D&D 5E Is the Noble class a good Warlord substitute?

[Morrus]

Maybe we could have an EN5ider forum specifically for discussion of EN5ider material?

You're welcome to discuss then in the EN Publishing forum if you like.

 

[Mistwell]

I've reviewed the Noble class in detail. You seem interested in comments on it. Here are changes I would make to the Noble class:

Hit Dice: 1d8 instead of 1d6. It's roughly a Bard equivalent, and should reflect that.
Proficiencies:
Weapons - Simple, plus Rapier and Longsword (I can't see how nobles wouldn't receive training in those)
Armor: Light Armor, Medium Armor, Shields (This seems to be the baseline, which is taken away by one subclass, so just spell it out that way)
Tools: One Instrument (every Noble would have training in an instrument), One Artisan Tool
Skills: Add History to the list (every Noble would have knowledge of History - it's the basis of BEING an noble). Might add Intimidation as well (see note on Noble Renown, below).
Starting Equipment: You list a martial weapon, though they don't even have proficiency in it, or an artisan tool, though they don't have proficiency in that, and scale mail, though they don't have proficiency in that either. Doesn't make sense. I'd add "Rapier or Longsword, and one Artisan Tool" to match the changes I made above to proficiencies, which also included medium armor.

Rallying Word: This could use some brief fluff language to describe this ability. Something like, "You exhort, encourage, and inspire your allies to find a surge of courage and endurance within themselves." That's paraphrased from the 4e Warlord text, so might want to alter it some more. Also, you should add that the ally must be able to see or hear you, in addition to being within 30 feet.

Direct Ally: The language here is a bit awkward. It should read, "Starting at 2nd level, as an action on your turn you can enable one ally within 30' that can hear or see you to use their reaction to do one of the following: make a single weapon attack, cast a cantrip, or move up to half their movement." I added the 30', as that makes it consistent with the rest of the abilities.

Coordinated Attack: Add to the range, "that can see or hear you" to keep it consistent with the other abilities. Also, shouldn't the target have to be the same target you attacked with your attack action, to make it "coordinated?"

Noble Renown: You list Intimidate, but they don't have proficiency in Intimidate. Maybe give them the option to have proficiency? See note above under Skills.

Path of the Brave:

Proficiencies: If you take the changes I listed above, you'd just be adding melee martial weapons here. I'm really not sure though why it's not just martial weapons - why melee only?

Dauntless: Should be just, "Advantage on Saving Throws against being frightened." No need to list "spells and abilities".

Combat Style: This again calls into question the choice to not give proficiency in all martial weapons, as some of these combat styles are inapplicable unless using a ranged weapon.

Lionheart: I'd probably make the range for allies be within 30' or 60'. An ally who can see you from a mile away, or who uses a magic spell or item to hear you from miles away, shouldn't feel encouraged.

Path of the Heart:

General Comment: This subclass feels a bit weak for what you're giving up. I expected to see things like a bonus action to use the Help action, or the ability to disengage as a bonus action, or use an object as a free action, along with more things to do with your action and/or movement.

Noncombat: This feels inelegant, and a bit much. How about, "You have disadvantage on all attack rolls, and creatures and objects gain advantage on all saving throws against any attack you make or spell you cast. You may not cast any spell that deals damage. You do not gain your proficiency bonus with any spell which targets a foe, or with any weapon attack or unarmed attack unless it is against an object." There is no real reason to lose proficiency with armor, as your Aura of Innocence only works when you're unarmored anyway. And there is no reason to deny proficiency bonuses against an object. If a Path of the Heart wants to bash a door down with their longsword, why not allow them to be proficient in those attacks?

Vicarious Attack: Not sure there is any reason for the "enemy of their choice" verbiage. It's automatically that, unless the text says otherwise.

Bonus Proficiencies: I would make it any one tool and any two skills. Period. No reason for a list. Nobles are known for their breadth of study.

