D&D 5E 5e Warlord Demand Poll

[Satyrn]

Not even a "joke", AFAICT.

But you recognized the core of the post as ridiculous. I would expect that to be a sign of humourous intent.

A least you moved on to "jokes". Because your original premise I responded to, of there being two diametrically opposed camps, is ridiculous.

Oh well. I'm not that funny, and sometimes I fail. Most times, really. I'm that not funny.

 

[Tony Vargas]

No skin in this fight whatsoever, but this isn't like to like at all. I don't know if you have a very nuanced view of the ninja trope in general, but the 5e Way of the Shadow Monk accomplishes pretty much all of the classic Ninja tropes (and it says its a Ninja on the tin as I know that matters to some folks). If you couple that with Rogue Sneak Attack/Expertise/Uncanny Dodge and the Assassination subclass (as you mention) you have pretty much all of the 1e OA Ninja (except sub spending ki for phasing through walls for darkness/silence/pass w/o trace as well as the base Monk stuff + at-will shadow jump + outright invisibility later) and 2e AD&D Ninja except a supercharged version with profoundly more (thematic) offense, (thematic) passive and activatable defense, (thematic) mystical utility, relative competency against obstacles faced. Altogether, you have significantly more agency in imposing your ninja archetype upon play.

And from a first principles perspective, you start with a coherent mechanical and thematic chassis with no wasted build components.

The Warlord, on the hand, is a martial support character. Coherently carving that out of the Bard chassis (arcane support character with tons of magical utility) or the Fighter chassis (martial multi-attacker) is rife with thematic or mechanical incoherency and wasted build components.

If it's fine for you to say to someone to build their favourite class from the various components in the game then I think it's fair for others to say the same about people asking for a warlord, build it out of the current options.

Manbearcat was very obviously talking about the state of the game and what the current options actually present, not about the 'tude of the fan wanting a ninja.

The ninja is really a very narrow concept, a sub-set of assassins with a strong streak of culture-specific flavor and perhaps some darksome mysticism. Either the quasi-realistic historical assassin or the fantastic mystical one are arguably do-able with the Assassin sub-class or the Shadow Monk, or a combination of the two (assuming multiclassing which is no small assumption).

Really, though, the Ninja, as a fanatical member of a close-knit clan serving a higher political power in a very specific setting, cries out for a PrC and a good one, this time...

Not that I'm schilling for 5e to adopt 3.5 PrCs...

...oh, wait, yes, I am doing exactly that...


Because, y'know, after we get a Mystic, and a Warlord, and a few other things, some PrC rules would be a worthy use of pagecount. Actual PrCs could be put in setting books and APs, though, where they'd be ideally useful, but y'know not overly cross-contaminate the standard game, even when run relatively open.

 

[Manbearcat]

I think the analogy is very apt. Yes, 90% of what I want out of the ninja class (from previous editions) can be covered by a few classes in 5e. Just like 90% of what people want out of the warlord can be covered by other classes in 5e. In both cases, you'd have to mix-match classes and feats to get what want, and as you say, there would be in-coherency and wasted build components. And in both cases 10% just doesn't appear at all in 5e. For example, there is no 5e subclass where I as a ninja can change my tracks, hold my breath for long periods of time, walk on water, or other core ninja abilities from previous editions.

Before you say, "Yeah, but you're talking about what YOU want, and not the ninja in general", I'll point out that in all of these warlord threads, there is no consensus as to just what the warlord should look like, so again, the parallels are there (going by someone's personal preference as opposed to in general).

Ironically, what your post did was what has been pissing off the warlord fans for a long time: Someone coming in and saying, "You have your warlord in the game already, just pull bits from this class, and bits from that class, etc, etc"

There is no irony in what I posted. I don't care whatsoever if WotC decides to make a new class called Ninja. Means nothing to me. I actually don't care if they make a Warlord either. And I don't care if you start 5000 posts and a grass-roots movement for them to do so (same as I don't care about a Warlord effort to do so).

