D&D 5E I don't actually get the opposition for the warlord... or rather the opposition to the concept.

[mellored]

Well, lets see...

Full Definition of LEADERSHIP

Try "support".

"Leader" was a poor choice of words on WotC's part.

 

[mellored]

Well, lets see...

Full Definition of LEADERSHIP

"Leader" was a poor choice of words on WotC's part.
Try "support".


Full Definition of SUPPORT

1
: to endure bravely or quietly : bear
2
a (1) : to promote the interests or cause of (2) : to uphold or defend as valid or right : advocate <supports fair play> (3) : to argue or vote for <supported the motion to lower taxes>
b (1) : assist, help <bombers supported the ground troops> (2) : to act with (a star actor) (3) : to bid in bridge so as to show support for
c : to provide with substantiation : corroborate <support an alibi>
3
a : to pay the costs of : maintain <support a family>
b : to provide a basis for the existence or subsistence of <the island could probably support three — A. B. C. Whipple> <support a habit>
4
a : to hold up or serve as a foundation or prop for
b : to maintain (a price) at a desired level by purchases or loans; also : to maintain the price of by purchases or loans
5
: to keep from fainting, yielding, or losing courage : comfort
6
: to keep (something) going

 

[Orlax]

Except the entire premise of the warlord is one of intelligent and charismatic leadership. That's its entire power and concept basis. To issue commands to nearby allies. Commands that they expect to be followed, that's how the warlord is effective in anything it does, by telling other people to do it. (Many have even give so far as to say that a fighter subclass is unfavorable because that character can stand on its own and be formidable as a sole entity).

 

[Bawylie]

Except the entire premise of the warlord is one of intelligent and charismatic leadership. That's its entire power and concept basis. To issue commands to nearby allies. Commands that they expect to be followed, that's how the warlord is effective in anything it does, by telling other people to do it. (Many have even give so far as to say that a fighter subclass is unfavorable because that character can stand on its own and be formidable as a sole entity).

Yeah, the warlord players weren't looking for an essentially frontline role. We're looking for a class that overlaps more with cleric, Druid, and bard. It's more of a support buff/debuff class than frontline combatant.

So yeah, having a subclass doesn't quite cut it because your primary function is out of synch with the experience you're looking for.

 

[El Mahdi]

I honestly don't follow sports much, but my understanding of coaches is that they train the players so that they have the tools they need. But during play, or a battle, it's all on the players. In American Football I know coaches can talk to the quarterback and tell him what plays to run, but once the play starts (or the battle begins) it is all the players.

Coaches most definitely do give guidance and feedback during games. Even in European Football, coaches yell input from the sidelines quite often.

But coaches aren't the only example. In American Football, the primary "Leader" position is the quarterback. They most definitely call out guidance to the other players. Linebackers are obviously the expert at their position, yet Quarterbacks often point out members of the defense to pay attention to or highlight positioning aspects that may signal what the Defense is planning (Blitz, stuff the run, full pass coverage, prevent defense, etc.)

Peyton Manning is one of the best examples. Arguably one of the best field generals in the history of the game. He makes any team he quarterbacks for - better. He makes any player he plays with - better.

Also, no amount of peptalk is going to get the player back on his feet after he has been flattened on the field. Either he is well enough to play, or he isn't.

Not true. American Football coaches have done this for decades - though less often today. This is one of the reasons we've had such extensive research into the long-term effects of concussions in the last few years. Getting players back on their feet and back in the fight/game despite significant concussion damage. Now we're finding that many of these players are dying earlier than they should (in retirement) due to Chronic_traumatic_encephalopathy . (specifically here and here ) But coaches have been able to pep talk there players back on to the field since the beginning of the game, inspiring players to overcome the short-term effects of injury.

The long term effects - many years down the road - are another story altogether...

We have very different views of magic. I don't see magic as a deus ex machina or a crutch. It is a power that can be used. Just like muscles. You might as well say you want to be a pilot without the crutch of using a plane. And honestly that would be a perfectly reasonable request if this were a superhero game.

Frankly, I find this a bit condescending. It comes across to me as saying the desire for a no-magic campaign is bad-wrong-fun. That the game cannot be played without magic. It's the equivalent of saying that real-life isn't possible because magic doesn't exist.

Magic is something outside of reality, outside of nature - literally supernatural. Fictionally, magic can be used metaphorically, used to highlight or contrast other aspects, or quite often as a mere deus ex machina to accomplish things that otherwise cannot. In games, magic can be all of those things, or used simply for the enjoyment of pretending to do something beyond the realms of reality.

There are some, including myself, that like to have the human spirit be the Magic without using actual Magic.

All are perfectly reasonable approaches. There are as many styles of D&D and approaches to the game as there are tables that D&D is played on. The desire for running a non-magic game is hardly an unheard of approach. It's certainly something that seems reasonable for an edition meant to be inclusive.

A Warlord class facilitates that kind of play, along with bringing other desired aspects of which I mentioned before.

People are capable of some pretty extraordinary things! But causing wounds to close or bones to knit with a few words isn't one of them.