Cries: I would change the name of this ability. If you meant they are actually crying, I don't think many people will be interested in this subclass - it's just not a very compelling concept. If instead you mean cries as in shouting, then just make it shout, or yell, or call. Either way, it's too ambiguous. Also, there is a lot competing for your reaction here. I'd consider adding another bonus action, and perhaps a regular old action. Like an action to grant any ally advantage for the next round (similar to the Help action, but you don't need to be in melee range of the target).

Force of Personality: Probably should be expertise in one Charisma-based skill instead, in addition to the bonus to Rallying Word.

Tears of the Pure-Hearted: I again don't like the "crying" theme. And, I'd just make it the equivalent of a Lesser Restoration rather than list all those conditions, and then add "or remove the charmed or frightened condition".

Path of Tactician:

Bonus Proficiency: Seems an odd list. Why not all Martial Weapons? Or "One martial ranged weapon, one martial reach weapon, and one martial melee weapon"?

Maneuver: Inelegant. Just let them choose any maneuvers. If there is some reason why those exceptions just don't work well when gifted to others, summarize that reason as the restriction.

Superiority Dice: Usage should be similar to the Bardic inspiration rather than based on a number of rounds tied to your intelligence. Just make it a minute.

Focused Fire: "Creatures of your choice" should just be "Allies".

 

[Tony Vargas]

You're welcome to discuss then in the EN Publishing forum if you like.

Maybe that'd be a good place to move this discussion to.

 

[Uchawi]

Without seeing the entire class, there is no way to make a comment worth a solid critique when considering the 4E class.

 

[Henry]

I find myself in agreement with most of Mistwell's suggestions, as they simplify it in the same fashion as 5e's other class choices. (though I can appreciate the experimentation with the design of more hit points, etc. based on archetype).

However, I don't really find myself enthused about the class, probably because I wasn't a fan of the 4e Warlord, and I find the Battlemaster could be a very acceptable Warlord, perhaps just by tweaking the maneuvers a bit more. Also, I feel like the Battlemenaster needs just a smattering more superiority dice to pull off being a good warlord, one or two more over the course of 17 levels perhaps (in addition to the "+1 dice" feat you can take).

 

[MoonSong]

I've reviewed the Noble class in detail. You seem interested in comments on it. Here are changes I would make to the Noble class:

Hit Dice: 1d8 instead of 1d6. It's roughly a Bard equivalent, and should reflect that.
Proficiencies:
Weapons - Simple, plus Rapier and Longsword (I can't see how nobles wouldn't receive training in those)
Armor: Light Armor, Medium Armor, Shields (This seems to be the baseline, which is taken away by one subclass, so just spell it out that way)
Tools: One Instrument (every Noble would have training in an instrument), One Artisan Tool
Skills: Add History to the list (every Noble would have knowledge of History - it's the basis of BEING an noble). Might add Intimidation as well (see note on Noble Renown, below).
Starting Equipment: You list a martial weapon, though they don't even have proficiency in it, or an artisan tool, though they don't have proficiency in that, and scale mail, though they don't have proficiency in that either. Doesn't make sense. I'd add "Rapier or Longsword, and one Artisan Tool" to match the changes I made above to proficiencies, which also included medium armor.

Rallying Word: This could use some brief fluff language to describe this ability. Something like, "You exhort, encourage, and inspire your allies to find a surge of courage and endurance within themselves." That's paraphrased from the 4e Warlord text, so might want to alter it some more. Also, you should add that the ally must be able to see or hear you, in addition to being within 30 feet.

Direct Ally: The language here is a bit awkward. It should read, "Starting at 2nd level, as an action on your turn you can enable one ally within 30' that can hear or see you to use their reaction to do one of the following: make a single weapon attack, cast a cantrip, or move up to half their movement." I added the 30', as that makes it consistent with the rest of the abilities.

Coordinated Attack: Add to the range, "that can see or hear you" to keep it consistent with the other abilities. Also, shouldn't the target have to be the same target you attacked with your attack action, to make it "coordinated?"

Noble Renown: You list Intimidate, but they don't have proficiency in Intimidate. Maybe give them the option to have proficiency? See note above under Skills.