What I do care about is an attempt to make an ethical equivalence and then shame others/virtue signal ("My grievance is identical to your own and look at well-behaved I am by comparison!") based off a comparison that isn't remotely like to like.

There is no "core ability" to change tracks in prior editions. False Tracks was a 1st level spell that the Ninja Kit Spirit Warrior, Shinobi Mage, and Shinobi Illusionist had access to (I remember it quite well as Spirit Warriors were one of the played Ninjas in a prior campaign). I think maybe that was in an AD&D2e Ninja kit perhaps? 5e has Pass Without Trace for the Shadow Monk. Walking on water can be handled by the Ability Check mechanics. A Rogue/Monk with Expertise Acrobatics should be able to pull that off. Holding your breath for extraordinary long periods of time would be handled by a Con Ability Check. Conversely, both walking on water and holding your breath for Infil/Exfil could easily be handled by Tool proficiency (Ninja) as this is how Ninjas accomplished this in the real world. They're so specialty and so trivially handled I didn't mention them. I also didn't mention Clan Followers.

Everything is there for Ninjas in this edition. Shadow Monk specifically calls them Ninjas (or Shadowdancers) in the description and goes through all the fluff. You don't even have to spec into Rogue/Assassin if you don't want to. You have pretty much everything you need just in Shadow Monk. Personally, I would do it for Assassinate, Expertise, Uncanny Dodge (and you could trivially refluff Thieves Cant to Clan Signs), but that is just me.

I GMed 2 Ninja fanatics in AD&D1e and AD&D2e for about 6 years. They literally played nothing_but_ninjas and so all of my games where they were players featured the relevant thematic material/conflicts. If those guys were still playing with me, they would be drooling over the 5e Ninja (if they're still playing and they're playing 5e, I'm sure they are).The 5e Shadow Monk and the the Shadow Monk/Rogue:Assassin combo is everything those ninjas were but a million times better. You have complete mechanical and thematic coherency. All wheat. No chaffe. And the wheat that you have is many times over more capable, competent, and flat out cooler than that which was in AD&D 1e OA and 2e's CNH.

My first 1-30 4e game featured a Warlord of the 3 PCs. The player that played it is one of my primary players. It is trivially obvious to her, to anyone who earnestly and sincerely played or GMed 4e for any length of time, that there is no 5e Warlord analogue that is mechanically robust/coherent or thematically coherent. Nothing under the Fighter chassis could even attempt to do it because the mechanical design space of the two classes are completely incompatible. The Valor Bard is completely incompatible thematically along with all the smuggled in, unable to be detached/traded out, arcane magic (and most of the spell types to boot).

A pinch of the Battlemaster, a smidge of the Purple Dragon Knight, a dose of the Mastermind, and a helping of the Valor Bard...all torn apart and put a mechanically and thematically coherent and functional base chassis. That would be the equivalent of what you have available to play a classic D&D Ninja in 5e.

There is just no comparison. You're not a better guy than Warlord fans for putting stoically enduring your lack of Ninja. Because you don't have to do so. Because its there. And it isn't just there, it is better in every way than the classic (really not so good in play) AD&D Ninja.

 

[Tony Vargas]

I GMed 2 Ninja fanatics in AD&D1e and AD&D2e for about 6 years. They literally played nothing_but_ninjas and so all of my games where they were players featured the relevant thematic material/conflicts.

My heartfelt sympathies.

 

[Manbearcat]

If it's fine for you to say to someone to build their favourite class from the various components in the game then I think it's fair for others to say the same about people asking for a warlord, build it out of the current options.

Read my post above. I didn't ask anyone to do anything. I examined the position taken, the comparison made, and the shaming/virtue signalling that was underwritten by the wrong/incoherent/unfair first two.

 

[cbwjm]

Read my post above. I didn't ask anyone to do anything. I examined the position taken, the comparison made, and the shaming/virtue signalling that was underwritten by the wrong/incoherent/unfair first two.

