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

How many fans want a 5E Warlord?

  • I want a 5E Warlord

    Votes: 139 45.9%
  • Lemmon Curry

    Votes: 169 55.8%

Status
Not open for further replies.
Magic isn't supernatural in my games. If "supernatural" means "suspending the rules of the universe," then D&D magic should rarely be treated as supernatural, because magic always works according to rules. They are different rules than our universe uses, but they're still rules and still part of nature. In point of fact, it's hard to imagine anything you could model in the game which would be supernatural--which I believe was your point vis-a-vis shout healing, no? That it doesn't have to be supernatural.

It sounds like you're okay with it being supernatural, but it absolutely must not be magical in order to be Cool in your eyes. If it were presented as magical (but not necessarily supernatural), would you consider that "unplayable"?

Example of not-magical-but-supernatural:
Your passionate exhortations can heal wounds. You have a pool of healing power that replenishes when you take a long rest. With that pool, you can recover a total number of hit points equal to your class level +3.
As an action, you can give an inspiring cry and draw power from the pool to restore a number of hit points to a creature that can hear you, up to the maximum amount remaining in your pool. This feature has no effect on deafened creatures, or creatures that cannot hear.​

(3+class level might not be the end number, just an example) Here, we have someone whose "inspiring cry" can heal wounds. Is it magical? PERHAPS! :)

Or maybe:
At XX level, you gain the ability to project your desires into the world using pure force of will. When you use Project Will, you must finish a short or long rest to use it again.
As an action, you can Project Will and utter a passionate cry to restore a number of hit points equal to 1d8 + your Charisma modifier for every two class levels you have to one target that can hear you.​

Here we have someone who can Project their Will. This might be magical, or it might just be something super-normal charismatic people can do.

Are these too supernatural for warlords?
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad


basically i'm thinking...

if a cleric uses all his resouces (spells, action, ect...) on healing, he might heal 100 HP (as an example)
if a warlord uses all his resources (dice, actions, ect...) on healing he might heal for 30 HP, and indirectly save 70 HP via THP, DR, and bonus AC.

that way, the warlord is different both in rescources, and in play style.

5TH LEVEL CLERIC WITH 18 WISDOM


4 1st level cure wounds: 4d8+16
3 2nd level cure wounds: 6d8+12
2 3rd level cure wounds: 6d8+4

Total: 16d8+32 (~104 HP)

5TH LEVEL FIGHTER WITH CHARISMA 16 WITH 4 ALLIES AND INSPIRING LEADER

8 THP granted per ally.
40 THP per rest
1 long rest and 2 short rests

Total: 120 THP


5TH LEVEL PC WITH 1/3 CASTING, CURE WOUNDS, AND 14 IN MAGIC STAT


3 1st level cure wounds: 3d8+6

Total ~20 HP


5TH LEVEL PC WITH 1/2 CASTING, CURE WOUNDS, AND 14 IN MAGIC STAT


4 1st level cure wounds: 4d8+8
2 2nd level cure wounds: 4d8+4

Total: 8d8+12 (~48 HP)

5TH LEVEL PC WITH SONG OF REST VARIANT AND 4 ALLIES

1d6 HP granted per ally.
5d6 HP per rest
1 long rest and 2 short rests

Total: 15d6 HP (~53 HP)

Works at the current warlord-build for the fighter works at level 5. But the progression of spell slots would make keeping up with the cleric or any full caster impossible even if the caster only uses half of their slots on it.
 

I can't believe this thread is still going... I skipped like 3/4 of the middle but I have to ask the point of all this warlord BS, I mean didn't mearls basically say never again?

You could always not post. In fact, if you can't contribute to the conversation, I'd HIGHLY recommend it.
 

Thank you for clarifying your position. I understand it much better now, and - believe it or not - I agree with the basic assertion: additional options interacting with prior options increases complexity. We can call this "unclean," but we can also call this "depth" depending on how those complexities interact with each other. Given the sluggish pace of 5E releases (and associated player crunch content), I'm not sure if we have to worry about bloat, power creep, or uncleanliness to the same extent as 2nd to 4th editions.