Path of the Brave:

Proficiencies: If you take the changes I listed above, you'd just be adding melee martial weapons here. I'm really not sure though why it's not just martial weapons - why melee only?

Dauntless: Should be just, "Advantage on Saving Throws against being frightened." No need to list "spells and abilities".

Combat Style: This again calls into question the choice to not give proficiency in all martial weapons, as some of these combat styles are inapplicable unless using a ranged weapon.

Lionheart: I'd probably make the range for allies be within 30' or 60'. An ally who can see you from a mile away, or who uses a magic spell or item to hear you from miles away, shouldn't feel encouraged.

Path of the Heart:

General Comment: This subclass feels a bit weak for what you're giving up. I expected to see things like a bonus action to use the Help action, or the ability to disengage as a bonus action, or use an object as a free action, along with more things to do with your action and/or movement.

Noncombat: This feels inelegant, and a bit much. How about, "You have disadvantage on all attack rolls, and creatures and objects gain advantage on all saving throws against any attack you make or spell you cast. You may not cast any spell that deals damage. You do not gain your proficiency bonus with any spell which targets a foe, or with any weapon attack or unarmed attack unless it is against an object." There is no real reason to lose proficiency with armor, as your Aura of Innocence only works when you're unarmored anyway. And there is no reason to deny proficiency bonuses against an object. If a Path of the Heart wants to bash a door down with their longsword, why not allow them to be proficient in those attacks?

Vicarious Attack: Not sure there is any reason for the "enemy of their choice" verbiage. It's automatically that, unless the text says otherwise.

Bonus Proficiencies: I would make it any one tool and any two skills. Period. No reason for a list. Nobles are known for their breadth of study.

Cries: I would change the name of this ability. If you meant they are actually crying, I don't think many people will be interested in this subclass - it's just not a very compelling concept. If instead you mean cries as in shouting, then just make it shout, or yell, or call. Either way, it's too ambiguous. Also, there is a lot competing for your reaction here. I'd consider adding another bonus action, and perhaps a regular old action. Like an action to grant any ally advantage for the next round (similar to the Help action, but you don't need to be in melee range of the target).

Force of Personality: Probably should be expertise in one Charisma-based skill instead, in addition to the bonus to Rallying Word.

Tears of the Pure-Hearted: I again don't like the "crying" theme. And, I'd just make it the equivalent of a Lesser Restoration rather than list all those conditions, and then add "or remove the charmed or frightened condition".

Path of Tactician:

Bonus Proficiency: Seems an odd list. Why not all Martial Weapons? Or "One martial ranged weapon, one martial reach weapon, and one martial melee weapon"?

Maneuver: Inelegant. Just let them choose any maneuvers. If there is some reason why those exceptions just don't work well when gifted to others, summarize that reason as the restriction.

Superiority Dice: Usage should be similar to the Bardic inspiration rather than based on a number of rounds tied to your intelligence. Just make it a minute.

Focused Fire: "Creatures of your choice" should just be "Allies".

Wow, lots of stuff in here. I need to sort it all out. I thought wording wouldn't be as important, but again sometimes I get so purpley with my prose... Intimidate and History are omissions, I was sure they were there... the musical instrument could work, but I didn't want to invoke bard that much.

With the Brave I had to tone it down because it was so close to fighter, the lack of ranged weapons is cause of the warlord profs. And the tactician's selection is based on the same ideas, taclords used lots or reach and ranged ones. The forbidden maneuvers are because they create weird situations, you give an ally the power of giving an ally and attack, and it can be weirder when they give it back to you and then use it to give an ally an attack with coordinated attack so you double break the action economy.


Path of the heart changed a lot, Tears of the pure hearted used to be called "Tears of the princess" -taken from fairy tales such Rapunzel as a way to give the class access to some form of restoration that seemed plausible-, and the cries were more like begs, nags, reactions, or even reprimands. Some of the cries were originally actions, but that had to change to avoid stepping on the bard's toes. Force of personality used to be just expertise on two skills of your choosing. The unarmored thing is more cosmetic -an artifact of when it was a more generic bystander subclass-, and I'm not aware of attacking objects still being a thing -I guess that if a group still gives hp and ac to things, the DM can rule for it-, but the intention was so the subclass was a full opt out of combat option, almost like a full pacifist.

