D&D 5E Jeremy Crawford Discusses the Wild Soul Barbarian and Path of the Astral Self Monk

[Shardstone]

Are ideas made, or discovered?

#FullSocrates

The difference doesn't matter.

What I'm ultimately getting at (and why it doesn't matter) is because I find it incredibly arrogant and super anti-creative to say that every fantasy idea has been created already (or discovered) and that new ones can't be created (or discovered).

 

[Parmandur]

The difference doesn't matter.

What I'm ultimately getting at (and why it doesn't matter) is because I find it incredibly arrogant and super anti-creative to say that every fantasy idea has been created already (or discovered) and that new ones can't be created (or discovered).

Oh, the difference always matters: foundations are important.

But, there is a wide number of concepts out there. A magical live wire seems a valid concept for the live wire Class.

 

[SkidAce]

 

[Shardstone]

Oh, the difference always matters: foundations are important.

But, there is a wide number of concepts out there. A magical live wire seems a valid concept for the live wire Class.

If the wide number is effectively infinity, then the foundation ceases to matter. Or rather, ceases to matter in from a pragmatic viewpoint. Academically it still has weight

 

[Hexmage-EN]

The thing is that multiple 5E archetypes are already similar to the Warlord. The Banneret and Cavalier especially.

 

[Azzy]

Since we are on this...and people are talking about things not even touched upon (or touched lightly upon but not really integrated)...

From 1e

Acrobat

Partially subsumed into the thief class.

Sohei

It'd make for a decent paladin subclass.

Bushi (fighter with scavenging abilities)

A hack of a class not really based on anything. Bushi is just another term for samurai, if they wanted a "commoner warrior, they should have went with "ashigaru". Should have just been a fighter (so should the samurai have been), so let it be a fighter.

Ninja?? (as in the more traditional type)

Rogue assassin or shadow monk, we've got you covered.

Yakuza

Another class that didn't need to exist. This is a rogue, pick your subclass.

Shukenja

The typo class (it should be "shugenja") that really stretched from its origins. It's presented mostly a cleric/druid crossbreed in its spell list. The spirit aspect could serve as a shamanesque druid subclass.

Wu-jen

Wizard with a different spell list.

In retrospect, the 1e OA was really not good and hasn't aged well.

 

[Hussar]

That's not what I mean by "storyless". It might be more appropriate to use terminology like "Primal Archetypes". A type of character that is deeply imbedded in shared stories. The noble knight, the devious rogue who may or may not have a heart of gold, the absent minded wizard/professor. The "great leader" is there, but they pretty much always lead from the front, they don't stand at the back telling others what to do (unless they are a villain).

Not everything in 4e was bad, but the idea that "we have to have a support character that doesn't use magic but is just as good at supporting as a magic using character" is a bad idea that arises purely out of game mechanics with no story basis. That's what people have such a hard time making one for 5e. Look at the Law cleric - designed to do the same job but "oh no, it doesn't count because it uses magic".

Huh. Sam Vimes from Discworld makes a pretty darn good warlord archetype. As does Sharpe from Sharpe's Regiment. Cutter from Cook's Black Company. I'm sure I could find more, but, then again, I don't read that much fantasy. I DO read lots of military fiction though. But, then again, since you're insisting that warlords lead from the rear, it shows that you don't really know much about the warlord class. Why would you think that warlords must lead from the rear? ((Other than, well, thousands of years of military history)) Many of the warlords were front line combatants, similar in vein to a cleric.

So, no, there is a huge body of inspiration for the class. The main problem is that there is also an extremely vocal group in the fandom that would lose their collective minds if WotC did something so blatantly as to admit that people liked the warlord and that getting 4e cooties in 5e wouldn't hurt anyone.

 

[Hussar]

The thing is that multiple 5E archetypes are already similar to the Warlord. The Banneret and Cavalier especially.

See this is the truly frustrating part. Every single element to have a warlord is already in the game. But because of 4e cooties, 4e fans get left out in the cold to appease a group of “fans”.

I mean it’s so bad that they can’t even ask about it on polls. That’s how much 4e fans have gotten screwed over by edition warriors. Something we’d like to see cannot even be talked about without the edition warriors coming out of the woodwork.

I mean, we’ve seen numerous polls on what classes people would like to see developed from WotC. They’ve had numerous UA articles about new classes. But the elephant in the room just never gets talked about.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Huh. Sam Vimes from Discworld makes a pretty darn good warlord archetype.

Really, no. He doesn't go round boosting allies. He's a rogue, probably an Investigative. He fights dirty and has great Perception, Investigation, Insight, Intimidation skills.

As does Sharpe from Sharpe's Regiment.

Battlemaster, quite obviously. Possibly with a level or two of rogue. He does most of the killing stuff himself. I've read most of the novels and seen the TV series.

Many of the warlords were front line combatants, similar in vein to a cleric.

That's because they are clerics, who can magically do the same stuff without magic.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Oh, the difference always matters: foundations are important.

But, there is a wide number of concepts out there. A magical live wire seems a valid concept for the live wire Class.

There already is one: Wild Magic Sorcerer. "Magical live wire" fits with sorcerer. what doesn't go together is "magical live wire" and "primitive warrior".

This is what it makes me think of: taking the chassis of a Formula One racing car, attaching tractor wheels to it, and expecting it to be good at racing and ploughing fields.