What I'm about to say is about "adding more options", and not specifically about a hypothetical Warlord:

I agree that you can add some kinds of complexity without compromising design integrity. Essentially you add the mechanic, then re-evaluate the design of the system as a whole as if it were a new system, and determine whether there are any redundancies or inelegancies in the new design. For example, GURPS Martial Arts added a few new categories of attacks between "normal" and "all out attack" such as "committed attack" which compromises your defenses, but not as badly as an all-out-attack, and then it leveraged that mechanic with a variety of maneuvers that interacted with that mechanic. I found the end result very clean.

My (subjective) evaluation of D&D design is that adding new mechanics via a new class is not a clean way to introduce those new mechanics. E.g. if you make a zombie-hunter class which gains "hunter points" up to half its level every time it discovers a Plot Point (pre-placed secret determined by the DM), and then expends them on self-healing or extra attacks, but it can only expend them once per round (but it doesn't cost a bonus action, it's just a once-per-round limit)... that would be extremely messy. On the other hand, if you first introduce the idea of Plot Points as a new rule, and then the Zombie Hunter is just one class which has a way to use Plot Points more effectively, but other PCs can use them too--in that case, you have a game which isn't exactly vanilla 5E although it is 5E-derived, and it might still be a clean design.

Magic in AD&D was notorious for introducing unclean, special-snowflake mechanics on a per-spell basis. 5E has cleaned that up to a large extent with things like the Prone/Stunned/Restrained/etc. conditions, plus ability-score saves, and it's a big improvement.
 

It's totally narrative. "Vanishing with an hour's rest" isn't specifically required by the narrative tropes typically in use with wound-based HP.
First of all, while I'm fine with genre tropes like the ones you describe being stretched to accommodate a 'wound-based' model of hp, it hardly /typical/. Proponents of that model fought tooth-and-nail against HD, Second Wind, and overnight healing, and there are slower-natural-healing in the DMG that address those concerns. When ideas like the ones you are expressing now were brought up in those debates they were roundly rejected as adequately modeling hps in that way, and the insistence on /only/ magic providing quick healing, because recovering hp implied all wounds were /gone/ has also seemed like a solid corner-stone of the 'typical' presentation of the hps-must-all-represent-wounds model.

If you were making the below arguments a few years ago as an argument for allowing short rests, healing surges, and overnight healing into Next, you'd probably find the typical 'all-meat' hp model proponent roundly rejecting it. (Of course, as an argument /against/ the Warlord, I'm sure they'd be all for it.)

With a bit of downtime, all of the below tropes become narratively plausible
I'm not actually seeing a lot of 'with a bit of downtime....' in those.

So, what you're really saying is that you can just squeeze the 'wound' model into these tropes /if/ you /add/ a bit of downtime to them. They don't actually require it.

The distinction you're drawing between restoring hps and temp hps isn't present in them.

Getting over an injury quickly is a tried and true narrative device in action media, so much so that it's often over-used.
Quickly? Most of what you just quoted could just as easily be (and often is, all but instantly). In fact, if it seems to take the hero a little time to recover in the middle of a fight while the Villain mysteriously does nothing, it's probably just the time dialation trope - the action pauses to let the audience take in the drama.

I've been watching a lot of Buffy the Vampire Slayer these last few weeks and when someone had to go to the hospital after they got knocked unconscious it was an exception to the usual rule of getting punched/chived/bludgedoned and getting over it.


The narrow use of the word "heal" to mean only "heal completely" is unnecessary. "Healed enough to not suffer its effects" is more often the case (though I've got no major issues with "healed completely" in most cases, either - descriptions of something lingering is pure color).
"Healed enough to not suffer its effects" under the tropes you quoted above, could very easily be not healed at all. Take Second Wind, for instance, it's instantaneous, a free action, not even a bonus action, it doesn't require healing supplies or second wind, but it restores hps. How did you rationalize that one in your 'wound model?'

See above (especially Hollywood Healing). I'd be fine with a warlord that is as magical as a paladin's Lay On Hands or a cleric's Channel Divnity
Not quiet what I asked. In another thread, you closely parsed some rules and concluded that Lay on Hands and Channel Divinity, among quite a lot of other obviously-magical things, could be ruled 'not magic' (setting aside that anything could be ruled 'not magic' because Rulings not Rules). I didn't ask would you be OK with the warlord being presented with obviously-intended-to-be-magical abilities that could, on a close parsing of the rules, be declared non-magical, but the reverse.

Would you be OK with a Warlord that had powers, include Inspiring Word that restored hps, that were clearly and obviously presented as non-supernatural (for the fantasy setting, no more so than Second Wind, for instance), but could, on a close parsing of some related rules, be ruled to be supernatural or even magical?