You're new to the Warlord conversations here at ENWorld...Yes?

Warlords don't cause wounds to close or bones to knit together using words. Mostly, it's those that want to discredit the concept of a Warlord that say this, and not fans of the Warlord.

First, D&D Hit Points don't express as "broken bones." They don't even express as "open wounds." D&D Hit Points are vague - on purpose - and they constitute more than just meat, as per the rules definition of Hit Points (physical durability, mental durability, luck and will to live). Things like broken bones or other obviously debilitating injuries would be the realm of critical hits and lingering wounds. Lingering wounds are an optional aspect of the game. The standard D&D rules do not include effects for broken bones or anything else - there is no debilitating effect of Hit Point loss until one hits zero. D&D Hit Points are not that granular.

However, if one used Lingering Wounds or Specific Wounds (broken bones, etc.) in a game, and applied penalties based on those, I think such wounds should require some kind of special treatment - and No, Warlord Inspiration wouldn't necessarily help (depending on the type of wound).

Second, Inspiration can, physiologically, improve one's physical condition. It's very rare and very extraordinary, but extraordinary is what the game is all about (as you said).

An inspirational exhortation triggers a sympathetic nervous system response. That response generates a surge of adrenaline, endorphins, serotonin and dopamine. This causes pain mitigation (physical and mental durability), an increase in blood pressure - allowing the body to regain homeostasis (physical durability), makes one feel more optimistic (mental durability, will to live), and promotes blood clotting (physical durability).

Yes, the actual "cuts" may still exist, but there effect has largely been neutralized. That is Hit Point recovery.

But honestly, the real-world explanation shouldn't be necessary. Warlord inspirational hit point recovery is consistent with the game's definition of Hit Points - and that's all that should matter.

Also, one can't make an argument that Inspirational Recovery is illogical or doesn't make sense, when one also accepts that simply sleeping 8 hours completely heals a person of all wounds.

And we get back to "Leadership". I don't doubt that soldiers on a battlefield benefit from good leadership. The problem is I don't want to be one of the soldiers. There is a reason a group of soldiers is called a "unit". It is because they create a single group that is greater than the sum of its parts. The leader is the head.

One thing about actually serving in the military, rather than just participating in an academic discussion or a detached simulation, is that I've been immersed in a culture where Leadership is a very real, tangible, and omnipresent thing.

Leadership is not limited to just those who are in charge, and Leadership does not require one to be in charge. Leadership is a quality that anyone can possess, but it must be cultivated. Leadership requires above all things, Conscientiousness. Exercising leadership does not require telling people what to do, just as following doesn't necessarily mean subordinate. In a really good team, everybody is a Leader - which is why the Military teaches and cultivates Leadership throughout every stage of one's career - regardless of rank. From moment to moment, one might find themselves following or leading as the situation dictates. People don't only follow leaders because they have to, they most often do it because it's mutually beneficial. Leadership can be exercised through advice as well as orders - but most often displayed through example.

But that is not what I want in my D&D game. My vision of D&D is a group of extraordinary individuals that work together as equals to accomplish common goals. There is no leader. The warlord, by its very existence places that one character, and that characters player, as the leader. And all other players are just his soldiers.

Or to put it another way. The Warlord is the Beastmaster that is sacrificing his actions to give his animal companions (the other characters) a mechanical benefit in combat. Again, not a role I like to be forced into.

What you're talking about is Authority, not Leadership. It really helps to differentiate between the two concepts.

In the game, I'd absolutely have a problem with another character having authority over my character.

That is not what a Warlord does.

 

[Bawylie]

This is the "it just works, don't worry about it" problem that I stated above. I don't want a game mechanics source. I want to know how it works in game.



So again. He commands and everyone else must follow. And why healing? It just does, don't worry about it. [sigh]



Well I guess everyone else is inconsistent. I'm the only one that has a problem with all of those things. Why should the bard's song work on someone that hates music? If it was magical it would at least make sense!

And I AM arguing about the Bard and the Fighter abilities and all the rest. The Warlord just takes all of those abilities and cranks them up to 11.

Anyway, thanks for taking the time to argue the other side. The OP of this thread stated they didn't understand the opposition. So I am trying to explain. The goal is understanding.

Yeah NP. I understand there ARE objections, I just wish fans of warlord didn't have to re-litigate basic stuff that other classes get without anyone* objecting.

I mean, if we as a community accept X Y & Z in other classes, why not accept them on the warlord class too? Now, if these objections are part of a strategy to reject the class whole-cloth, then fine. I get it, but it's a little shady, IMO. I respect people not liking it - that's cool with me. But I have a hard time with selective objections.

*for the most part

 

[El Mahdi]

1. But he accomplishes the same thing as a character that heals with magic.

No. The effective result is the same, but what happens on the way there are two very different things.

 

[Tony Vargas]

No. The effective result is the same, but what happens on the way there are two very different things.

The game mechanic result might be similar (or not quite, for instance, if the Warlord triggers HD, the result of being at full hps, but down some of your HD is very different from the result of being at full hps with all your HD still available after being healed by magic).
The narrative result, as well as the narrative mechanism, might be very different.

