Lets design a Warlord for 5th edition

[Tony Vargas]

I'm probably not as worried about stepping on the bards toes as I should be.

As long as your Warlord doesn't start singing and casting spells, you should be fine.

I guess that puts us back at debating about whether such an ability should primarily be at-will or per rest?

Most classes have a combination of both.

My concern with per rest powers:
We want some warlords to be able to extra attack and some we don't want to be able to. If your abilities are all per rest then the question about extra attack either gets hard coded into the class or relegated to subclass selections, neither of which feel like very appealing choices IMO.

There aren't many Warlord sub-class concepts that really cry out for it: bravura, mainly, so dropping it in a sub-class would be fine, regardless of resource mix, otherwise.
There are several examples of such, already, so it's well-established.

But if you did want a recharge extra attack ability, you could make it work like a Bo9S stance or focus.

The concern with at will powers:
If most of your "power" is coming from at-will powers then there is limited room to make the character into a good healer. There is also less room to add other really strong per rest abilities

A valid concern, at-wills seem highly valued in the alchemy of D&D design, and would be problematic as healing, unless they consumed another resource, as well, like HD.

I can't think of a way to give a player an actual choice regarding whether he wants his warlord to be more at will or per rest so it's looking to me like this is one of the first major design decisions we will have to choose for the warlord that primarily uses reaction-like abilities.

I can't think of a class that worked that way. The closest would be 4e utilities, but they represented a relatively small portion of a character's power.

One possibility is to give the warlord at-will maneuvers and a rest-recharge mechanic like the BM's CS dice or the MMHFT fighter-sub-class's Tactical Insight uses, and allow the latter to boost the former in dramatic ways.

 

[FrogReaver]

what is your concern?

Because it's non-stacking THP, limited to 1 die at a time. A max of 1d12+11 on a level 20 barbarian, but more likely, 1d8+6 at any any moment. And daily healing amount of for 1.5 HP per ally per level (with 16 Cha). A little bit stronger than a paladin's lay on hands.

If you want to go around slapping people to exite them before battle, well, I don't see an issue with it.

I had read your ability as giving both the hp from the hit dice and temp hp. Looks like that was wrong?

 

[mellored]

I had read your ability as giving both the hp from the hit dice and temp hp. Looks like that was wrong?

my intention was just instant DR/THP.
So it adds the same amount net HP per day, but no actual HP recovery. (It also helps casters keep concentration).

Hence why I was asking if that qualified as "base warlord healing".
A sub-class could have more actual healing.

 

[mellored]

Sounds a bit like the 13A Commander design.

had to look that up, but yea.

 

[mellored]

That's a little more awkward because you're granting the ally an attack on their turn. So you're not really using this feature. They are. And you're not the active part. They are. It feels less like giving an extra attack and having them take one.
It's a small tonal shift, but weird.

well, you get the idea. You can reword it to be more active.

Plus, the extra off turn attack is nice. And it does give you a chance to use those once/turn abilities like Colossus Slayer. And, unlike Zard, I'm less concerned about that extra rogue attack as it requires that little bit of extra coordination to pull off (an ally needs to be adjacent, which isn't likely the lazylord) and getting fun (and slightly broken) combos like that is part of the fun of the game.

sure, but flexible multi-attack also works.

Options are good.

I'm just wary to have a martial class with too many level 1 maneuvers/ powers

I agree that too many choices at once is a poor design.
But I see no reason what martial has to do with the number of choices.

And for reference, wizards have 29 cantrips to choose from, and 44 1st level spells.
And there are 60 feats.

So really, putting the martial features inside the class instead of as feats will help reduce the number of level 4 choices for everyone else.

 

[Tony Vargas]

my intention was just instant DR/THP.
So it adds the same amount net HP per day, but no actual HP recovery. (It also helps casters keep concentration).

Hence why I was asking if that qualified as "base warlord healing".
A sub-class could have more actual healing.

IMHO, support necessarily includes some ability to stand up a fallen ally. Support is most critical when things have already gone wrong.

