D&D 5E How many fans want a 5E Warlord?

[El Mahdi]

Lazylord: "Hey, fighter. You can totally hit that monster twice as many times within 6 seconds as you thought."
Fighter: "Weird. I guess I'm clearly capable of it. Why wasn't I able to do that yesterday when you weren't around? You must know a lot more about sword fighting than I. Get up here and do it too."
Lazylord: "I can't. I'm pretty lame at it, actually. I can only tell others how to do it. Here, let me tell you how awesome you are so your wounds won't hurt as much."
Fighter: "But I am clearly not as awesome as I thought. At least not unless you are around telling me how to swing my sword. So you are the one who is truly awesome it would seem."

If this is the way you see things, could you explain to me your thoughts on Synergy? What are your thoughts on Leadership?

To me (and by definition), Synergy is the idea that when people work together, they can be greater than the sum of their parts.

Or do you disagree with that? Do you disagree with the very existence of Synergy?

(Conversely a group can also be significantly less than the sum of their parts - but that's another discussion entirely.)

Extending the concept to D&D: 5 adventurers, working together, can accomplish more than the sum of what they can accomplish individually - if they can either find that synergy themselves, or have a catalyst for it.

Are they now better because their compatriots are suddenly telling them how to be better? No.

Are they now suddenly able to swing a sword better, move faster, do more in the same amount of time? Yes.

That's Synergy.

They find the time in the little moments between actions. They give advice, warnings, and exclamations that give each other an extra degree of perception and insight - that kick them into a whole other gear.

When you add a Warlord, they become the catalyst for inspiring that potential synergy - a catalyst that makes the occurrence of synergy far more likely than without it.

That's what Inspirational Leadership does. It creates a synergy between Leader and Ally.


That may seem hokey to you, but it's true. This is something I've seen - and done - firsthand. I don't know what experience you have with leadership - either being a leader or observing/following a leader - but I'm a retired military NCO. I have twenty-one years in the military, and seventeen of those as various ranks of Sergeant.

I know a thing or two about Leadership, including Leadership under fire.

I can attest that it's most certainly a real thing.


Back to the coach analogy:

Does a coach suddenly make a player capable of doing things they couldn't do before? No.

Does a coach make a player better than they were before? A good coach: Absolutely Yes.

Otherwise, what's the point of having a coach? What's the point of having Sergeants, Officers, or any other Leader?


Now to be honest, I don't exactly like the 4E Warlord either, but that's more about me not being a fan of 4E. But even in 4E, the Warlord couldn't force an Ally to do something they didn't want to do; they did however inspire that extra gear of activity - just like a real-world Leader.

 

[El Mahdi]

Well since we are apparently swimming in the deep end of the pool, I will point out that you just used a strawman. I never said "fallacy" was a "fancy word".

You're right. What you said was "fancy claim", which is essentially the same point.

And just because he "pointed something out" does not make my claim of his claim being illogical invalid. Just because I say the sky is blue does not make it so. But guess what...

I didn't say it did. All I said is you provided no logical basis for your statement.

"Because I said so" is not a logical basis.

 

[Eric V]

Players on a sports team aren't insulted by the presence of a coach - that is unless they're a prima donna or Lebron James.

This post was worth XP until that last line. Lebron is merely a better warlord than Blatt.

 

[El Mahdi]

This post was worth XP until that last line. Lebron is merely a better warlord that Blatt.

He's getting there.

Jordan is still better.

 

[Eric V]

[MENTION=6801216]ChrisCarlson[/MENTION], You never pointed out why his logic is flawed either.

You can't.

Perhaps there were indeed other words besides "fallacy" he used that you thought "fancy." A quick skim of his post reveals nothing that would be considered such.

 

[ChrisCarlson]

Synergy? Maybe you should explain yourself better? What do you consider minimal levels of synergy to qualify? When a PC with the Inspiring Leadership feat grants everyone temp HP between each short rest, are they not now greater than the sum of their parts?

And when 5 PCs all act as a team, they are accomplishing more together than the five individually with or without a leader. Action economy is already a substantive and measurable aspect of the 5e engine.

"Because I said so" is not a logical basis.

"Because I pointed it out," would be more accurate.

