D&D 5E Different types of Warlords

[Paul Smart]

In a post on the old D and D forum, wrecan identified 5 different types of warlords. I have quoted them below. Which of these is already covered by 5th edition and which would you like to see as subclasses in a Warlord class, if and when it comes out?

Practitioner

The warlord who is most concerned with maintaining and boosting his allies and keeping them in the fight. This warlord specializes in martial healing, granting temporary hit points, resistance to damage, and ending conditions. He does this through a combination of first aid, improvement to morale, and an intimate knowledge of how a body can adjust to and react to combat situations.
Signature Power: Martial Healing

Vanguard

A warlord who leads by example. He attacks enemies in ways that show allies how to fight them more effectively. This manifests as the warlord hitting a foe, thus granting allies a bonus to either hitting that same foe or hitting a similar foe (as in "Here's how you take down a giant!").
Signature Power: Impose a condition that encourages allies to attack that target.

Grandmaster

A warlord who spots tactical weaknesses in position and directs allies on how to get the most advantageous position. This usually manifests as free movement, extra benefits from positioning, or off-turn parries.
Signature Power: Grant allies off-turn movement.

Captain

This is the warlord who oversees a battle and directs the allies to give them benefits to their attacks. Unlike the vanguard, who exploits an enemy's weakness, the captain deals primarily with his ally's own strengths, granting off-turn actions, added damage, or bonuses to attempts to trip, grapple, etc.
Signature Power: Grant allies off-turn attacks.

Hector

Rather than use his strategy to boost allies, he uses it to demoralize and disarray his enemies. With choreographed attacks that are designed to be as demoralizing as they are damaging, he causes enemies to miss opportunity (attacks), take penalties to hit or damage, or to incur fear-based conditions. Like the vanguard, his powers trigger off attacks, but unlike the vanguard, his attacks are meant to affect other enemies, rather than his allies.
Signature Power: Hit an enemy and impose a condition on nearby allies of that enemy.

 

[Tony Vargas]

5e currently does exactly none of those to an adequate degree. The deficiency is more profound when you look at the way it dips a toe into some of them, and compare it to the support other classes have gotten.

Take the 'Practitioner' for instance, a PDK/banneret (SCAG) is in that vein, but what does it do, a handful of hps restored once between each rest, and they can't help downed allies? Compared to the Warlord's most basic Inspiring Word at least twice per encounter, that's nothing. Compared to a more conventional support character's spellcasting, it's less than nothing.

Or consider the Battlemaster, who chooses 3 maneuvers from a list of 17 or so, any of which are presumably suitable for a 3rd level PC to use, vs the Warlord's hundreds of exploits right up into epic levels. Compared to a more conventional support character's spellcasting, the Battlemaster is like a Cleric who can only ever use 1st level spells!


Now, you could fake any of them - the sorts of mechanics are mostly there, in fragmentary bits, a sub-class ability here, a feat there - but only in the same sense you could fake a Cleric by playing a Champion with the Acolyte Background if the game didn't present the Cleric or Paladin, but that's about as much credit as you can give 5e for covering the Warlord so far.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I disagree with the names, and I think it needs an addition of a Lead The Charge type, whose focus is on hitting first while boosting the subsequent attacks of allies, or raise morale, improve defenses, dishearten the enemy, etc. which is what is use the name Captain for, if I can't use it for the class itself.

Other than that, looks fair at a glance. [MENTION=996]Tony Vargas[/MENTION] pretty well describes my thoughts on those ideas.

 

[Undrhil]

Take the 'Practitioner' for instance, a PDK/banneret (SCAG) is in that vein, but what does it do, a handful of hps restored once between each rest, and they can't help downed allies?

What do you mean they can't help downed allies?

 

[Tony Vargas]

What do you mean they can't help downed allies?

The PDK has can restore a few hps to allies who are conscious and can hear him. Downed (0 hp) allies aren't conscious, so can't be brought back into the fight by a PDK. At least, not using any PDK feature - like anyone, he could feed them a healing potion, for instance.

 

[Undrhil]

The PDK has can restore a few hps to allies who are conscious and can hear him. Downed (0 hp) allies aren't conscious, so can't be brought back into the fight by a PDK. At least, not using any PDK feature - like anyone, he could feed them a healing potion, for instance.

The feature says nothing about them needing to be conscious. And I would counter that if an unconscious creature can't hear then shouting at them can't wake them up (in the case of being unconscious from sleeping). Note the difference between 'hearing' and 'listening'. Hearing is a passive action while listening is an active active. An unconscious creature can hear just fine, it just isn't listening.

I have tweeted Jeremy Crawford to see what he thinks.

 

[Undrhil]

I think a Bard (of either college) with the Inspiring Leader feat and three levels of Fighter for Battle Master archetype can make an effective Warlord. Just take the Commander's Strike, Rally, and Maneuvering Attack maneuvers.

 

[Jester David]

These are lacking as far as 5e design goes, being little more than names and loose mechanical hooks. There's no identity to these subclasses. They have no story or place in the world. They have no hook or role for the 2/3rd of the game where you're not in combat. "Hit an enemy and impose a condition" would be a weak description for a cantrip, let alone an entire subclass.

 

[Jester David]

The feature says nothing about them needing to be conscious. And I would counter that if an unconscious creature can't hear then shouting at them can't wake them up (in the case of being unconscious from sleeping). Note the difference between 'hearing' and 'listening'. Hearing is a passive action while listening is an active active. An unconscious creature can hear just fine, it just isn't listening.

I have tweeted Jeremy Crawford to see what he thinks.

From the PHB:
UNCONSCIOUS An unconscious creature is incapacitated (see the condition), can't move or speak, and is unaware of its surroundings.

If you're unaware, that mean you can't see or hear.
You can't shout a sleeping creature awake if they were targeted by the sleep spell. Shouting them awake from regular sleep is up to the DM.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

Is the ability to heal someone with a shout that they cannot hear something that the warlord should be able to do?
Should they get an ability like the Healer feat that allows them to bring round unconscious allies 'medically' so they can start using their 'morale' healing on them?