D&D 5E Different types of Warlords

[Aldarc]

I think you meant 'Arcane Cleric should just play a Wizard.'

Tony Vargas addressed this well enough.

And I think that a thread asking for ideas on how to spec out a 'Warlord' is the perfect place to discuss 'alternative' paths to making a Warlord, such as making it as a Bard or even as a War Cleric. Kindly stop poo-poo-ing on someone else's ideas of how to play a game.

And when someone asks you what sort of cat they should buy or how they can get a cat, do you tell them that they should just get a dog as an "alternative cat"? Don't be surprised when people look at you strangely or peeved when you answer them in that sort of non-sequitur manner.

 

[Krachek]

For now a Fighter battle master, that pick the feats healer and inspiring leader. That Pick commander strike, maneuvering attack and rally maneuvers.
All of this is making a solid Warlord in term of 4ed.

It is just missing a version of the lucky feat that would allow to help your ally with a reaction. It is not too hard to create that one. And we are set.

Temp hp, nonmagical healing, give help on d20 rolls, making your ally attack or move by using maneuvers.

If I do remember right the Warlord I play in 4ed, nothing is missing, except the ability to allow your ally to cast a spell or a cantrip. I would not count on that from official rules.

What do we need more to play a warlord?

 

[Undrhil]

Kindly stop poo-poo-ing on someone else's ideas of how to play a game.

Nice try, but it was my game play idea that was poo-poo-ed on. So, thanks for trying to make me look bad, but you failed.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Nice try, but it was my game play idea that was poo-poo-ed on. So, thanks for trying to make me look bad, but you failed.

Huh?

Oh, I neglected to delete the last line of your post when I quoted you.

Sorry...


...fixed.

For now a Fighter battle master, that pick the feats healer and inspiring leader. That Pick commander strike, maneuvering attack and rally maneuvers.
All of this is making a solid Warlord in term of 4ed.
...
What do we need more to play a warlord?

Oh, advancement. Any variation at all. I mean, that's a poor excuse for a 1st-level Warlord even at 4th level (8th if you're not variant human), and at 1st & 2nd it's nothing like one at all, but after the second feat, what happens? You just keep accumulating HD and extra attack.

The Battlemaster is comparable to the Warlord the way the Eldritch Knight is comparable to the Wizard... that is, if the EK only ever got 1st level spells, and only ever learned 6 of them, and only 3 or 4 were actually spells that bore a resemblance to something on the wizard list.

The BM is fine if you want a 4e fighter in the way the EK is fine if you want a 1e fighter/magic-user, it's nice if you want a character who's mostly one thing (tanky DPR), but a little bit something else (maneuvers or spells).
That's as far as it goes. The BM doesn't really do the 3.5 or 4e fighter justice, either, but it's not as far short as it is of the Warlord. More to the point, the 3.5 & 4e fighters were supposed to be tanks & hit pretty hard (the former depending on build, obviously) so all that juicy DPR and general toughness is on the money, even if it falls short in customizeability, flexiblity, or defender support - for the Warlord, it's excessive, just eats up design space.

 

[mellored]

For now a Fighter battle master, that pick the feats healer and inspiring leader. That Pick commander strike, maneuvering attack and rally maneuvers.
All of this is making a solid Warlord in term of 4ed.

It is just missing a version of the lucky feat that would allow to help your ally with a reaction. It is not too hard to create that one. And we are set.

Temp hp, nonmagical healing, give help on d20 rolls, making your ally attack or move by using maneuvers.

If I do remember right the Warlord I play in 4ed, nothing is missing, except the ability to allow your ally to cast a spell or a cantrip. I would not count on that from official rules.

What do we need more to play a warlord?

For it to go to level 20.

You have 5 levels worth of warlord, and 15 levels worth of fighter. You're going to quickly run out of your support options, and spend most of your time, and effectiveness, hitting things with a stick.

 

[Alexemplar]

When I get back home, I can provide page numbers and direct quotes.

Suffice it to say, the book does explicitly state that Bards cast arcane spells, Clerics cast divine spells, monks use Ki, etc. Both in the class descriptions and in the section regarding spellcasting.

