could be better, but he's pretty good, and a similarly-levelled fighter with Str 20 and a greatsword would be even better. Just make sure you have a spare one-handed weapon so you can still stab the dragon when one hand is too busy to hold your greatsword.

To be a decent defensive fighter in 5E requires primarily one thing: a relatively small ego. Having multiple attacks and a high strength helps, but the primary thing you need is to not particularly care if someone else is scoring all of the DPR.

We have very different approaches to 5E BTW. To me, genre is totally irrelevant to whether or not it is NBD for certain capabilities to not exist within the game. The game system is primary, and I will play D&D as long as it models things that are cool (c.f. Brust's Rule of Cool), and I happen to think Fireballs and Mental Domination are cool, ergo 5E is sufficiently cool to be worth playing. I frankly don't care at all whether fireballs appear in literature. Conversely, there are certain things that appear in fantasy literature such as prophecies and Ultimate Weapons that simply don't work within 5E for obvious reasons, and their absence in D&D doesn't bother me. Saberhagen's Swords of Power make for awesome fantasy novels, but they'd (probably) be terribly boring in D&D, and more importantly they don't fit the D&D idiom. Much of Saberhagen's fantasy doesn't fit the D&D idiom in fact--c.f. Arms of Hercules, in which Hercules trivializes every "combat encounter" he has, narrating them with an air almost of boredom, and most of the dramatic tension centers on cerebral matters like where the giants are coming from and what Zeus is trying to accomplish via Hercules. The fact that D&D doesn't handle these kinds of stories well is not a problem though; D&D is what it is, and it's good at certain things, and those things are mostly small-unit tactics and magical violence.

TL;DR: I don't care if everything Cool can be incorporated into 5E. I just care that the things 5E does enable are Cool.

 

[pemerton]

Well compared to later editions AD&D classes were definitely not balanced entirely around combat, which 3e and 4e were especially focused on.

Suppose this is true - how does that change the fact that 1st ed AD&D had classes with defined roles spelled out in its rulebooks.

I also don't see that it has any bearing on whether or not there is scope within 5e's design space for a warlord. Although 5e is clearly designed around a pretty high degree of combat balance, and that would have to be factored into the warlord's design.

If the bardic music is magical then its a different effect.

And from reading the descriptions of the powers in 4e where it was stated that the Warlord commands an ally to attack and such probably didn't help those who thought the class was usurping their control over their own character to a bit.

I've never encountered a table where taking control of another PC's mind via magic is OK, but powers flavoured as inspiration/command are anathema. But I'm sure they exist.

 

[mellored]

Well, I like what you propose, with just two details. It should have the option to surrender your own attack at will -maybe only for a subclass that is about being lazy- and that the easiest way to keep allies going is with a regular healing ability instead of five different ones that cover small aspects of it that in turn need you to keep track of all of them. I wouldn't want to demand game mastery just to do what I think is one of the main jobs of the class. (Could you tell me if the class I made ticks those points for you?)

you can make a lazy-lord without granting an attack.
for instance, "when you use the help action, and the ally hits, the creature must make a DC save or be knocked prone".

also, i would prefer int as the main stat, cha seconday. but a mix of both would be good.

 

[Minigiant]

To me the main concept to the warlord are

• The guy or gal in charge of dangerous operations
• Or the main adviser to the guy or gal in charge of dangerous operations

Basically the brains, charm, or wisdom in any organization which is puts itself in constant danger.

Let's go though all the PHB backgrounds... and make a concept of each.

• Acolyte
  • Divine Battlemaster
    • A warrior which minor divine magic who combines in and mundane medicine for miraculous effects.
    • "He's bleeding from a blood vessel here. Put your finger int the wound here, cast cure wounds, then remove your finger in 3 seconds."
• Charlatan
  • Ringmaster
    • A warrior who has masters the arts of manipulation of emotion to cause others to be gripped by feeling of fear, awe, anger, confidence, or excitement.
• Criminal
  • Prince of Thieves
    • A warrior and trickster who can aid others less skilled than he in theft and assassination.
    • "Hey, Clanky. Didn't I tell you to hold that shoulder plate of that new armor of yours. And don't tiptop in those giant boots. Full steps."
• Entertainer/Gladiator
  • Exotic Weapon Master
    • A warrior who learned unconventional methods of combat and can use their knowledge to point out what others miss.
• Folk Hero
  • Well this one is so generic
• Guild Artisan
  • Master Weaponsmith
    • A warrior who knows weaponry from creation to application. They know the ins and outs of indivdual weapons to let others use weapons to their full potential.
• Hermit
  • A hermit warlord? Errr...
• Noble/Knight
  • Beacon of Hope
    • A warrior whose mere presence inspires his allies to survive and fight on either by admiration or rival..
    • "As long as Sir Wayne can stand, I can too." "I'm not falling before that idiot Wayne."
• Outlander
  • Borderlands Marshal
    • A guardian who keeps the team sharp and ready for ambushes.
• Sage
  • Arcane Battlemaster
    • A warrior with minor arcane magic who can mix magic, weaponry, and coordination into a devastating force.
    • "Hit him with an ice spell. It will make his parry on the nonshield side slow."
• Sailor/Pirate
  • Captain of Fortune
    • A warrior who learns to take advantage of every lucky break he get and every jinx on the enemy
    • "The orc chieftain's visor is loose. He won't be able to parry overheads."
• Soldier
  • Combat Veteran
    • A master of battle who can teach his tricks earned from experience mid-battle.
    • "Try that shot I taught ya."
• Urchin
  • Give me a sec

 

[Imaro]

I think this is the "TOTM Effect" in action. We play on a grid, where you find that zipping all the way into melee and back out to a safe location is simply not going to happen (a character with 35' movement is going to likely be able to move 20', attack, and then POSSIBLY move back within the cover of his allies, though I think this relies on specific readings of Cunning Action).

We do a mix of ToTM and grid... and no it's very much not the effect of TotM, not even seeing how that would matter. A Rogue with 35' movement can, using Cunning action as a dash movement move 110' total... if that's not enough to get out of the melee range of most creatures (especially if they are already engaged with another party member), not sure what is... and what exactly do you mean a specific reading of Cunning Action... it's pretty clear to me but what is the alternative?

Not that our thief doesn't manage plenty of backstabs and surprise attacks, he does. Sometimes he also slides out of the way and avoids a counterpunch, but that will NOT always work. For example we took on a hydra the other day, you're just not getting away from those heads, not unless you can move faster than a normal character. Nobody actually went down in that fight, because we unleashed everything we had on the beast and fried it in round 3, though it did predictably take a nice chunk out of old Doodle's hit points!

How can a Rogue using the Mobile feat and Cunning Action not get away from the creature? It gets no OppAttk on him and he can dash as a bonus action on top of his regular movement...

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

My understanding is that that's not warlord enough for a lot of warlord fans.

I don't really have a problem with what you're saying. I suspect there are a few things I'd be OK with that you seem to want to exclude, but then again I'd give everyone the benefit of the doubt there.

 

[Carlsen Chris]

What the hell is a Warlord?