- not "magical" per the rules, but clearly something beyond mortal capacity. That warlord would be looking less purely martial in that case, though.
Not magical but clearly beyond 'mere mortals,' is practically the definition of martial. Martial heroes have often been presented as being as rare and exceptional as casters. I think the 3e DMG came right out and said that. And, the presentation of martial classes as a choice of PC with no lower 'cost' to the player to choose than casters, also implies that - especially in the gamist sense of trying to avoid 'trap choices.'

So, no, I don't need PC fighters, rogues, & warlords to be crushingly mundane.

The main way if fails to model the narrative is that it doesn't wear off.
But, you're OK with Temp hps, even though, in 5e, they can last until your next long rest?
There's no point at which you actually need to tend to the injury
Couldn't that just happen 'off screen' the next time there's a moment to pause in the action? It seems a fairly easy thing to toss in there to salvage the model.

Temp HP is good for representing a bit of "padding" or a shield or a wellspring of pluck. It's good because it makes you feel better (you're farther away from death!) without actually making you any better (it doesn't heal your wounds). Psychologically, that's perfect - you know as a player that you're not fully up, but you've got a bit of extra juice before you suffer any consequences for it anyway.
Apparently it's very much psychological, since you're OK with restoring hps not healing wounds, at all, just stabilizing them. Wrap a handkerchief around that severed artery and you're good to go.

The fact that it doesn't prevent unconsciousness at 0 hp helps model the fact that padding and pluck won't save you from a potentially lethal sword wound, even if they will help you out until you get there.
Unfortunately it also make it strictly inferior as a sole option for a support class, which is functionally the same as simply blocking the class completely. Also, that limitation doesn't match the narrative, since be brought back to consciousness - even from the brink of death, by nothing more than the voice of a comrade or loved one is another of these cliched genre bits we've been considering.

Aside: So, I want to put something that's bothering me about this line of reasoning behind us. You're advocating for the Warlord being unable to restore hps, only provide temps, on these grounds we've been discussing. It would also 'coincidentally' make the warlord strictly inferior to all other potential support characters, even third-string ones like the Ranger. Now, I would hate to add a new mechanic (it'd certainly be 'cruff' to Hemlock, for instance), but, hypothetically, if the Warlord gave 'temps' that even /expired faster than regular temps unless the wounds in question got some attention after the fight/, so more closely modeled your narrative than current temp hps, but stacked with eachother and brought characters back from 0 hps, would that be OK?


I prefer it when rules language is natural language as opposed to jargon.
And 5e goes that way, so you're good. I was just illustrating my PoV.

Possibly-hypothetically. The biggest difficulty is that it would have to actually heal the wounds of someone who is unconscious from a traumatic injury
That is not consistent with the tropes, above. Like the one about traumatic head injuries. If you lose consciousness, even for a second, from a blow to the head, IRL, that's a traumatic brain injury (aka concussion), it can take you months to fully recover. But, in the narrative you prefer, you can get right back up and be fine, no months of healing required, for just one example. Now, for your narrative, you might /need/ to have those wounds dealt with in some mundane way right away /after/ you've fought at few effectiveness for the rest of the scene and beaten the bad guys.

The closest I can think of is maybe something like prayer for someone in a coma? But even there, the narrative way to model that in D&D is divine power (which is very supernatural), not non-magical inspiration.
You've already come up with this theory that that /wouldn't/ be magical, anyway. And it's not like the documented 'power of prayer' IRL convinces atheist like myself that there's a God answering those prayers. It's just a specific case of mood affecting healing - depression and stress have been shown to slow the healing process, and the reverse to be true of being kept in 'good spirits.' It's not dramatic, but it's clinically significant, and easily explains the 'power of prayer' results.

There's prep-and-points (spell point option), and no-prep-and-points (any class with Spells Known instead of a prepared list from a pool),
And there are now at-wills yes. At wills work fine, but one consequence of the spell slot system is that you can run out of lower level slots first. So, as you 'tire' you can still cast magic missle - but only very powerful ones. Spell points are provided as an alternative module to address that issue, just as slower rates of natural healing are to address more typical wound-interpretations of hps.