 

[Tony Vargas]

When I get back home, I can provide page numbers and direct quotes.

Suffice it to say, the book does explicitly state that Bards cast arcane spells, Clerics cast divine spells, monks use Ki, etc. Both in the class descriptions and in the section regarding spellcasting.

I couldn't resist the temptation to check. And, yes, the Cleric uses 'Divine magic' and the Monks call the 'magical energy' the use 'Ki,' etc... (The Wizard actually mentions 'the weave' so score one for 'FR is the default setting.')

...but, the Bard, perhaps appropriately, has a more lyrical take on it's magic. It's the magic of words and music, gleaned from - get this - echoes of creation. The Gods spoke to create the world, the echoes of those words provide the Bard's magic. The 5e Bard is a divine caster for the first time in the history of the game! :: que cheesy Monty Python animation of clouds parting and a divine sun shining down beatifically ::

I was so used to thinking of it as an arcane caster since they switched it from Druid spells with the release of 2e.
Wild, huh?

Good thing the Artificer's in the pipeline, so we can have non-divine/nature support-contributing caster (OK 1/2, but magical enough with items) class again.

 

[Alexemplar]

I couldn't resist the temptation to check. And, yes, the Cleric uses 'Divine magic' and the Monks call the 'magical energy' the use 'Ki,' etc... (The Wizard actually mentions 'the weave' so score one for 'FR is the default setting.')


...but, the Bard, perhaps appropriately, has a more lyrical take on it's magic. It's the magic of words and music, gleaned from - get this - echoes of creation. The Gods spoke to create the world, the echoes of those words provide the Bard's magic. The 5e Bard is a divine caster for the first time in the history of the game! :: que cheesy Monty Python animation of clouds parting and a divine sun shining down beatifically ::


I was so used to thinking of it as an arcane caster since they switched it from Druid spells with the release of 2e.
Wild, huh?


Good thing the Artificer's in the pipeline, so we can have non-divine/nature support-contributing caster (OK 1/2, but magical enough with items) class again.

You beat me to it, but to elaborate...


The Druid also makes referenced to the "Divine Essence", and the Ranger "use(s) the magical essence of nature to cast spells, much as a druid does." And Paladins learn to "draw on divine magic through meditation and prayer to cast spells as a cleric does." And both the Eldritch Knight and Arcane Trickster cast Wizard spells from the Wizard spell list "since you learn your
spells through study and memorization," just like a Wizard.


And of course, under the Monk's Ki section, it explictly states that the mystical energies they manipulate are known as "ki".


The Bard is in a somewhat funky spot. It's the ONLY spellcasting class that doesn't reference arcane/divine magic or arcane/divine spellcasting classes in the description, but the sidebar in the Spellcasting section on page 206 lumps them in with Wizards, Sorcerers, and Warlocks as arcane casters.


Of course power sources have always been largely academic. Back in 3e, the arcane/divine/psionic/whatever split really didn't matter aside from determining what spell trigger items your character could/couldn't use or prestige class requirements. Even in 4e, they had little mechanical impact, as very very few feats, paragon paths, etc were restricted by power source.


"Power sources" are mostly a matter of aesthetics and "feel".

 

[Tony Vargas]

The Bard is in a somewhat funky spot. It's the ONLY spellcasting class that doesn't reference arcane/divine magic or arcane/divine spellcasting classes in the description, but the sidebar in the Spellcasting section on page 206 lumps them in with Wizards, Sorcerers, and Warlocks as arcane casters.

Interesting. I guess riffing off divine echoes isn't quite divine. I guess it's like using Mystara's 'Weave,' that way. Divinity put it there, but you're not beholden to 'em for it?

Of course power sources have always been largely academic. Back in 3e, the arcane/divine/psionic/whatever split really didn't matter aside from determining what spell trigger items your character could/couldn't use or prestige class requirements. Even in 4e, they had little mechanical impact, as very very few feats, paragon paths, etc were restricted by power source.

Nod. Like Roles, always been there, formalizing them didn't really make that much of a difference. Natural language doesn't really make a big difference either - you just have to dig and interpret a bit more.