So then, what warlord, or warlord-related-non-magical-non-damage sub-class do people want to see?
Can we get to at least 10 of them?
Bravada/self-sacrifice (provoking an OA makes the enemy provoke an OA)
Tactical/Commander (back line, shouty)
Stealth/Skrimisher (allies don't provoke OA's, allies can move and hide as a reaction)
Inspiring/Non-magical bard. (THP, +bonus while THP lasts)
Doctor/Non-magical cleric. (healing kits)
Nature Guide/Non-magical ranger (tracking, survival, secure encampment)
Officer of the Peace (net's, non-lethal)
Non-magical beastmaster. (command animals)
That's 8.
9 if you want to include Lifeguard/David Hasselhoff (swimming)
Anyone got a few more?
Quick eval:
Bravada - Workable
Commander - Workable
Skirmisher - Commander specialization
Inspiring - Part of the base class
Doctor - Rogue
Nature Guide - Ranger
Officer of the Peace - Fighter
Beastmaster - Ranger
Lifeguard - David Hasselhoff
When I consider what a class has to support, it needs one broadly general concept, and a number of unique, specialized concepts. Mastermind is very different from Thief, and Dragon Bloodline is very different from Storm Sorcerer, even though they are still based on the same underlying class, and even though the mechanics may not be so terribly different. Each subclass has to provide realization to an entirely different character concept.
The alternate approach is considering that Circle of the Land and Circle of the Moon Druids can both cast spells and shapechange, but their focus and expertise in each respective area is notably different. Same for the various schools of magic for a Wizard.
So the first question is whether to go the specialization route or the uniqueness route. Overall, mages that choose their subclass at level 1 tend to go the specialization route (get better at some aspect of what anyone of that class can do), whereas melee that choose their subclass at level 3 tend to go for the uniqueness route (add new things that other subclasses can't do).
Another way of thinking of it is deciding whether the class or the subclass is the more defining aspect of your character concept. For example, I'm a Sorcerer (1) / Storm Sorcerer (2), vs I'm a Mastermind (1) / Rogue (2). A Wizard doesn't typically identify himself as an Evoker. He's a Wizard, who happens to specialize in evocation magic. On the other hand, an assassin will think of himself as an Assassin, which happens to be a type of Rogue. A Beastmaster is a Beastmaster first, Ranger second.
So:
Is this a class that should choose its subclass at level 1, or at level 3?
This choice determines how much of the character concept has to be incorporated into the main class, vs the subclass. Are all Warlords essentially the same, just with different focuses? Or is the Warlord class just a support framework for a variety of different, but related, character concepts?
For example, a Doctor vs a Commander are very different concepts, and thus lend themselves to the idea that the Warlord is a level 3 class like Fighter. On the other hand, a Commander that uses inspiration vs a Commander that uses clever tactics vs a Commander that throws himself into the fray in a self-sacrificing manner implies that this is a specialization class.
It
is possible to mix them together. That's essentially what the Battlemaster is — a specialization mechanic within a uniqueness mechanic. Same for the Totem Barbarian. In each case, the uniqueness tier provides the primary character concept, while the specialization just provides a path that it can follow.
If you go the specialization route, the primary class has to be able to represent all the character concepts that the class supports. This works when the main class itself represents a broadly understandable concept — a Wizard, the student of magic; a Warlock, who made a deal for power; a Cleric, who has devoted himself to god; a Druid, a shapeshifter tied to nature; a Sorcerer, someone imbued with magic from birth. That's not the case for Fighter, Rogue, Monk, etc. And my impression is that it's not the case for Warlord, either. A Warlord isn't part of the broader zeitgeist, and isn't a concept unto itself.
Thus, I'd choose to define it with a subclass at level 3. This has further mechanical implications.
In general, all further choices you make within the class will be restricted to either the subclass (for classes that go the unique route) or the main class (for classes that go the specialization route). The half casters sort of break this rule by having spell selection choices, and the Ranger breaks it further with its Favored Terrain and Favored Enemy features (though both of them are also considered to be 'bad' mechanics).
In any case, any further choices that allow specialization should be contained within each Warlord subclass. If you have a Commander subclass, then you should have Battlemaster-like specialization choices, rather than Commander A/Commander B/Commander C subclasses. That's because the Commander needs to encompass a complete character concept, and not be in competition with the other subclasses to do the same thing.
~~~~~
So now you need to define subclasses. Subclasses must be defined by character concept,
not by mechanics. (I had written up an explanation for this for those who were still having trouble grokking the difference, but decided I didn't want to drag out the continued flaming.)