Thanks for the input. Maybe this class could use some errata -is that possible?-

 

[Strider1973]

Hi everybody, I'm a En5ider subscriber, and I'm very happy with the Noble Class, because I think it added something that D&D lacked so far: a non combat, non spell caster viable character class! I'm really so happy with this: I'll be considering including some of the modofications suggested by Mistwell, and I'd be glad to see a revised Noble Class by its author, if need arises, but I really think that it's a very customizable class, if you want to play a politician, a diplomat, a "power behind the throne" type of character, much à la Games of Thrones series. Really, until now I had seen in other d20 or narrativist - d20 hybrid games classes that filled this niche, but I had never seen a class just like this in D&D (I apologize, I might be missing some class from 3.5 edition, I'm not an expert of the plethora of classes of that edition!) and I missed it so much in D&D, which seemed to me to be focused just on front - line adventurers (including also sneaky and shadowy thieves). The Noble - Brave Path can be a good commander, the Noble - Tactician path can be a great master of puppets, and the Noble - Path of the Hearth can be lots of tender and moving characters, from princesses in distress, to spiritual guides, to lay healer, with a little of rewording of the fluff and of the presentation of the class itself. Really, now I find D&D to be much more complete as a game, even for what it concerns conceptually diverse options available to players to imagine and create their characters, and D&D 5th ed. is definetely my go-to game for heroic fantasy. I have enjoyed all the previous D&D editions, and clones as well, I really like also 4th ed. for the very specific gaming flavour it encouraged, but 5th ed is really MY D&D edition! Many thanks and happy gaming to everybody,
Strider

Edit: 1) Path of the Heart, of course, and not "Hearth" (I wasn't speaking about rural lords...). 2) When I wrote about a non combat, non spell caster class, I was thinking of the Path of the Heart, of course, not of the Path of the Brave or the Path pf the Tactician.
Happy Life and Game On!
Strider

 

[MoonSong]

Bump. Maybe this one is more relevant right now. at least take it as a chance to give specific examples of what works and doesn't work with warlord brews. I have seen lots of comments on how warlords brews tend to be broken and maybe with this class you guys can give more specific examples? -just be nice, a little...-

 

[Ainulindalion]

It's not as if they don't have options for analyzing homebrew warlords. I don't see it happening, though.

 

[Zardnaar]

I've reviewed the Noble class in detail. You seem interested in comments on it. Here are changes I would make to the Noble class:

Hit Dice: 1d8 instead of 1d6. It's roughly a Bard equivalent, and should reflect that.
Proficiencies:
Weapons - Simple, plus Rapier and Longsword (I can't see how nobles wouldn't receive training in those)
Armor: Light Armor, Medium Armor, Shields (This seems to be the baseline, which is taken away by one subclass, so just spell it out that way)
Tools: One Instrument (every Noble would have training in an instrument), One Artisan Tool
Skills: Add History to the list (every Noble would have knowledge of History - it's the basis of BEING an noble). Might add Intimidation as well (see note on Noble Renown, below).
Starting Equipment: You list a martial weapon, though they don't even have proficiency in it, or an artisan tool, though they don't have proficiency in that, and scale mail, though they don't have proficiency in that either. Doesn't make sense. I'd add "Rapier or Longsword, and one Artisan Tool" to match the changes I made above to proficiencies, which also included medium armor.

Rallying Word: This could use some brief fluff language to describe this ability. Something like, "You exhort, encourage, and inspire your allies to find a surge of courage and endurance within themselves." That's paraphrased from the 4e Warlord text, so might want to alter it some more. Also, you should add that the ally must be able to see or hear you, in addition to being within 30 feet.

Direct Ally: The language here is a bit awkward. It should read, "Starting at 2nd level, as an action on your turn you can enable one ally within 30' that can hear or see you to use their reaction to do one of the following: make a single weapon attack, cast a cantrip, or move up to half their movement." I added the 30', as that makes it consistent with the rest of the abilities.

