Considerations when Designing a Warlord.

[FrogReaver]

You have 5 superiority dice.

(3 attacks * 8 rounds +3 for action surge)* 25% chance to miss (no including natural 1s) = 6.75 dice needed.
Not including bonus action attacks from GWM.


Unless you get rather lucky, you're going to run out of dice with just the fighters attacks. None will be left over for the granted attacks.

Sure there might be times when you are granted an attack against a 1 HP foe, and you miss by 1, and you spend a die to finish it off. But that's still reducing your chances to hit the next foe. Otherwise you wouldn't want to spend resources on 1/2 damage, when you can get full damage on your own turn.

Once I hit 3 attacks I would only use them when i missed by 1 to 5. So 25% of the time. 20% * 27 attacks = 6.75 attacks per superiority dice. The key is to realize that if I had enough superiority dice to always use them in that scenario then I would gain +18.75% chance to hit. However, since I do occasionaly run out of superiority dice my actual simulated chance to hit for 27 attacks and d10 superiority dice is +14%.

Double checked. Going from 3 attacks per turn to 6 per turn with a warlord action granting feature does cause the dice to run out too quickly. My simulation came up with a +8.7% increase to hit in that scenario. However, that is assuming that the warlord is targeting the fighter with his power every turn.

But you do bring up another more important point I had failed to account for. You wouldn't use your superiority dice because of the half damage. Good call!

 

[Remathilis]

Slots are an x/rest resource, just a very plentiful, powerful, and versatile one compared to things like Rage or CS dice. Points, likewise, are plentiful x/rest like spells, just more granular and thus even more flexible.

So, really, you've got x/short rest, x/long rest, and 1/2x/long rest (HD, the slowest-to-recover resource in the standard game).

Spells/Points are a little more than a x/rest mechanic due to flexibility (which you mentioned). You can cast spells with higher spell slots (often to higher effect) and have flexibility in choice, both of which makes them more flexible than rage 4/day or wild shape 2/short rest. Points are even more granular in theory (but so far, have appeared to conform to spell slots).

In order of most flexible to least.

Per Long Rest
Per Short Rest
Dice (more choices, variable outcome)
Spell slots
Spell/Psi Points

Now, most martial characters fill the upper ranks (LR/SR/Dice) but I could see a Command Point system work as well, especially if the various actions had pseudo "levels" assigned by point cost

 

[mellored]

In order of most flexible to least.

Per Long Rest
Per Short Rest
Dice (more choices, variable outcome)
Spell slots
Spell/Psi Points

Don't forget (bonus / re)actions.
That's a resource as well.

 

[Eltab]

...what does a warlord do?

Anything I'm missing?

* Movement buffs, as in:
- more speed. An ally can Dash or Dodge without using his Action (perhaps using his bonus action instead, a la Rogue or Monk ki ability)
- ally can ignore Difficult Terrain for a turn and just plow through it as if it was normal ground.

* But the Warlord canNOT let somebody 'defy physics' the way a Monk eventually can run up walls or on water.

One of the best moments with my son's Warlord was when he put the Barbarian all the way through a thicket and able to engage the enemy, while the rest of us (spellcasters) waded through the brambles.

 

[Remathilis]

Don't forget (bonus / re)actions.
That's a resource as well.

Sorta. Action Economy is a separate piece of the equation. Without a resource to spend, all (bonus/re)Actions are essentially "Infinite" with the only price being paid is in Opportunity Cost vs doing another action.

Take Commander's Strike (BM maneuver). If the cost was only the commander's Bonus Action and the User's Reaction, then the cost is negligible. A BM doesn't have that many thing he can be using his bonus actions on (that he can do round after round; one action surge and one second wind isn't much of a price in a 20 rounds of combat between rests) and most recipients have even less to spend reactions on (OAs for movement being the only universal) so if that alone is the cost, there is effectively no cost. Even if the cost was the BM's action, the reaction cost is barely noticable.

So while it is a cost of sorts, it barely registers when considering resources.

 

[mellored]

Without a resource to spend, all (bonus/re)Actions are essentially "Infinite" with the only price being paid is in Opportunity Cost vs doing another action.