 

[Tony Vargas]

I agree that too many choices at once is a poor design.

Its not so much too many choices as too many choices at first level relative to new choices opening up as you level. The BM is the poster child for the issue.

 

[Jester David]

well, you get the idea. You can reword it to be more active.

It’s a pet peeve of mine in design. I really like when what the story of the mechanic matches the effect. You inspire/ direct someone to take and action, and they do so. You’re the active, and intiating figure in the narrative, and so the mechanic should begin with you.

It could work as a mechanic where in place of an attack you can Ready, and then use your reaction to grant an attack.

I agree that too many choices at once is a poor design.
But I see no reason what martial has to do with the number of choices.

Not everyone wants to play a spellcaster. Not everyone wants to be managing multiple powers and choosing between a half-dozen options each round, all competing for the one action.
Martial characters in 5e are the more simple characters. By design for those people who want that sort of thing.

Part of the potential appeal of a good warlord class is that it should be lower complexity than a spellcaster like a bard or cleric. Because high complexity healers already exist in the game. The benefit of a non-spellcaster cleric isn’t a healer that works in anti-magic zones or low magic campaigns, but as a healer character for parties who need one that is less complex than a cleric.

And for reference, wizards have 29 cantrips to choose from, and 44 1st level spells.
And there are 60 feats.

So really, putting the martial features inside the class instead of as feats will help reduce the number of level 4 choices for everyone else.

The wizard has 29+44 but the rogue and barbarian have 1: what weapon to choose. And both are subtly limited. And the fighter has six related to weapons.
Because not everyone wants to pick between a dozen options. Some people just want to be the barbarian or the champion fighter or the rogue. And they should have a healer option as well...

 

[Tony Vargas]

.
But I see no reason what martial has to do with the number of choices.

Simple stereotyping: if you don't want to play a caster you must want to play a simplistic character. You can't possibly have the faculties to handle anything too complicated, or you'd realize you should always play the caster, because they're supposed to be better.
That and the matching stereotype that martial characters are necessarily big dumb meat shields. (Yes, the rogues too, because stereotyping only needs a little confirmation, so, obviously, a brilliant tactician or resourceful opportunist must also be a lunk.)

 

[mellored]

It could work as a mechanic where in place of an attack you can Ready, and then use your reaction to grant an attack.

Give it a try, see if it works.

Not everyone wants to play a spellcaster. Not everyone wants to be managing multiple powers and choosing between a half-dozen options each round, all competing for the one action.

That's fine. You can play a fighter, or rogue, or barbarian.

Martial characters in 5e are the more simple characters. By design for those people who want that sort of thing.

And where are the classes for people who do not want to be a spell caster, but DO want to manage half-dozen opens each round?

Part of the potential appeal of a good warlord class is that it should be lower complexity than a spellcaster like a bard or cleric. Because high complexity healers already exist in the game. The benefit of a non-spellcaster cleric isn’t a healer that works in anti-magic zones or low magic campaigns, but as a healer character for parties who need one that is less complex than a cleric.

And simple martial classes already exsist in the game.

Because not everyone wants to pick between a dozen options. Some people just want to be the barbarian or the champion fighter or the rogue. And they should have a healer option as well...

Then the solution is to make a simple caster.

Priest:
Level 1: Healer: You gain a pool of healing equal to 2d8 per level, you can use as a bonus action. You gain sacred flame and light cantrips.
Level 5: Continual Blessing: As an action, select 3 people. They gain the benifits of the bless spell until you take a long rest, or until you use this feature again.
Level 6: Divine Sustenance: Once per day, you can cast create food and water.
Level 9: Sub-class choice.
*When you roll initiative, you can cast Haste on one creature.
*When you roll initiative, you can cast Spritual Guardian.
Level 11: Improved Healer: Increase your healing pool to 2d12 per level.
Level 20: You can cast true resurrection without any material components. Once you do so, you cannot do it again for a week.
etc...