You then iterate between subclasses and the main class until you can define a broad concept for the main class that encompasses the character class concepts that the subclasses represent. Once you have that down, you can work out what mechanics the main class needs to provide, in order to support all the subclasses' common needs.
2) What are the subclasses for the Warlord class? Or more particularly, what character concepts belong within the scope of the Warlord?
The problem here loops back around to the issue that I keep trying to raise in-thread: What broad idea does the Warlord represent? I'll try brainstorming a few things.
Supporting allies. Helps them when they're down. Keeps them going.
Uses skill and training. All classes do this; what's special? What sort of training? What sort of skill? (Probably per unique.)
Tactical mindset. Find strengths and weaknesses. Don't just find a bigger hammer; find the
right hammer.
Getting to the right place. Often needs to adjust positions.
Pay attention.
A Warlord is well trained, or at least skilled, at supporting her allies. She pays close attention to detail as she moves through the battlefield, using a focused mindset to spot what's important. Whether or not her friends recognize the effort she makes, she'll do what she can to keep them going through the long slog of battle.
That feels good. The Warlord's strength comes from skill rather than magic. It touches on the basic healing provided, and hints at the tactical mindset, and the fact that she focuses on support rather than direct combat power. Movement is likely. Mechanics beyond that are left to the subclasses to flesh out.
So, some basic powers the class can provide. I will add more as I think of them. Not doing any attempt at balancing stuff here, so it will probably look weak.
1] Inspirational healing. With words of soft encouragement, barking demands, calm commands, or perky cheerleading, the Warlord can keep her allies fighting through the toughest of battles. Provide healing (scales with level), that overflows into temporary hit points. Gain at 1st level.
2] Warning. Periodic use. Can cause an attack against an ally to have disadvantage.
3] Insight. Periodic use. Can give an ally advantage on an attack.
4] Movement. Increase speed by 10 feet.
5] Use Int as primary weapon modifier. (1st level)
So, we have a few basic things the main class can do, and thus all subclasses can do. Now what can we add to the subclasses to make them unique? What character concepts can be derived from the very basic building blocks?
1) Self-sacrifice. A character that will deliberately make themselves seem weak or troublesome, in order to draw in the enemy, and allow her allies to have the advantage. A damsel in distress, a princess that needs rescuing, the Leeroy Jenkins of the group. Sailor Moon. Likely to inspire grudging respect, mixed with frustration and affection.
Possible mechanics: Gain resistance to damage, while giving the enemy advantage on their attacks against the Warlord, and disadvantage to attack characters other than the Warlord (eg: Bear Totem). Rallying Cry.
Alternate: Take disadvantage on your attacks to give disadvantage to enemy attacks.
2) Commander. A character that evaluates the battlefield and finds advantage within it. Finds ways for allies to avoid enemies, or turn the tables. Figures ways around enemy defenses. Likely to inspire official respect. Ouki (Kingdom), Chidori Kaname (Full Metal Panic).
Possible mechanics: Mearls' Tactical Focus area. Better recovery during rests.
Possible specializations: Ambushes, Naval Warfare
3) Strategist. Always seems to be two steps ahead, and often uses that knowledge to lay down traps for the enemy to fall into. May play it serious, as a trickster, or make it all seem like one giant coincidence. Likely to inspire respect, at a distance, and maybe a little fear. Ousen (Kingdom), Tokuchi (One Outs), Tylor (Irresponsible Captain Tylor), Thrawn (Star Wars).
Possible mechanics: 'precog'. Get DM to reveal intended enemy movement and/or actions, or use reactions to interrupt enemy action. Portent-like tools. Alternate Tactical Focus tools.
4) Defender. Expert in defending prepared areas, such as encampments, forts, castles, or cities. Forces the enemy to play his game. Good at maintaining morale. Likely to inspire camradery. Dot Pixis (Attack on Titan)
Possible mechanics: Larger, but immovable Tactical Focus. Can heal allies within the TF area (ie: improved morale or medkits). Can improve defenses within that area. Traps. Limit enemy's movement choices.
Edit: Stealing a couple obvious ideas from Tony:
5) Crusader. 1/3 divine caster
6) Arcane Battlemaster. 1/3 arcane caster
No real character concepts with them, but the 1/3 caster is an obvious extension for a non-magical class.
~~
Well, there's a few fairly solid starting subclasses. I'll admit that I'm having a really hard time coming up with character concepts that expand beyond those four, though. Commander, Plotter, Planner, and Screw-up. Everything else I'm seeing right now fits as abilities or specializations within those four.