I don't really understand what the hell you're talking about in this post. What I saw in the earlier post of yours I quoted was you effectively saying that in one case someone should be happy that they can just mix and match current classes as they wanted and that they shouldn't need an update to one of their favourite classes and then turn around and say that the warlord, however, should have their own class in spite of the fact that you can create a warlord using current options.

 

[Sacrosanct]

There is no irony in what I posted.

Yeah there is. You saying how I shouldn't tell warlord fans they can get what they want by by mix/matching classes while telling me in the same post that I can get what I want by mix matching other classes. That's kinda the literal definition of irony.

What I do care about is an attempt to make an ethical equivalence and then shame others/virtue signal ("My grievance is identical to your own and look at well-behaved I am by comparison!") based off a comparison that isn't remotely like to like.

There is no "core ability" to change tracks in prior editions. False Tracks was a 1st level spell that the Ninja Kit Spirit Warrior, Shinobi Mage, and Shinobi Illusionist had access to (I remember it quite well as Spirit Warriors were one of the played Ninjas in a prior campaign). I think maybe that was in an AD&D2e Ninja kit perhaps? 5e has Pass Without Trace for the Shadow Monk. Walking on water can be handled by the Ability Check mechanics. A Rogue/Monk with Expertise Acrobatics should be able to pull that off. Holding your breath for extraordinary long periods of time would be handled by a Con Ability Check. Conversely, both walking on water and holding your breath for Infil/Exfil could easily be handled by Tool proficiency (Ninja) as this is how Ninjas accomplished this in the real world. They're so specialty and so trivially handled I didn't mention them. I also didn't mention Clan Followers.

Wrong on a couple fronts. First, you can't be an assassin rogue AND an arcane trickster rogue in 5e (which is required if you wanted the illusion spell casting that I'm talking about with false tracks). You'd have to choose magic initiate feat, which is not baked into a class (a complaint several of the warlord fans have made when being told they can do the same thing). Also, there is no replication of the pass through walls ability, and it doesn't matter what your acrobatics skill is, you can't walk on water. Physics still is physics. Re: the holding of breath, that is something ninja could do a lot longer than everyone else (which is what you're positing if it's just a Con check). There's no ability for that either available. To be blunt, who cares if YOU find them trivial. It doesn't discount the fact that these abilities did exist in prior editions and don't exist in 5e, which is one of the foundational arguments for the need of a warlord.

Everything is there for Ninjas in this edition. Shadow Monk specifically calls them Ninjas (or Shadowdancers) in the description and goes through all the fluff. You don't even have to spec into Rogue/Assassin if you don't want to. You have pretty much everything you need just in Shadow Monk. Personally, I would do it for Assassinate, Expertise, Uncanny Dodge (and you could trivially refluff Thieves Cant to Clan Signs), but that is just me.

No, everything is not there. I just gave you several examples. There are more if I broke out my books I'm sure I could come up with.

I GMed 2 Ninja fanatics in AD&D1e and AD&D2e for about 6 years. They literally played nothing_but_ninjas and so all of my games where they were players featured the relevant thematic material/conflicts. If those guys were still playing with me, they would be drooling over the 5e Ninja (if they're still playing and they're playing 5e, I'm sure they are).The 5e Shadow Monk and the the Shadow Monk/Rogue:Assassin combo is everything those ninjas were but a million times better. You have complete mechanical and thematic coherency. All wheat. No chaffe. And the wheat that you have is many times over more capable, competent, and flat out cooler than that which was in AD&D 1e OA and 2e's CNH.

My first 1-30 4e game featured a Warlord of the 3 PCs. The player that played it is one of my primary players. It is trivially obvious to her, to anyone who earnestly and sincerely played or GMed 4e for any length of time, that there is no 5e Warlord analogue that is mechanically robust/coherent or thematically coherent. Nothing under the Fighter chassis could even attempt to do it because the mechanical design space of the two classes are completely incompatible. The Valor Bard is completely incompatible thematically along with all the smuggled in, unable to be detached/traded out, arcane magic (and most of the spell types to boot).

