Lets design a Warlord for 5th edition

[FrogReaver]

Its not that situational though its 99% of the time in every combat round.

Its obvious though Mearls is not going to give you at will attack granting as he is not drunk and stoned. Hell he is not giving you the WL as an independent class, if the WL lands as a fighter subclass its basically allover for the WL as an independent class.

Speaking of drunk or stoned... Mearls wants to give something better than at will attack granting. Essentially all the time prone with fighter level damage and extra feats. This tactical warlord may actually edge out the battlemaster in terms of GWM DPR and that's saying a lot.

But more importantly,
At will attack granting works fine as long as you are granting the attack on the allies turn you are granting the attack to. It's when you can grant your ally an attack on your turn or on another allies turn that it's a problem.

 

[mellored]

I do think a level 1 warlord ability that gave a choice for your weapon and armor proficiencies maybe with some other minor benefit or benefits conferred would be kind of cool.

True. It is nice to nice go start out with the correct tools rather than having to go back to town mid-adventure, or carry around gear you can't use for 2 levels.

Then again "heavy armor proficiency" could be an invocation. (Mage armor already is).
As could +2 initiative.
and first turn movement if you're in light armor.

Then they would still be available from the start.

 

[FrogReaver]

True. It is nice to nice go start out with the correct tools rather than having to go back to town mid-adventure, or carry around gear you can't use for 2 levels.

Then again "heavy armor proficiency" could be an invocation. (Mage armor already is).
As could +2 initiative.
and first turn movement if you're in light armor.

Then they would still be available from the start.

yes if we went the invocation route. I'm not convinced it will work the best but I'm still needing to go back and reread your post on it. I think you are going to have vanician caster flexibility in a world of neo vanician casting.

 

[Zardnaar]

Speaking of drunk or stoned... Mearls wants to give something better than at will attack granting. Essentially all the time prone with fighter level damage and extra feats. This tactical warlord may actually edge out the battlemaster in terms of GWM DPR and that's saying a lot.

But more importantly,
At will attack granting works fine as long as you are granting the attack on the allies turn you are granting the attack to. It's when you can grant your ally an attack on your turn or on another allies turn that it's a problem.

That is creating other complexity though and it still means things like Hunter Rangers for example are really good with a WL although it solves the Rogue thing.

Gonna wait until Mearls does a final version of the WL Fighter.

 

[Zardnaar]

And let me throw out a novel idea...

No sub-class. (just invocations).
Multi-sub-classes.

I did both, "invocations" and sub classes.

I chose level 3 as a point of divergence as you don't want to front load the class. YOu pick your subclass at level 1. You get.

Bravura. Combat style, heavy armor
Tactical int to initiative
Inspiring Cha to healing

Generic WL stuff
1d8/+level short rest healing

Level 2 you get your 1st "invocation" plus WL version of channel divinity, level 3 you get major sublass features.

I made it level 3 due to front loading and we can do a 1/3rd caster warlord if desired. Level 3 is also where things like BM dice kick in.

You can't really have attack granting, healing, an invocation etc at level 1 its to front loaded in 5E terms, you only get 1-2 abilities at level 1 often minor. Level 3 is roughly the 4E level 1. My level 3 WL gets.

1d8/+3 healing bonus action/short rest
2d8+3 30' healing standard action short rest
2 "invocations"
Major subclass ability (which usually duplicates 4E powers, BM dice or bard dice, not sure for the Bravura)
Minor level 1 abilities (varies by subclass).

lvl 4 ASI + "invocation"
Level 5 healing word scales, ability, + "invocation". Invocations here also scale a'la Warlock 5th level archetype abilities.
Level healing 30' 2d8+6 2/short rest, + "invocation"

If you pick all the attack granting invocations as a tactical WL combined with the ones that grant extra BM dice you won't quite have at will attack granting but 50-75% probably. Smooths out the Rogue damage anyway and you get more healing/other stuff or the option to take other invocations that do not allow attack granting. For example at level 4 you could have 6 BM dice, +2 invocaitons 1 could be attack granting + advantage and the other one could be healing or movement related or a passive one like +2 skills etc.

 

[FrogReaver]

That is creating other complexity though and it still means things like Hunter Rangers for example are really good with a WL although it solves the Rogue thing.

Gonna wait until Mearls does a final version of the WL Fighter.

So you think an extra d6 and a small extra chance to land colossus slayer is a big enough of a difference to bring up?

 

[Zardnaar]

So you think an extra d6 and a small extra chance to land colossus slayer is a big enough of a difference to bring up?

With 3 attacks you have a very good chance of colossus slayer and that is on top of things like the -5/+10 feats. Its potentially 1d6+1d8+10. Even without the Rogue its why I think attack granting at will is to good in 5E at least on a support class it might be OK on a Rogue perhaps.

Keep in mind a Cleric by comparison gets an extra 1d8 at level 8, 2d8 at 14. Yes I am aware they cast spells but that just means the other warlord abilities need to be competitive with spells as that is what you are giving up.

Also see previous post about how I have done it. THe tactical warlord can be better at attack granting than the Battlemaster and I have made a couple of attack granting "invocations" with riders so you can do it a lot and its worth doing but you are not overshadowing the cleric hopefully as you can make a beat down cleric in 5E its just not that obvious and unlimited (when you run out of spells). The beatdown cleric is not that viable until level 5 or even 8 either.

 

[FrogReaver]

With 3 attacks you have a very good chance of colossus slayer and that is on top of things like the -5/+10 feats. Its potentially 1d6+1d8+10. Even without the Rogue its why I think attack granting at will is to good in 5E at least on a support class it might be OK on a Rogue perhaps.

