D&D (2024) Chance for a warlord?

[Corinnguard]

Yes indeed!
You can take a look here!

The Elemental Scion heritage in the sneak peak PDF looked nice.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Yes indeed!
You can take a look here!

Not bad. Instead of stratagems I would wish battlemaster combat maneuvers. No need for another subsystem (rally is already a copy from the battlemaster).

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Marshal | Level Up

a5e.tools

A5e already has it and better deserves your money than WotC!

You miss a verb. I also heavily dislike that kind of marketing.
If you feel that is a point, there is no point at all.

 

[Distracted DM]

Not bad. Instead of stratagems I would wish battlemaster combat maneuvers. No need for another subsystem (rally is already a copy from the battlemaster).

Curious take. Why would they use battlemaster maneuvers when they're not a fighter? It's either a reprint, or you need to reference another class for your chosen class.
"Another subsystem" is like complaining that sorcerers need to have their own system for sorcery points.

 

[mellored]

Not for this edition, but...

I could see merging Ranger and Warlord into a single class. Call it Guide or something.

"Ranger" being the subclass that gets druid spells.
And give a bonus to leading a ghost army.

 

[Steampunkette]

You miss a verb.

What verb did I miss?

 

[TorgoTheWhite]

I'm saying its a divisive narrative that is highly likely to cause friction within a group (especially given that D&D players are still most likely to be geeks, the hereditary enemies of jocks). Also see, kender.

Friction in the party is a great roleplay mechanism. Isn't that very dispute between the intel officer and the field commander a tale as old as time? I see the flipside narrative of this all the time where people intellectually bully the barbarian with eye-roll stuff... but it is all an opportunity for roleplay on the group dynamic of people who don't see eye-to-eye. Also, this type of character has no MECHANICAL way of forcing any decisions on other players. It's like that captain you hate, but the dude knows how to spoil his team after battle and you'd rather have that prick at your back, you may ignore his douchery and do your own thing though.

Back to the warlord though..serg. Narrative is just one. And no, I don't think that is just a high charisma fighter. Like your many other magic subclasses, I feel that the innate ability to lead fighting men, make them ignore fear and screwed up crap, push them beyond themselves, or jump when you say jump - with your (charisma). Is a legit class gap that is not well-filled by just a battlemaster with incredibly limited ability slots to devote to developing and utilizing charisma (especially when they only have so many times per day that they apparently warlord it up). Again, maybe a secular warship paladin comes close and I don't hate that close second. I would agree with you if the battlemaster came with higher quantity of charisma based buff maneuvers and amount of times they could actually command on the field it would not require its' own class. But no, narratively, commanding others at this level is an innate 'it factor' that not every fighter (even charisma fighter) would have. Mechanically, it relies on charisma, and has too little support coming from the fighter shell.... I guess you could wait till battlemaster level 15 though to have consistent access to 2 abilities that you could CONSISTENTLY warlord it up with.

The balanced shell of this is already there, commanders strike where you sacrifice your own modest strike to gift one. Protection fighting style (sacrifice DPR for a buff), a few others. But it gets pretty patchworky.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

What verb did I miss?

Sorry. No verb. An adjective ("more" presumably. Could also be "less") . My bad.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Curious take. Why would they use battlemaster maneuvers when they're not a fighter? It's either a reprint, or you need to reference another class for your chosen class.
"Another subsystem" is like complaining that sorcerers need to have their own system for sorcery points.

Because a champion is a pure fighter. An eldritch knight is a wizard light. Uses the spell subsystem. A psi warrior, if the Psion gets through as is, will be a psion light using the psi dice subsystem.
For symmetry reasons, a battlemaster should be a warlord light, using the same subsystem as they do.

This is my take explained in post 1. Maybe not explicitely enough.

Edit: you also mix up complaining with stating an opinion. Which is dismissive.

 

[mellored]

Here's the Pathfinder 2 version. I think it works quite well, except the banner which is a bit awkward IMO.
.Demiplane