D&D 5E 5e Warlord Demand Poll

[Corwin]

You were quoted as saying "That list is both misleading and, frankly, wrong-headed. I see no point to such an exercise in futility.", and the body of the post was "How so?"

Thanks. Yeah, I can answer that. Though David already tackled it well himself. Mainly, asking to perfectly mimic another class is pointless. If you want exactly what the other class, does, play that class. Its misleading because a good chunk of the list involves casting a concentration spell on someone. That has multiple, substantive ramifications not addressed by the list as presented.

But, to me at least, most importantly, its wrong-headed because its trying to put the cart before the horse, as it were. Its demanding that a concept adhere to a rigid set of parameters. When the truth is, the concept already *does* exist, in multiple avenues. Just not in such a way as to appease a particular person. Well, nothing in 5e is immune from being disliked by a contingent of people. So: pointless.

EDIT: That continues to be one of the more grimy actions one can take a public forum, IMO. Quoting or replying to someone that you chose to put on ignore. <shakes head> And don't even get me started on *how* they do it.

 

[AaronOfBarbaria]

EDIT: That continues to be one of the more grimy actions one can take a public forum, IMO. Quoting or replying to someone that you chose to put on ignore. <shakes head> And don't even get me started on *how* they do it.

I'm pretty sure I remember hearing something about the block feature not always hiding posts of users you've blocked if you are on the forum via mobile, rather than computer.

So it's not necessarily a "grimy action"; It could simply be that someone put you on their block list, but forgot or just aren't paying attention to who a post is made by so they don't realize they are quoting someone that can't see their posts.

As someone frequently on the bad end of having my intentions assumed to be ill (regardless of how many times I express my intentions being otherwise), I encourage you (meaning everyone, not just specifically Corwin) to assume accident rather than malice for anything that has even the most remote possibility of being either.

 

[Yunru]

Yeah I forgot Corwin's on my block list.

 

[mellored]

Is it going to be identical to the 4e one? Nope.

No one cares.

[quopte]It's highly unlikely a warlord class will be 100% support every single round. That's 4e design, not 5e design. Neither the bard nor the cleric have baked-in at-will support options.[/quote]Viscous mockery, guidance, restance.

Does it have to be identical to a bard? No.

Will a warlord fighter build let you do warlordy things in almost every session of the campaign?

Every session? Yes.
And an eldrich knight can do wizardly things every session. Doesn't make it a wizard.

Will it be identical? No.

Good. It should be different.

When did having to match another character be a requirement for being a fun build?

it doesn't have to be identical. But most people approve of class balance.

Not contributing in the exact same way as bard doesn't mean it's not contributing or worth playing. Otherwise, why isn't there a bard in every table.

No one expects a warlord at every table.
And no one expects it to be identical.

Also, do you really think a WotC warlord class would compare with that? Even for a second. Do you honestly believe they'd release a class for 5e that matched the bard that effectively note-for-note. The catch is, martial characters will *always* be designed to do better over multiple rounds.

It doesn't have to be identical.
It should be different.

I can't even really compare as information is lacking. How many rounds is that?

Level 11 bard can cast haste 9 times, with 10 rounds each.
So 90 rounds.

Though, most of those will be wasted after combat is over, so call it 45.

What build of bard?

That was lore.
But valor works too. With 1d8+3 * 2 attacks = 15 damage.

IIRC a 11th level bard will have the 3rd level spells to buff that much for all three combats. Far fewer than the "every combat" you suggest. Maybe four or five if they dip into 5th level spells, but that seeems inefficient. And the stunning effect if the bard loses concentration is problematic. And that much hasting will cut into their use of healing word.

No dipping. Just straight level 11 bard. And yes, it's an inefficient use of his spell slots, and he could cast polymorph, greater invisibility, or something instead. But i'm trying to keep things simple, not identical.

Though i did mess up my healing calculation a bit.

9 slots for haste.
7 slots for cure wounds = (1d8+4) * 4 (level 1) + (2d8+4) * 3 ( level 2) = 73 HP
or
7 slots for healing word would be (1d4+4) *4 + (2d4+4) *3 = 53 HP

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I'm sure plenty of people would like to play a true archmage, too. And I'm not talking about just a high level wizard, either. Or heck, since you seem enamored with a certain previous edition, where's my demigod class!? I want to play a demigod, darnit!

the polite term for the above is "disengenuous".

The warlord bears no relation to the archmage or Demi-God, as you very well know.

...to you. Its important to try not presenting your personal opinions as if some kind of global fact. Because you are clearly not speaking for everyone here. Not me, at least, for certain. Because if I were to convert my favorite 4e warlord into 5e, I would seriously consider the valor bard as a possible base.

And my wife is using a Warlock to convert her 4e Avenger. That doesn't mean the Warlock models the Avenger. It just means it can model a specific character. I can use the wizard or sorcerer to model a monk, but that has nothing at all to do with whether there should be monks in 5e.

The Valor Bard is a cool concept. A cool Bard concept.

And I'm all for relfavoring player options. But the ability to do so does not mean that a given thing is represented in the game.

 

[Imaro]

Level 11 bard can cast haste 9 times, with 10 rounds each.
So 90 rounds.