Try "support".

"Leader" was a poor choice of words on WotC's part.

It sure sounded better than band-aid(tm) or 'healer,' though.

Support is a better terminology for what Clerics, Warlords, Bards, Artificers, Shamans & Ardents were doing in 4e, and what Bards, Clerics, & Druids do in 5e (on top of everything else they can do as full casters).

Except the entire premise of the warlord is one of intelligent and charismatic leadership.

Nod. And the concept of a Cleric is worshiping & receiving supernatural power from a deity. A player might give a nod to that concept in how he RPs (or not), but he doesn't actually take up the worship of an imaginary pagan deity, demand the other players join him, and sacrifice a goat in the back yard.

The same is true of every class. Players aren't required to actually recite spells for their characters to cast them, get violently angry to activate their barbarian's Rage, and so forth. PC concepts involve a lot of stuff that happens only in the imagination.

That's its entire power and concept basis. To issue commands to nearby allies. Commands that they expect to be followed, that's how the warlord is effective in anything it does, by telling other people to do it. (Many have even give so far as to say that a fighter subclass is unfavorable because that character can stand on its own and be formidable as a sole entity).

That's really only part of it, inspiration and tactical planning also come into it, as well as personal martial skill, and, ideally, the class should be designed with enough customizeability that the player has alternatives, but, it should be a legitimate Warlord build or archetype to focus on 'command.' And, by the same token as the Cleric &c, above, the player of a Warlord might give an RP nod to 'giving commands' (or not) when he uses a class feature based upon such, conceptually, but he's not going to be bossing the other players around.

 

[El Mahdi]

Well, lets see...

Full Definition of LEADERSHIP...

You've used a definition that uses itself to define it.

In other words, all you've said is that Leadership is one who has the capacity and initiative to Lead.

But what is Leading?


By definition, Leading can be "to direct with authority"; but it also means "to guide...to show...to influence" - things that do not denote or require authority.


Lead

Guide

Some synonyms for Lead: conduct, contribute, introduce, prompt, affect, induce, persuade, shepherd, point out, point the way...none of which mandate that one have authority.

 

[Lord Twig]

I'm sorry, but, this is just a ludicrous argument on its face.

Do you bitch about the cleric healing you, forcing you to play a follower of the cleric's diety? Or, conversely, do you complain that clerics can heal those who aren't of the faith? How does a cleric Bless those who don't share his or her faith and why does it work? Do you complain about bards granting bonuses to you, even though you hate poetry? Do you complain about Battlemasters DOING EXACTLY THE THINGS A WARLORD CAN DO? Do you complain about Paladins granting saving throw bonuses to allies despite not even sharing alignment?

Virtually every single class in the game tells you what to do and what to believe. The only difference is, we ignore it 99% of the time and don't worry about it. It's only when something comes from 4e that we see people having a problem with it. It's edition warring with a funny set of glasses and a fake moustache.

Unless you start claiming that paladins, clerics, battle masters, bards, and druids should also be removed from the game for being "leaders", at least have the intellectual honesty to admit what you're doing.

Woah! I'm not sure you read what I wrote. But to answer your questions. A Cleric does not require you to worship her god when she heals you. The Cleric's god exists, it is an in game fact. That god channels power to the Cleric in the form of magic which the cleric uses to heal you. None of that requires my character to accept or do anything. I am not inspired by the Cleric or her god, I don't worship her god, and I don't have an innate ability to heal myself that the Cleric is somehow unlocking. The Cleric is using an external power source to produce an effect. Bless works the exact same way. There is a measurable magical force that is enhancing my abilities. It is real, it exists, and it can be stopped with a Dispel Magic or other counter.

The Bard's Inspiration dice requires my character to be inspired by the Bard's performance. There is no magical inspiration enhancing my character's abilities. Apparently I would always be able to perform at that level, but for some reason I wasn't able to until I was "Inspired" to do so. If my character hates the Arts and was terrified by travelling performers when he was a child it doesn't matter, he's still inspired. It is almost like it is a Mind-effecting compulsion that has no save.

And what really makes me think you didn't actually read my post was that I explicitly called out the Battlemaster as a problem. I explained that the Battlemaster Commander's Strike can be re-fluffed, but that might not sit well with everyone.

So Paladin aura. It's magic. (I'm pretty sure.) It is something he is giving me, like the Cleric's healing or Bless. It is not requiring me to do anything but accept the offered magical bonus. I don't need to be inspired by his performance or follow his orders and I don't have to be of his alignment. Nothing is required of me.

And for the most part I do ignore the Bard's Inspiration and the Fighter's Second Wind or Commander's Strike and all the other minor things that are just glossed over. But to make a character that is all about those type of abilities is something that becomes difficult to just ignore.

I'll leave edition warring out of this. I think all my points stand on their own without any reference to any particular edition. I understand that a lot of people will disagree, or don't see the same problems as I do, but that doesn't make my own view any less valid.