But hit points also have some higher requirements that magic systems can get out on because magic is made up artifice from the get-go, but not dying after getting hit with a sword is something that people need explaining away to accept.
There's the double-standard. Magic is part of the genre, D&D magic fails to model genre tropes very well. If I find a way to rationalize that, and decide that, say, Psionics, messes with that rationalization, then I could mount the same attempt to block or sabotage the mystic as you are doing here with the Warlord. It wouldn't work because there's a double standard.

For that matter, there are myriad mechanics in the game that could be interpreted in alternate ways, and then the claim could be made that any new addition to the game could collapse one of those house of cards.

And if the Warlord must have an inspirational healing mechanic or not be a "true" warlord, then it becomes a question of what you make optional.
I'm good with the whole Warlord being optional, so that it can be designed for people who might actually use it, rather than people who just want to block or, failing that, sabotage it.

If that can moot this whole line of reasoning, that'd be OK. Though I'm still hopeful that you're keeping an open mind and we can find a narrative rationalization that works for you as well as the ones you have found for HD, overnight healing, and...

....Oh, right: Second Wind, how did you make that work as hp-recovery in your wound model?
 

I'm good with the whole Warlord being optional, so that it can be designed for people who might actually use it, rather than people who just want to block or, failing that, sabotage it.
this is what is so strange, can someone explain why they are arguing so venomously against something that at least 300 people want optional rules for?
 

"Healed enough to not suffer its effects" under the tropes you quoted above, could very easily be not healed at all. Take Second Wind, for instance, it's instantaneous, a free action, not even a bonus action, it doesn't require healing supplies or second wind, but it restores hps. How did you rationalize that one in your 'wound model?'

Second Wind is a bonus action, not a free action like paladin smiting.
 

this is what is so strange, can someone explain why they are arguing so venomously against something that at least 300 people want optional rules for?

I am going to try to actually contribute here... I am being serious (as much as I hate 4e in general) let me try to explain...

I don't want to play make believe in a world that allows things I think are stupid... I bet you don't either. SO when one of us says "That's stupid" we need to stomp it out of the world. I don't care that 259 people say "I want the warlord" because it is completely out weighted even if only 5% of that number say 13ish say they don't (and lemon curry is beating I want a warlord) then that means there are people who don't want there game trashed...


Think this way, you and your bros order a pizza, and one guy hates mushroom, and another hates green peppers but you all like peperoni then you order a large all cheese half peperoni pizza... you don't take a vote and say "Sorry dave and jon, we ordered a mushrrom green peper and cheese pizza" because just because you like something doesn't out weigh us not wanting it...

does that make sense?
 

basically i'm thinking...

if a cleric uses all his resouces (spells, action, ect...) on healing, he might heal 100 HP (as an example)
if a warlord uses all his resources (dice, actions, ect...) on healing he might heal for 30 HP, and indirectly save 70 HP via THP, DR, and bonus AC.
Not lik'n it. Not because of the proportion, though it's probably not good, but because of the implied inflexibility on the warlord side. The cleric could put all his resources into healing. Or he could cast Aid /a lot/ and provide a lot of temps, or he could provide a lot of buffs. When a Warlord Inspires a wounded ally, he's probably giving him back hps so he can get back into the fight, but an unwounded ally before a battle could be inspired to fight longer, too, in the form of temps - or, to fight /harder/ in the form of a buff. They're all good ways go model Inspiration in different circumstances, and the Warlord's mechanics could (and should) reflect that.

that way, the warlord is different both in rescources, and in play style.
I think the warlord is inevitably going to be different in both resources and play style, since he'll never be Turning Undead or casting Flame Strike or Sound Burst or turning into a Bear or (which support class haven't I covered yet) or summoning a magical warhorse (paladins don't actually do that anymore, do they) or whatever. So no worries there. No reason to make them strictly inferior (or superior) in terms of healing potential or damage mitigation or buffing or any other basic in-combat support function just to be different.


also, what if we left the desctription of inspiring woed as vauge. that way some people could interprerit it as magic, and some could not.

"Your carefully chosen words are powerfu enough to bring people back from the edge of death, encouraging them to fight on. Many say your have power similar to a bard, but others think it's pure cunning insperation. 1 creatue within 30' can spend a hit die and gain X bonus"
Rather like they almost did with Psionics-as-magic? Wouldn't bother me. 'Some say' is always a great natural-language way to put forth an explanation with out even the appearance of making it a rule.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Remove ads

Top