A pinch of the Battlemaster, a smidge of the Purple Dragon Knight, a dose of the Mastermind, and a helping of the Valor Bard...all torn apart and put a mechanically and thematically coherent and functional base chassis. That would be the equivalent of what you have available to play a classic D&D Ninja in 5e.

There is just no comparison. You're not a better guy than Warlord fans for putting stoically enduring your lack of Ninja. Because you don't have to do so. Because its there. And it isn't just there, it is better in every way than the classic (really not so good in play) AD&D Ninja.

Ah, the "I never encountered this, so it doesn't exist" and "MY players never had that problem" argument. I'm sure I don't have to tell you how that's a bad argument to base a position on. You're basing your entire argument on your own biases and opinion rather than the facts presented. Just because 5e models your opinion of what a ninja is doesn't mean it models what anyone else's opinion of what the ninja is, just like because 5e models what my opinion of the warlord is doesn't mean it models what anyone else's opinion of the warlord is. Handwaving away objective abilities that are missing just because you don't think they are important in no way means those aren't important in general.

The analogy is apt, because it is quite literally the same basic arguments for the ninja and warlord. Both can be roughly accomplished with what 5e offers now between classes, subclasses, backgrounds, and feats. Both also are missing core components. And both, if frankensteined together with multiclassing, would have features that may not be "thematically coherent" and/or have extra features to what the player wants.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I don't really understand what the hell you're talking about in this post. What I saw in the earlier post of yours I quoted was you effectively saying that in one case someone should be happy that they can just mix and match current classes as they wanted and that they shouldn't need an update to one of their favourite classes and then turn around and say that the warlord, however, should have their own class in spite of the fact that you can create a warlord using current options.

Maybe read their last post? Bc they addressed this already.

You can't actually, meaningfully build a warlord in 5e. You can build a ninja in 5e. The Shadow Monk is literally explicitly called out as a ninja, and does everything a ninja needs to do. Even the rogue MC is just icing.

The warlord would require homebrew to meaningfully represent in 5e.

The difference between the two examples is a difference of both type and scale. It is apples and motorcycles.

to be clear, I want there to be an assassin class, that includes everything that is "missing" for ninjas.

I've been calling for one since 5e launched, that covers the non magical Assassin's Creed style Assassin, the mystical ninja, with invocation style features that allow flexibility in building the class.

But I generally want more purpose built mechanics, and I'm not into having such strong archetypes exist exclusively in subclasses, because subclasses are pretty small in 5e.

 

[Sacrosanct]

Maybe read their last post? Bc they addressed this already.

You can't actually, meaningfully build a warlord in 5e. You can build a ninja in 5e. The Shadow Monk is literally explicitly called out as a ninja, and does everything a ninja needs to do..

except cast illusion spells, or pass through walls, or hold breath, or walk on water or.....

Sure seems like you're holding a double standard there. You can build a ninja in 5e, just like you can build a warlord. If you say the shadow monk heavily implies it covers the ninja class, then I can fire right back and say the purple dragon knight heavily implies it covers the warlord class (since that is what it was designed to do). In the case of the warlord, it doesn't do exactly what you want so you want an official class. In the case of the ninja, it doesn't do what I want, but I guess I don't get the same consideration as you? Well, that's nice.

 

[cbwjm]

Maybe read their last post? Bc they addressed this already.

You can't actually, meaningfully build a warlord in 5e. You can build a ninja in 5e. The Shadow Monk is literally explicitly called out as a ninja, and does everything a ninja needs to do. Even the rogue MC is just icing.

The warlord would require homebrew to meaningfully represent in 5e.

The difference between the two examples is a difference of both type and scale. It is apples and motorcycles.

It's a little subjective though. Some people think that they can't get a warlord, others look at the current options and think "Cool, I can make my warlord in 5e". It's the same with the Ninja, some look at the options and think that the shadow-monk fits for their ninja, whereas others won't.