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

[Tony Vargas]

At 50% accuracy (cause it's quicker).

3d6+15 * .25 = 6.375
2d6+5 * .5 = 6

Giving a TWF advantage for a round is better then a single 2-handed attack.
And if your facing a horde of kobolds, the 2-hander is likely to lose more with overkill.

Overkill, wow, this is flashing me back to some 3.5 discussions. All valid points, of course. Though it seems like attack-oriented PCs hit more like 60-70% than half.

Similarly, having 5 people able to launch fireballs, isn't as helpful.

A 40d nova isn't nice to have? Seriously, though, I agree that a diverse party is an ideal D&D at least attempts to encourage. There should be some synergy among the party, in any case, support classes like the Warlord, though, particularly highlight that.

Party synergy <> imbalance.
Unintended synergy among options a single character might avail himself of, OTOH...

There are several classes in 5e who's PRIMARY SHTICK is often providing advantages of one sort or another to other characters. Its perfectly reasonable to refer to these as 'leaders'.

But not necessary nor even that accurate. 'Support' works just as well, for instance. Just like it might be easy to say 'Striker,' but 'DPR' is just as easy and conveys the laser-focus some 5e DPR classes have ('Strikers' had a few other aspects to the role, such as mobility or discouraging counter-attacks, that aren't true of all 5e DPR classes).

Well, we're just fundamentally in disagreement then, I don't accept that non-magical is 'less impressive'. There's more too it, but that's close enough for now.

'Less flashy' might be fair.

I just want productive discussions, not 'get lost'.
...
...
Lets make it simple. I don't intend to create a class that can do less because it "isn't magical." I don't think that's a core conceit of the game or of the genre. It is certainly an easy and lazy mode of thinking to get into that allows one to avoid a lot of extra creative work to make classes that allow really interesting non-casters, but if you want this conceit I think you might find some other systems to be more appropriate, like Ars Magica.

Regardless of how much I agree with other ideas of the person saying it, "D&D is not for you, go play something else," just isn't constructive. It's as dismissive as what he did to you up-thread.
5e is meant to be for all fans of D&D.
I know that's an almost painfully cutesy, kumbaya, line, but it really would be good for the game if the community could rise to that level.

 

[Remathilis]

Can't say i like the long rest idea. There are already plenty of long rest classes.

Long rest allows powers to be balanced againt spells better. The trade off is most powers can auto-scale (based on tactical die) and you get more than a bard or battlemaster. Really, every class has long rest refresh (with some short rest ones mixed in) so I don't see a point messing with success

 

[Minigiant]

Just to clarify, there are some instances that nonmagical is better than magical.

In 5e there's:
Damage- weapon damage over time exceeds magic damage.
Ability checks: you get more bonuses and reliability from nonmagical sources than magical.

The question is what aspects which 5th edition cares about that the warlord also cares about could be a major part of the class. Presence is the easiest to see. Healing is too sung to magic and positioning doesn't matter in 5e.

So buffs.
Buff that don't require concentration.
Buffs.

 

[ChrisCarlson]

You mean there's limits on how many spells they can have?
And how many they can use?

Yes. There is. At 20th level wizard, even a high elf with Magic Initiate and Spell Sniper feats will have no more than 9 cantrips. So you are indeed wrong.

 

[steeldragons]

Lets make it simple. I don't intend to create a class that can do less because it "isn't magical." I don't think that's a core conceit of the game or of the genre. It is certainly an easy and lazy mode of thinking to get into that allows one to avoid a lot of extra creative work to make classes that allow really interesting non-casters, but if you want this conceit I think you might find some other systems to be more appropriate, like Ars Magica.

I suppose I am not to take this as "totally dismissive" or "insulting", right? Luckily I, also, do not have a thin skin.

I will just say, that the view a mundane class should have the same as a magic-using class because "if they can do it, so should I" is unjustified...and unjustifiable.

There is nothing lazy or avoiding creativity in designing a class to have abilities that can not do what magic can accomplish. Saying that is also not saying magical classes are inherently "better." That is a defensive reaction. It can still have it's own mechanics and flavor. It can [and should] have its own unique shtick. It can [and perhaps should, in some cases] do things that magic can't do as well or, maybe even, at all. As you said, each class has its specialty. There is/must be/has always been a trade off. That is a central conceit of the game.

The magic class can do [perhaps] more variety or [definitely] more "impressive" [perhaps a poor choice of words on my part] a.k.a. "powerful" a.k.a. "reality bending" (flashy or not) things...but only as far/often as their magic (slots and lists) let them.

The mundane class can do [perhaps] less variety or [definitely] less "impressive" a.k.a. "powerful" a.k.a. "reality bending" things...if not all/any time, certainly more often than spell slots (in 5e parlance, potentially, a short rest recharge). It's a matter of trade-off, what's "fair, and what makes sense, not what's "the same" or "must be as 'good' as 'they' get."

