so if it was His words can cause your body to push past it's pain tolerance?
or wait... what if it was just "Inspireing word" the warlord uses his bonus action and you can spend a HD...
Pretty sure that's not what he's asking about.
edit: whoa, what just happened? Elfcrusher, I feel like you deserve an apology for all the non-responsive answers you just got. I hope the following isn't so bad....
In another thread nobody was able to answer this question very well, so I'll try here: can you describe to me how "non-magical healing" works that does not dictate the recipient's state of mind?
No, I can't: they have to be allies for it to work. 'Ally' is, I'm afraid, very much a state of mind. Though it's not so much the ability dictating the state of mind, as the state of mind determining if the ability can work or not.
The idea is, you inspire someone and that allows them to fight on. It's affecting their state of mind in a positive way that is modeled with restored hps. There's a number of magical, technically non-magical, and entirely non-magical mechanics that already function by 'Inspiration' and thus change your character's state of mind in a positive way: Aid (explicitly magical) imposes 'resolve' upon your character (even he's a Paladin of Bahamut, and a Cleric of Tiamat casts it on him), Bardic Inspiration (not technically magical, even though Bards are casters) obviously makes you all inspired to the tune of getting a larger bonus to a future roll than Bless, and, of course Inspiring Leader (not magical at all) makes you all inspired between combats (no matter how much your lone-wolf resents said 'leadership').
So, while no one's going to explain to you how something can be inspiring without making people feel inspired, it's also no basis for rejecting an ability for modeling inspiration, as there's already precedent for doing so.
Potential intra-party RP conflict is also nothing new, and nothing the game needs to go out of its way to avoid. Noble and Soldier background grant status and military rank, respectively, Inspiring Leader has 'Leader' right in the name, multiple classes bring religious baggage that could conflict (and an extreme example of differing alignments isn't the only way), warlocks could be the object of superstition and suspicion or prejudice, and, as always, personalities can simply conflict - heck, the kind of 'lone wolf' who summarily rejects inspiration and leadership probably has axes to grind with everyone (and it's not like that trope is unknown in genre, though such a character usually develops, eventually).
So, while you're bringing up something that could happen, it's not a unique problem that needs to be solved before the class can even go into development.
It's just a truism that player conflicts can happen.
Most versions I see of this are "Your allies find inspiration in your leadership" or "Your words cause your allies to have renewed hope" or "You command your companion to" or things of that nature. That seems to suggest my character admires and looks up to this warlord, whether or not that's what I want my character to think.
You could also have an intense rivalry, so you go out of your way to prove you're better than him, just for one instance.
My objection to the general warlord concept is not tactical bonuses or non-magical healing, but that the class is described, fluffed, and even named to suggest that other player characters look up to, admire, and follow him. The archetypes offered (coach, officer, team captain) are all examples where one individual has some kind authority over, or at the very least earned respect from, the other(s).
I get it, you begrudge people that kind of character concept, you don't want to let them play the character they want to play, you feel it gets in the way of the kind of character you want to play.
You're entitled to feel that way, but it's not a valid reason to say the class can't exist.
Can you offer any fluff (not the least of which is a less obnoxious class name) that suggests equality with the other heroes, not unearned leadership of them?
Sure. A character who inspires - whether hypothetical Warlord or actual Bard, Inspiring Leader, Battlemaster with the Rally maneuver, Cleric "mind-controlling" you with Aid, or whatever other extant or potential concept - /could/ be a nominal 'unearned' superior (with the Noble background, for instance) or an 'earned' superior (Soldier background with some military rank) or he could be a skillful manipulator (with the Charlatan background) who doesn't openly present himself as a superior (but probably thinks of himself that way), or he could be a brave (equal or even inferior) comrade-in-arms who inspires by example and mutual respect, or a nominal inferior (an Entertainer - jester or chronicler, for instance) who alternately flatters and goads his superiors to greater efforts, or a literal inferior (a perennial victim in need of rescue, as in a cheap melodrama, or a sidekick) who inspires with pluck and wide-eyed admiration for his heroes, or a formal inferior (a loyal retainer) who inspires with his unshakable faith in the master and a bit of deferential advice now and then (you could literally play 'Casters & Caddies' if you wanted with that one).
And, yes, the reply I always hear is "just fluff it however you want". Well, if it's that easy then:
1) What exactly is that alternate fluff?
Whatever you can imagine, the above are some possibilities off the top of my head, not meant to be exhaustive.
2) Why can't it be the official fluff, instead of the "my hero is the boss of yours" version?
I don't see why one specific concept needs to be an official default: the class has potential to cover a lot, and a good representative sampling should certainly be given. When it comes to names of specific maneuvers, those that imply an active role and competence are probably /mostly/ preferable. Mostly.
My Hero![/i]
Your part is easy: scream and look helpless.
When an enemy moves adjacent to or attacks you, you can use this tactic as a Reaction to nominate an ally who could reach you in a single move action to come to your rescue. The ally can spend his Reaction to move up to his speed and attack the triggering enemy. If he does, your ally gains temp hps (insert calculus for how many, taking into account your level & CHA, ally's level, and the enemies level, because math is fun). If the attack hits, that enemy has disadvantage on its attacks that turn, unless he attacks the ally.
Inspiration:The ally you nominate must either have Inspiration available, or make a CON save (DC= see 'Inspiration' feature that I haven't written up, assume it's perfect) to summon up the surge of heroic effort to come to your rescue.
Tactic:Enemies have a chance to see through your ploy. On a successful INT save (DC = see 'Tactics' feature that I haven't written up, assume it's perfect), the triggering enemy can change his movement or attack someone else, you lose your reaction, and the tactic fails - even if he chooses to go through with his action, your ally's attack is at disadvantage, and the enemy doesn't suffer disadvantage if it hits.
EDIT: And to circle around, my objection is not to inspirational healing in general (I'm fine with Second Wind)
don't see how it's inspirational, but I'm glad you're OK with it
but rather that when it's applied to somebody other than self it always seems to come with a description that roleplays somebody else's character for them.
I've always found it a little odd that you could 'inspire yourself' - it's not crazy, and I can see the need for it, but it is slightly less intuitive on the surface than inspiring others.
Anyway, you could try to look at 'being inspired' as an RP opportunity - RP can/does/should happen among PCs as well as PC-NPC interactions: Work out your relationship to any Bard, Battlemaster, Warlord, 'Inspiring Leader' or other character that might have such a mechanic in a way that fits both concepts and suits both players.