Keep in mind a Cleric by comparison gets an extra 1d8 at level 8, 2d8 at 14. Yes I am aware they cast spells but that just means the other warlord abilities need to be competitive with spells as that is what you are giving up.

Also see previous post about how I have done it. THe tactical warlord can be better at attack granting than the Battlemaster and I have made a couple of attack granting "invocations" with riders so you can do it a lot and its worth doing but you are not overshadowing the cleric hopefully as you can make a beat down cleric in 5E its just not that obvious and unlimited (when you run out of spells). The beatdown cleric is not that viable until level 5 or even 8 either.

At will attack granting that comes online at level 5 means a warlord does 1 relatively terrible attack and may can grant an ally 1 really good attack. You will average out somewhere in the average range.

Best case might look like
2d6+4 and 3d6+4 = 11 vs 15.5 = 26.5 average damage over 1 turn at will. A basic fighter with Great Weapon Fighter Master does 12.33 damage an attack at level 5. That's 24.67 damage over 1 turn at will.

I don't see enough of a difference to matter.

How about this. You give me your best case character chance to hit and damage per attack and we will see how much DPR granting 1 attack at level 5 and having the warlord make 1 attack at level 5 really matters?

 

[Zardnaar]

At will attack granting that comes online at level 5 means a warlord does 1 relatively terrible attack and may can grant an ally 1 really good attack. You will average out somewhere in the average range.

Best case might look like
2d6+4 and 3d6+4 = 11 vs 15.5 = 26.5 average damage over 1 turn at will. A basic fighter with Great Weapon Fighter Master does 12.33 damage an attack at level 5. That's 24.67 damage over 1 turn at will.

I don't see enough of a difference to matter.

How about this. You give me your best case character chance to hit and damage per attack and we will see how much DPR granting 1 attack at level 5 and having the warlord make 1 attack at level 5 really matters?

Warlords not a fighter though its role is leader/support. Compare its damage to clerics and bards all of which are rather lacklustre. You're not getting at will attack granting this is not my opinion but the developers, even the BM fighter doesn't have it and that is on a high DPR class. There is a reason for that its OP in 5E

Its why I am so opposed to it having at will attack granting.

If you want to crunch math the average monster AC in the book is 14.5 apparently. That doesn't factor in things like advantage, bard dice, bless etc if you want to abuse the -5/+10 feats.

The only way to balance at will attack granting is to either define a basic attack, or make the rules so complicated you may as well limit it via BM dice or something similar or make the attack roughly equal to what the warlord is giving up at best 2d6+5.

You can't even level gate it. A level 14 Cleric for example gets at best 2d6+5+2d8 at will on one attack only. Even if you made is a level 14 ability you still have level 14 Rogues, 1d8 +7d6+5.

At will can't be balanced in 5E you may be able to grant bonus damage dice that can scale like a cantrip 1d8 level 1-4, 2d8 level 5 etc.

I'll put it in 4E terms. At will attack granting in 5E is the equivalent of giving a 4E PHB leader class at will striker levels of damage (ignoring essentials). That is the fundamental problem right there. Its like giving a fighter level 9 spells.

 

[FrogReaver]

Warlords not a fighter though its role is leader/support. Compare its damage to clerics and bards all of which are rather lacklustre. You're not getting at will attack granting this is not my opinion but the developers, even the BM fighter doesn't have it and that is on a high DPR class. There is a reason for that its OP in 5E

Its why I am so opposed to it having at will attack granting.

If you want to crunch math the average monster AC in the book is 14.5 apparently. That doesn't factor in things like advantage, bard dice, bless etc if you want to abuse the -5/+10 feats.

The only way to balance at will attack granting is to either define a basic attack, or make the rules so complicated you may as well limit it via BM dice or something similar or make the attack roughly equal to what the warlord is giving up at best 2d6+5.

You can't even level gate it. A level 14 Cleric for example gets at best 2d6+5+2d8 at will on one attack only. Even if you made is a level 14 ability you still have level 14 Rogues, 1d8 +7d6+5.

At will can't be balanced in 5E you may be able to grant bonus damage dice that can scale like a cantrip 1d8 level 1-4, 2d8 level 5 etc.

I'll put it in 4E terms. At will attack granting in 5E is the equivalent of giving a 4E PHB leader class at will striker levels of damage (ignoring essentials). That is the fundamental problem right there. Its like giving a fighter level 9 spells.

Your not proving it. You just keep repeating yourself. If you force warlord attack granting to give allies a single extra attack on the allies turn then it's not a problem. Almost all extra damage effects get eliminated because you don't get to double dip any once per turn damage effects. The remaining damage effects make like 1d6 or so of a difference on a single attack, definitely not enough to worry about. Oh and it gives a slightly higher chance to proc something like colossus slayer. Not much higher as 2 attacks vs 3 attacks at 50% chance to hit only accounts for a 75% to 87.5% increase in chance to proc it. That's .125 * 4.5 damage = .5625 DPR from a 1d8 colossus slayer. Again it's not enough to worry about.

Even things like the -5/+10 feats at most double your damage. In the case I'm suggesting you would get 1 attack at below normal damage and 1 attack double normal damage. You are still doing no where near the damage of a second GWM or SS character and no matter what you do your not going to get anywhere near their damage output.

Yes, there will be a bit of variation but it's within the normal range of variation.

Here's the thing. Any support ability already depends on the damage of the characters you are supporting. It all scales by that. Haste, scales by your allies damage. Bless scales by your allies damage. It's almost like the very concept of a support character doing better with allies around that do more damage is something that doesn't bother you till it comes to warlords.

Oh and don't go saying bless and haste aren't at will. They might as well be when you can cast them every combat of every day.