How are you factoring in concentration and the fact that the spell ends if he takes damage and fails the save? This assumes maximum duration in every fight and that hasn't been my experience especially for casters on the front line...

 

[Jester David]

No one expects a warlord at every table.
And no one expects it to be identical.

That doesn't answer the question I asked.
I said:

Also, do you really think a WotC warlord class would compare with that? Even for a second. Do you honestly believe they'd release a class for 5e that matched the bard that effectively note-for-note.

Do you think Wizards of the Coast - aka Mike Mearls and Jeremy Crawford - are able to design a 5th Edition warlord class that both feels like a 4e warlord and is also "approximately on par with a haste spamming bard"?
Do you think that is possible? Do you think that is likely?

 

[AaronOfBarbaria]

I have a question for [MENTION=6801209]mellored[/MENTION], that I do not intend to sound condescending or ignorant so I will apologize for either or both before even asking; I am sorry.

Would the following step-by-step approach to building a warlord character in the same ballpark as an 11th level bard work for you, and if not, why not?

1. Take 11 levels of bard, the same feats you mention, and make all the same choices that would go into making the bard you describe
2. Change "bard" on your character sheet to "warlord" or whatever your prefered class name for the concept might be
3. Change your "spellcasting" into "tactical insight", granting identical benefits to what spells would, but being non-magical in both flavor and for purposes of anything that can counter magical effects.
4. Similarly change the fluff of any magical features of the bard build in question to being nonmagical in nature.

 

[Corwin]

I'm pretty sure I remember hearing something about the block feature not always hiding posts of users you've blocked if you are on the forum via mobile, rather than computer.

So it's not necessarily a "grimy action"; It could simply be that someone put you on their block list, but forgot or just aren't paying attention to who a post is made by so they don't realize they are quoting someone that can't see their posts.

As someone frequently on the bad end of having my intentions assumed to be ill (regardless of how many times I express my intentions being otherwise), I encourage you (meaning everyone, not just specifically Corwin) to assume accident rather than malice for anything that has even the most remote possibility of being either.

[Shrug] Perhaps. But, IMO, shouldn't it be incumbent on the person who chooses to use the ignore feature to put in the necessary effort? I mean, clearly if you put someone on it, you are choosing not to interact with them. Don't interact with them. That's simple enough. If a person simply can't stand to converse with me--so much so that they don't even want to *see* my posts--they should at least put the minimal effort to avoid quoting me. Since that, presumably, violates their own sensibilities.

And WRT the mobile "issue", if you are a user of the mobile app, and the ignore feature doesn't work on it, why are you even using the ignore feature in the first place? They get to see and interact with everyone's posts, but get to remain invisible to those they ignore? That's grimy in-and-of itself, IMO. Its an end-around.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Wait... so did you mean PDK specifically as opposed to any of the other warlord-esque classes and feats?

that post is very, *very*, clearly taking each attempted warlord stand-in and commenting on them individually. I'm not sure how you could possibly miss that.

Strange I've seen it suggested on this very forum along with other options...

fair enough. Perhaps I'm wrong in thinking you were the first in a thread I've tracked on the subject, in this recent spat of warlord threads, to suggest it.
I'll reword, just in case. Until this recent spat of warlord discussions, I've never seen anyone, online or irl, (and without being sarcastic) suggest the Bard as a serious warlord stand-in.

So it isn't a satisfactory replacement for your friend... Cool. That said others find a class that can grant attacks, grant movement and grant (temp) hit points very warlord-esque...

The Eldritch Knight is very Wizard-esque, as is the Arcane Trickster. Doesn't mean the game would still have a wizard without the full wizard class. Indeed, the Cleric and Bard are very Wizard-esque.
And the wizard is so broad in capability that it's hard to balance. And it has less distinct identity than most classes. Certainly less than the warlord, imo. Maybe we shouldn't have a wizard class!

Again can't dispute what you've seen. But I disagree that the mastermind must be a criminal leader.

Agreed! <thumbs up>
Good thing I never said that the MM "must" be a criminal leader.
What I did say, is that the subclass is built to be a criminal leader. We can quibble over ideas like a rebel leader, and whether that counts, but I literally couldn't care less about nit picking.

I think you mean unsatisfying to two people... your friend and yourself. At least that's all you've presented in the quoted passages above.

LOL I don't think that there is a number of people that would convince you. A Gallup poll with 1 million respondents could come out with 90% agreeing with me, and you'd deny its relevance somehow.
I kid, but only a little. And only in the form of light hyperbole.
Maybe you think that literally only the people who get online to talk about the continued need for an actual warlord class, are unsatisfied with the "half or less of a warlord" options the game presented thus far?

Huh? I could have sworn they are both characters capable of buffing and healing their allies... both are not full fledged warriors... both inspire their companions... and both can debuff enemies. Or did you mean nothing to do with the warlord except for all of those things?

Ah yes, of course. The full caster support class with abilities centered around the Bardic theme is exactly the same as a Captain, Tactician, etc.

guess we are back to the false arguement of redundancy that always leads threads to divert into arguments about whether clerics and Druids are necessary or really add to the game.