D&D 5E Homebrewed Warlord on a Rogue chassis

[doctorbadwolf]

Don't forget it's a stun you could theoretically do every turn... Maybe I'll keep it for a subclass with more ressources instead?

Maybe something along the line "but not if you are already applying your proficiency bonus more than once"

Both sound good. The trick with stun is that unless your damage is likely to kill the target, it’s a better choice than dealing more damage, and thus better to pretty much every condition a PC can normally inflict.
It needs a decent cost, or it becomes the go to option all the time.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Gonna tage @Tony Vargas….
Is it too strong? Too good? Too weak? I'm also looking for more 'signals' ideas.

I can't see a class filling the vital support* function without a comparatively large resource pool that recharges on a longer time-scale - long-rest, at the minimum ( the same scale, or longer, as HD wouldn't be out of line, either, though it would be unique & outside the box...). It's just an artifact of the design & balancing of classes on the assumption of a long, encounter-heavy day.

For one thing, at-will support is both "too strong" in simple number-crunching theory, even if limited only to rounds of actual encounters, and too weak within an actual, challenging, encounter.

 

[Fenris-77]

Temp HP every turn is a strong ability, no matter the exact amount. The general standard for damage by level is about 9 I believe, so 3hp/turn at 1st level is pretty awesome. However, scaling is an issue. Even the 6 HP is only really useful through part of tier 2 at best. Lots of classes have abilities that are targeted at use in particular levels of play, and are then superseded by other abilities later on so this isn't necessarily a flaw in your design, you just have to account for usefulness at level when you;'re deciding when to hand out the ability.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I can't see a class filling the vital support* function without a comparatively large resource pool that recharges on a longer time-scale - long-rest, at the minimum ( the same scale, or longer, as HD wouldn't be out of line, either, though it would be unique & outside the box...). It's just an artifact of the design & balancing of classes on the assumption of a long, encounter-heavy day.

For one thing, at-will support is both "too strong" in simple number-crunching theory, even if limited only to rounds of actual encounters, and too weak within an actual, challenging, encounter.

Disagree. In actual play, I think this class, once cleaned up a bit, and the Marshal posited in the now defunct but soon resurrected thread, once finished, can fill that role just fine.

in play, the cleric pretty much has to start doing things like damage dealing and control, because it accomplishes party support so strongly with few resources spent.

Not only that, but support requires that every fight the team functions noticeably better because of the support class. @Undrave ’s class does that.

 

[generic]

Here we are! I mentionned this before in the various thread on Warlord we had recently that all the talks of chassis and abilities got me inspired.

So here is a first draft with, so far, only two subclasses for this Warlord idea. I plan to add at least two more subclasses to this, maybe three, but I figured I'd let you guys take a look first. Now that I got my own ideas out, I might be able to participate in the other Warlord homebrew thread...

Link to the Homebrewery document here.

Gonna tage @Tony Vargas @Garthanos and @doctorbadwolf so they can check it out.

I don't really have any plans on really playtesting this, since I just don't have enough players interested in the crunchy aspects of DnD for it, but I just HAD to get these ideas on a page.

Is it too strong? Too good? Too weak? I'm also looking for more 'signals' ideas.

My browser doesn't format it correctly. Would you mind putting the pdf on Dropbox or Google Drive, or even MEGA so that people with different browsers can view it? Thanks!

 

[Undrave]

My browser doesn't format it correctly. Would you mind putting the pdf on Dropbox or Google Drive, or even MEGA so that people with different browsers can view it? Thanks!

It doesn't format correctly because the tags got broken at some point this morning and I can't fix it from here. I'll give you a heads up when I do and we can discuss other options if you still have formatting problem.

 

[generic]

It doesn't format correctly because the tags got broken at some point this morning and I can't fix it from here. I'll give you a heads up when I do and we can discuss other options if you still have formatting problem.

Oh, thank you, I did not bother to look at the markup, sorry. And, thank you.

 

[Tony Vargas]

in play, the cleric pretty much has to start doing things like damage dealing and control, because it accomplishes party support so strongly with few resources spent.

The Cleric, in 5e, does damage & control because it's always done that kinda thing, and 5e is concept-first, not role-first.
In 4e, the cleric did damage & secondary control - tightly integrated with support - for fear that /pure/ support would still be perceived as boring and undesirable, per the perennial "nobody wants to play the cleric" stereotype. But, it still came out with a Pacifist Cleric, eventually.
In 3e, the same desire to render the Cleric less stereotypically boring resulted in CoDzilla.

So, no, the Cleric in 5e doesn't do those things because it has too much support ability (and it's worth noting that most of it's support resources are versatile, and can be used of to contribute in other ways, as well, because the party's need of support varies greatly...)

Not only that, but support requires that every fight the team functions noticeably better because of the support class. @Undrave ’s class does that.

Not s'much, really. Support is vital when needed - in a hard battle, when luck abandons the party, etc - and superfluous when they overmatch their enemies, and, sometimes, control or other contributions would be more efficient than reactive or even pro-active support.

Support classes need the infrequent/high-impact and versatility that D&D leaves design space for only in limited-use resources.

 

[Undrave]

Oh, thank you, I did not bother to look at the markup, sorry. And, thank you.

Here's a new link.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Good lord. I'm gonna go ahead and stop engaging on this topic with the intractable.