Coordinated Attack: Add to the range, "that can see or hear you" to keep it consistent with the other abilities. Also, shouldn't the target have to be the same target you attacked with your attack action, to make it "coordinated?"

Noble Renown: You list Intimidate, but they don't have proficiency in Intimidate. Maybe give them the option to have proficiency? See note above under Skills.

Path of the Brave:

Proficiencies: If you take the changes I listed above, you'd just be adding melee martial weapons here. I'm really not sure though why it's not just martial weapons - why melee only?

Dauntless: Should be just, "Advantage on Saving Throws against being frightened." No need to list "spells and abilities".

Combat Style: This again calls into question the choice to not give proficiency in all martial weapons, as some of these combat styles are inapplicable unless using a ranged weapon.

Lionheart: I'd probably make the range for allies be within 30' or 60'. An ally who can see you from a mile away, or who uses a magic spell or item to hear you from miles away, shouldn't feel encouraged.

Path of the Heart:

General Comment: This subclass feels a bit weak for what you're giving up. I expected to see things like a bonus action to use the Help action, or the ability to disengage as a bonus action, or use an object as a free action, along with more things to do with your action and/or movement.

Noncombat: This feels inelegant, and a bit much. How about, "You have disadvantage on all attack rolls, and creatures and objects gain advantage on all saving throws against any attack you make or spell you cast. You may not cast any spell that deals damage. You do not gain your proficiency bonus with any spell which targets a foe, or with any weapon attack or unarmed attack unless it is against an object." There is no real reason to lose proficiency with armor, as your Aura of Innocence only works when you're unarmored anyway. And there is no reason to deny proficiency bonuses against an object. If a Path of the Heart wants to bash a door down with their longsword, why not allow them to be proficient in those attacks?

Vicarious Attack: Not sure there is any reason for the "enemy of their choice" verbiage. It's automatically that, unless the text says otherwise.

Bonus Proficiencies: I would make it any one tool and any two skills. Period. No reason for a list. Nobles are known for their breadth of study.

Cries: I would change the name of this ability. If you meant they are actually crying, I don't think many people will be interested in this subclass - it's just not a very compelling concept. If instead you mean cries as in shouting, then just make it shout, or yell, or call. Either way, it's too ambiguous. Also, there is a lot competing for your reaction here. I'd consider adding another bonus action, and perhaps a regular old action. Like an action to grant any ally advantage for the next round (similar to the Help action, but you don't need to be in melee range of the target).

Force of Personality: Probably should be expertise in one Charisma-based skill instead, in addition to the bonus to Rallying Word.

Tears of the Pure-Hearted: I again don't like the "crying" theme. And, I'd just make it the equivalent of a Lesser Restoration rather than list all those conditions, and then add "or remove the charmed or frightened condition".

Path of Tactician:

Bonus Proficiency: Seems an odd list. Why not all Martial Weapons? Or "One martial ranged weapon, one martial reach weapon, and one martial melee weapon"?

Maneuver: Inelegant. Just let them choose any maneuvers. If there is some reason why those exceptions just don't work well when gifted to others, summarize that reason as the restriction.

Superiority Dice: Usage should be similar to the Bardic inspiration rather than based on a number of rounds tied to your intelligence. Just make it a minute.

Focused Fire: "Creatures of your choice" should just be "Allies".

I agree with most of this. I would almost igve it an extra feat here and there as well as you are sacrificing the combat oomph of the fighter classes and the spells of the caster classes. That gives you a bit of room for powerful abilities. The Bravura noble could have a d8 HD and +1 per level instead of d6 and +2. Mostly agree with everything else you wrote.

I'm not that sympathetic if people do not want to pay $3 to get the EN5sider content. Iis cheaper than DDI was, you can cancel at any time and I spent hundred on things like Pathfinder, C&C, various retroclones (and DDI come to think of it) when 4E failed to deliver what I wanted. If you can't justify $3 as a once off cost how do you justify DDI or the 4E PHB 2 and 3 just to get the classes missing from the 3.5 PHB?