D&D 5E (2014) Best Name For A “Leader” Class?

[Tony Vargas]

Either way, the whole 'leader' concept is just a nasty argument looking for places to happen. Tactician as a name, without any reference whatsoever to leading anything, kind of gets around this;

There's always someone waiting for a nasty argument on the internet, sure. And, it was kinda obvious: 'Healer' (not to mention Cleric, Band-Aid, and heal-bot) was not cutting it as the D&Dism for support contributions, so they tried to come up with something... the Fighter had, in the prior edition, been raptly described as 'anchoring' the party and the 'natural party leader' - with absolutely no mechanical support, of course, not even so much as a ribbon, and that had caused no controversy (not that the fighter lacked for controversy about how bad it "SUX" back then). So, they went with Leader, but, anticipated whingeing over the conflation with 'party leader,' and immediately, right in the role description, pointed out that it didn't mean party leader. It's just a little broader and less lame than healer.

So, no one should be saying "Leader," if you describe Cleric, Druid, and/or Bard as 'support' that seems to go over OK, maybe use that? It's not like the formal role is coming back, nor like the Warlord should be limited to it, even if it were.

though my next question would be, what would make a Tactician different from a Fighter with some specialized training?

It meaningfully benefits from INT? Has some abilities that don't involving hitting things harder and/or more often? And, really, how does 5e model "specialized training" beyond skills? Classes & sub-classes.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Just to not that the term Captain was prior to the 16th century used for the Head of a Mercenary company, the Capitani di ventura, that operated in italy and across Europe before the rise of the large states (Germany, France) with larger more permanent armies. They were independent ’leaders’ fighting for gold and not part of a hierarchy

yep, and it was a general term form someone who lead a band of warriors for a long time before it was ever a rank.

Fionn mac Chumhaill was a Captain. The idea of him as a “warlord” is just laughably incongruous, though.

 

[Anoth]

Let’s call it the Fighter or Fighting-Man.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Let’s call it the Fighter or Fighting-Man.

I’d love to turn the Fighter into the Captain, tbh. I don’t actually think that there is any identity to the fighter at all, and every single existing archetype would work just as well if it could do support stuff as part of attacking to represent being a paragon of martial prowess that others naturally look to for inspiration and battlefield strategy.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Let’s call it the Fighter or Fighting-Man.

You could roll every non-casting/non-supernatural class in D&D history into one - call it fighter or just Hero - and probably implement it in a worthy enough way without being OP compared to 5e casters.

But, 5e made the Fighter, Barbarian, and Rogue individual classes, restricting them each to limited design & conceptual space, and balancing them with different flavors of high single-target DPR.

So, here we are.

Fionn mac Chumhaill was a Captain. The idea of him as a “warlord” is just laughably incongruous, though.

The Fianna served the High King. The High King might very well have been so by strength of arms, but that aside, their leader necessarily had legitimate authority and was set above those he led in status, as well. Fionn was a might hero, and personally superior to those he led in many other ways, as well.

That is, indeed, not what the Warlord class is meant to evoke. A character like that - if a PC ended up in command of a formal unit somehow - might work very well with the Warlord class, but the class is not limited to that sort of concept the way 'marshal' or 'captain' or other military ranks or positions would suggest.

 

[Lanefan]

That is, indeed, not what the Warlord class is meant to evoke.

Its very name would tend to suggest otherwise, as Lord of War....

 

[Tony Vargas]

Its very name would tend to suggest otherwise, as Lord of War....

The OP posted a definition, if you're unsure of the actual meaning, just start at the top.

The class has been out for 11 years, if you care to educate yourself in how D&D used it.

 

[Lanefan]

The class has been out for 11 years, if you care to educate yourself in how D&D used it.

I know it has, as have all its problems - one of which is its name.

 

[generic]

I don't care what name it has as long as it's in the book.

That being a given, I chose Herald and Banneret, as each evokes less of a 'leader', and, perhaps, more of a martial marshal (ha ha ha).

Postscript: What's wrong with calling Support classes heal-bots? That's what they are right?

 

[Tony Vargas]

What's wrong with calling Support classes heal-bots? That's what they are right?

Apart from the occasional Warforged Pacifist Cleric, no.