We are in absolute agreement about one thing...we have a fundamental difference of perspective. ...and that poses an impasse. Unsurprisingly, I do not believe you and I are not the only ones in this thread to have them.

 

[mellored]

Long rest allows powers to be balanced againt spells better. The trade off is most powers can auto-scale (based on tactical die) and you get more than a bard or battlemaster. Really, every class has long rest refresh (with some short rest ones mixed in) so I don't see a point messing with success

Warlocks are at-will and short rest. No long rest until higher levels.
Monks are at-will and short rest. No long rests except a single sub-class feature.
Fighter's are at-will with some short rest mixed in. No long rest.
Rogues are at-will. No long rest, or even short rest. A few high level abilities are per-battle.

Plenty of precedent for at-will with maybe a few short-rest or per-battle abilities.


Unless you count HP. Which yes, the battlebard would also have long rest HP.

 

[mellored]

Just to clarify, there are some instances that nonmagical is better than magical.

In 5e there's:
Damage- weapon damage over time exceeds magic damage.
Ability checks: you get more bonuses and reliability from nonmagical sources than magical.

The question is what aspects which 5th edition cares about that the warlord also cares about could be a major part of the class. Presence is the easiest to see. Healing is too sung to magic and positioning doesn't matter in 5e.

So buffs.
Buff that don't require concentration.
Buffs.

Frequency.
Magic is limited. You can only do it X-times a day. Mundane is not.

A fighter can swing his sword all day long. Not as damaging as a evoker's big spell, but more frequently.
A rogue can cunning action all day long. Not as powerful as a sorcerer's greater invisibility, but more frequently.
A battlebard should be able to buff all day long. Not as much as big of a bonus, or not as many creatures, but more frequently.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Frequency.
Magic is limited. You can only do it X-times a day. Mundane is not.

A fighter can swing his sword all day long. Not as damaging as a evoker's big spell, but more frequently.

The Fighter's Action Surge is also limited use. More so than a Warlock's spells, for instance.

Just to clarify, there are some instances that nonmagical is better than magical.

In 5e there's:
Damage- weapon damage over time exceeds magic damage.

In theory. In a game that's all about fast combats...
Seriously, though, magic can do plenty of damage, it just does it differently. Smite instead of Action Surge, for instance... Both high-damage, both limited-use, yet one is very clearly magic of a certain flavor, and the other is very clearly non-magical and not supernatural at all.

Ability checks: you get more bonuses and reliability from nonmagical sources than magical.

I assume we're talking Expertise?

The question is what aspects which 5th edition cares about that the warlord also cares about could be a major part of the class. Presence is the easiest to see. Healing is too sung to magic and positioning doesn't matter in 5e.

'Healing' is a good example of how the same result could be reached in different ways to emphasize the magic vs non-magic distinction. Restoring hps needn't be 'healing,' which can be left to magic.

Positioning most certainly does matter in any game that has ranges and areas and movement speeds precise to the foot. But, that aside, if positioning doesn't matter, you could still aim for the same effects as positioning could accomplish in a game that did care, some of which might mean granting a specific action, benefit, or condition - like disengage, an extra reaction, or opportunity to use some ability (like SA) not normally used out-of-turn or the like.

others could simply be...

So buffs.
Buff that don't require concentration.
Buffs.

Yep. And/or buffs that require cooperation from the character receiving them rather than concentration, or are situational instead of limited-use. There's so many possibilities...

 

[Remathilis]

Warlocks are at-will and short rest. No long rest until higher levels.
Monks are at-will and short rest. No long rests except a single sub-class feature.
Fighter's are at-will with some short rest mixed in. No long rest.
Rogues are at-will. No long rest, or even short rest. A few high level abilities are per-battle.

Plenty of precedent for at-will with maybe a few short-rest or per-battle abilities.


Unless you count HP. Which yes, the battlebard would also have long rest HP.

I guess it's possible to have all dice refresh on a short (like a battlemaster or fifth level bard) but the # of dice is going to have to be dramatically slashed. The goal is that a warlord should use 1-3 powers/dice per encounter, since most 5e combats don't last all that long, that seems like a good number without spamming. Perhaps 3+int, with more as they level up?

 

[mellored]

I guess it's possible to have all dice refresh on a short (like a battlemaster or fifth level bard) but the # of dice is going to have to be dramatically slashed. The goal is that a warlord should use 1-3 powers/dice per encounter, since most 5e combats don't last all that long, that seems like a good number without spamming. Perhaps 3+int, with more as they level up?

I'd still rather have a weak buff each round then a strong buff every once in a while.


I mean, i can already get bless twice per short rest by going cleric 1/warlock 2.