 

[sleypy]

Even with that... most fantasy characters can be broadly grouped into categories... and Conan really could be represented, at least in 5e, as a fighter with really high attruibutes and the right background. What I'm looking for is a character whose main group would be "inspires others to fight better" as opposed to being grouped as a warrior, mage, rogue, etc. that inspires people once or twice.

Sorry for jumping into the conversation in the middle. I'm not sure what sources you would qualify as valid, so I don't know if I could offer five you would consider acceptable...

That said, Bruenor Battlehammer (Salvatore) and Clanless Mehen (Erin M. Evans) are characters who provide leadership while not playing the lead in the story often.

The short story of Bruenor as an initiate, with no authority, showed he was as effective a leader as he was a fighter. He was often providing leadership that kept people alive in and out of combat. It wasn't because of narrative importance and rarely was it purely based on a position of authority.

In the Brimstone Angels novels, characters would be annoyed by Mehen because he was over cautious and had an unnecessary training regiment. However, that training regiments rubbed off on people he traveled with because how often his fastidious preparations save them from a jam.

In both cases, Bruenor and Mehen are excellent fighters, but their contribution to the group primarily displayed by leadership; not positions of power or importance in the story.

 

[ChrisCarlson]

[MENTION=6801216]ChrisCarlson[/MENTION], You never pointed out why his logic is flawed either.

You can't.

I did. Please read my entire original response to him before posting. Like him, you are throwing out the baby with the bathwater. You take umbrage to a single line in a post and disqualify everything else said. Regardless of their individual merits. Because its easier to discount the whole of something you don't like that way and pretend it wasn't said.

With that yardstick, nothing I've seen from you is valid or logical thus far, either.

 

[Imaro]

That may seem hokey to you, but it's true. This is something I've seen - and done - firsthand. I don't know what experience you have with leadership - either being a leader or observing/following a leader - but I'm a retired military NCO. I have twenty-one years in the military, and seventeen of those as various ranks of Sergeant.

I know a thing or two about Leadership, including Leadership under fire.

I can attest that it's most certainly a real thing.

Yes but you've all been trained in similar if not the exact same way...the leader has the necessary knowledge of military procedures, tactics, weaponry, etc. could a Project Manager whose great at leading IT people come in and lead soldiers while they were under fire successfully? Or are we saying the Warlord is just knowledgeable enough and good enough at everything from sneaking to melee combat to spells that he can lead such a disparate group of people?

 

[DEFCON 1]

And yet the rest of his post does stand on its own. In entirely separate paragraphs even. So you avoided responding to it and instead singled out the throwaway lead-in. If you ask me, that's telling to the lack of strength of your own point. Avoidance is a thing just like hyperbole.

The strength of my point is "Don't use hyperbole because it makes you seem unreasonable and anything else you say suspect."

A discussion between two people can be had if they are both coming from a place of realistic expectation and point of view. But if your point of view starts from a place of ridiculousness, then I have a very hard time taking anything you say seriously and there's really no point in talking with you.

More often than not... hyperbole is used by people in an attempt to give their opinion more "weight" compared to other people who make more measured responses. Someone says "I'm not a fan of X because I don't think it serves the game and could be done better, so I hope WotC decides not to do it." The hyperbolist then counters with "X sucks and WotC is stupid if they do it! But if WotC does it anyway, then I might as well give up the game because it's obvious they don't care about their customers!"

Now... I know you might think *I'm* being hyperbolic with this example, but as a new member to ENWorld who might not have been here through 3E and the entirety of 4E... I can assure you, ChrisCarlson, that unfortunately... I'm not. Not even close. This kind of hyperbolic language making all kinds of ridiculous claims has been part and parcel on ENWorld for some posters for years now. And as a result... some of us (myself included) just like to point out to people that reasonable discussions can be had when we all start from a place of moderation, because we've been through listening to absurd hyperbolic claims for years that aren't in fact going to be or are true.

Does TrippyHippy have a good point otherwise? Perhaps. But I have a hard time believing it when I've already determined I don't believe his opening statement (because I personally *don't* think he'll walk away from the game just because WotC releases a Warlord class some time in the future.) And as a result, what might've been a reasonable point is stuck ten paces back.