That's like saying spells are "infinite" with the only price being long rests.

You only get ~20 combat turns in a day. 20 actions to spend.

Unless your talking out of combat then sure. Might as well make it a feature instead of an action.

 

[Tony Vargas]

That's like saying spells are "infinite" with the only price being long rests.

Which is to say its actually quite true, and not entirely irrelevant, but not that telling, yes. Bonus actions mostly matter in combat, and you only have so much combat, you can't systematically abuse a bonus action during your downtime, for instance. Spells, OTOH, are a renewable daily resource, with non-combat applications, so if you can find a way to systematically (ab)use a spell, day-in, day-out...

Besides, fighters in general have uses for bonus actions and reactions, especially if feats are in play. And, many character's reactions are made more valuable by some feature, defensive spells like Shield, for instance, or the Protection style.

So, yeah, user's bonus action & target's reaction is a pretty meaningful action-economy price. Action & target's reaction would a high price, indeed.

 

[MoutonRustique]

Sorta. Action Economy is a separate piece of the equation. Without a resource to spend, all (bonus/re)Actions are essentially "Infinite" with the only price being paid is in Opportunity Cost vs doing another action.

Take Commander's Strike (BM maneuver). If the cost was only the commander's Bonus Action and the User's Reaction, then the cost is negligible. A BM doesn't have that many thing he can be using his bonus actions on (that he can do round after round; one action surge and one second wind isn't much of a price in a 20 rounds of combat between rests) and most recipients have even less to spend reactions on (OAs for movement being the only universal) so if that alone is the cost, there is effectively no cost. Even if the cost was the BM's action, the reaction cost is barely noticable.

So while it is a cost of sorts, it barely registers when considering resources.

From where I'm sitting, the reverse is the case.

During a certain situation, you have 2 types of resources : available resources, and availability* of resources. If you only have one instance of [availability], you can have 19 level 9 spells, you're no better off than just having the one lonely level 9 spell.

Which of the two will be more important will depend upon the specific table. If the players aren't forced to expend all non-at-will resources, then [availability] was actually the more important factor. I'm not sure the norm is that everyone is often tapped out during the course of an adventuring day, but then again, any evidence I might have would be anecdotal.

*trying out a new way to say "action economy".

Reactions are currently very much in demand. Bonus actions really depend on the class and build choices - in many cases, they are very important indeed! There's a reason those have been hard-capped at 1! and even spells and effects that grant more actions don't grant more of these types - it's the same kind of "combo-blocking" as the 1 concentration spell rule.

 

[Remathilis]

That's like saying spells are "infinite" with the only price being long rests.

You only get ~20 combat turns in a day. 20 actions to spend.

Unless your talking out of combat then sure. Might as well make it a feature instead of an action.

Again, two different prices to pay.

Most actions are "infinite" as far as there is nothing lost/wasted by using them. A fighter who attacks doesn't lose his attack action, he can repeat it round after round after round. A wizard who casts a spell loses a spell slot, he can't do that round after round without burning through all his spell slots. If both characters go through 20 rounds of combat (broken up over several fights) before a rest, the wizard will run out of spells* long before a fighter runs out of sword swings, even with both of them spending on action per round to do it.

(*ignoring cantrips for a minute; they're basically wizard "sword swings").

So yes, anything that isn't capped some other way is essentially infinite. The game is not balanced round-to-round, but rest-to-rest (which is why a wizard can fireball a group monsters and deal large damage to each, but a fighter will deliver more hp damage over the course of 20 rounds). In practical terms, the only things a warlord should be able to do at the cost of "an action" (of any type) should equal an attack, cantrip, or other things that can be done essentially, "infinitely".

 

[mellored]

A fighter does "run out" of sword swings after 20 rounds by virtue of having no one to attack. She isn't doing infinite damage every rest.

And a wizard 11 does have 20 spells, as does a sorcerer or land druid. Cleric 11 also, if you include channel divinity. Bard's are a bit short.

You also need to factor in that many spells last multiple turns. Bless, for instance, can be done for 20 rounds by level 5. Haste by level 11. Foresight lasts all day, and stacks.