D&D 5E (2014) For the Record: Mearls on Warlords (ca. 2013)

[ChrisCarlson]

It's just the Comatose Canary TV Trope. Within a fantasy genre, it's an acceptable level of logic for many.

Your opinion, of course.

But assuming so regardless, by extension, are you saying that all the tropes listed on tvtropes are by default worthy of building a D&D character class out of?

 

[ChrisCarlson]

What if warlord were a subclass of fighter. And it incorporated damage mitigation, tactical bonuses, etc. But also interacted smoothly with the large-scale battle rules?

As PCs can take control over units and stands and whatever, what if this subclass worked fine on its own, but also really shines in large scale battles? Could still be a warlord. Just not commanding or leading other PCs.

How practical would this be in play? When large-scale battles aren't happening, is the player feeling his full potential is being wasted? When large-scale battles are happening, what are the other players doing?

Not saying it's not possible. Just that it can be a bit messy in actual play.

 

[Mistwell]

Your opinion, of course.

But assuming so regardless, by extension, are you saying that all the tropes listed on tvtropes are by default worthy of building a D&D character class out of?

No, I am saying they are a decent yardstick by which one can measure whether the logic holds up "enough" for a fantasy game like this, for many. Whether it should be in the game is based on whether there is sufficient demand for it to be in the game.

 

[Bawylie]

How practical would this be in play? When large-scale battles aren't happening, is the player feeling his full potential is being wasted? When large-scale battles are happening, what are the other players doing?

Not saying it's not possible. Just that it can be a bit messy in actual play.

I think they'd be worded in such a way as to be effective outside large scale battles AND in them.

For instance some line like "When used on a unit commanded by the warlord, the effect applies also to each stand within that unit." Other abilities might shorten the amount of time taken from actions to bonus actions. Idk. Just spitballing.

 

[ChrisCarlson]

No, I am saying they are a decent yardstick by which one can measure whether the logic holds up "enough" for a fantasy game like this, for many. Whether it should be in the game is based on whether there is sufficient demand for it to be in the game.

In which case I would counter with the fact that warlord inspiring healing is nothing like that trope. At all. Did you link the wrong one? Because what is repeatedly being proposed is instead akin to a non-magical cure wounds spell. I recommend those assuming the trope linked is related to please go read it. It has nothing to do with what is being requested as a class feature for warlords.

 

[sleypy]

So would it be reasonable for a warlord to have additional bond traits and have there abilities tied to the characters he shares a bond trait with.

 

[mellored]

Merls discussion is part of the reason why i think we need a broader skill-based support class (noble/tactician/strategist/spell-less bard). With warlord being just one sub-class that gives armor and weapons.

Let's not box in the ideas before they started.
Engineer, trapper, medics, mechanics, alchemist, detectives, lazylord, sapper, ect...

 

[I'm A Banana]

So it ends up that a warlord, to me, is a guy that makes the fighting unit better overall. He doesn't have to be "the leader," but he's got to offer some boons and some mitigation. He's not the Fighter, but he's at least as capable as a valor bard, a cleric, etc.

That's the niche I see. Now the mitigation doesn't HAVE TO BE "Inspiring Word." That was traditional, but it could be open to temp hp, reducing incoming damage, target denial, etc.

I could totally see space for that, even as a separate class, in the D&D we have now.

But if it lacks inspirational healing (as in "I non-magically tell you to shake it off and thus you regain hit points.") I think that it will not please some warlord fans.

That seems a shame to me, when one does not seem to require the other at all.

 

[Bawylie]

Well I *am* a warlord fan. And I'm open to alternatives to non-magical healing, not least of which is Temp HP (aka Rally).

Will some be upset? Maybe. But when I picked warlord it's because I drew the short straw (literally) and had to be team healer. However, I took no other healing powers, relying only on Uses of Inspiring Word. The rest of the class (paths, powers) were dedicated to moving allies and granting bonus damage and extra attacks.

Healing is/was A component of the class by virtue of it existing in the leader "role." But in a new paradigm, I believe mitigation will be sufficient, provided some of the extra stuff works too.

We played warlord so we didn't have to play cleric, some of us. So I'm not looking just to have non-magic cleric. It has to be non-magic. It doesn't have to duplicate cleric or bard. Whatever.

 

[ChrisCarlson]

Well I *am* a warlord fan. And I'm open to alternatives to non-magical healing, not least of which is Temp HP (aka Rally).

Agreed. It is my opinion that THPs is the ideal mechanic to simulate something like inspirational "empowerment" in battle. The demand for it to be real healing, by some, is strange to me.

What is it about THPs that doesn't fit the effect desired? Is it just that it cannot restore an unconscious ally? Because other than that it does everything else the same. In fact, thematically it works better. Because now you are playing to the trope of the motivational character giving the big speech before the battle (or early into it) that pumps his allies up. Gives them something more to fight for. That extra oomph to carry them through the fight.