Playtest (A5E) Level Up Advanced 5E Playtest Document #9: Warlord

Welcome to the 9th Level Up: Advanced 5E playtest document. This playtest contains a candidate for the game’s warlord class. The warlord is a new class and — like our spell-less ranger — we have allocated two playtest slots for it. This is the first document; a revised playtest version may appear next week based on your feedback.

Note that this class references two rules elements which have not yet been previewed -- followers, and strongholds. Those will be revealed at a later date.

Level Up Playtest Document #9: Warlord — Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition (A5E)

Welcome to the 9th Level Up playtest document. This playtest contains a candidate for the game’s warlord class.

www.levelup5e.com

Download the playtest document here!

And take the playtest survey here:

Mailchimp Survey

us15.list-manage.com

 

[Faolyn]

Let me clarify with super clarity in advance: HP ain't just meat in LU.

Whatever various editions of D&D may have said or you may have inferred from them, HP ain't just meat in LU.

We'll write that in the book.

As you know, what hit points truly represent has been one of those points of contention for basically ever. I'm sure you've seen the various gaming cartoons that have popped up over the years (even in old Dragon issues) of a warrior with a bunch of arrows and swords sticking out of them but doing OK about it because hey, they still have hp left. It doesn't matter how often people say things like hit points represent luck or skill in turning bad wounds into minor ones or just being winded, once you have things like falling damage and poison causing hp loss, it starts to blur the line between that and, well, meat points. (I will say I kind of miss poisons that dealt stat damage from 3e, but I can also see how they'd be a pain to implement in math-lite 5e.)

Now, again, I'm fine with the warlord healing. It's a bit odd, considering a lot of other classes just grant temp hp or affect how you use Hit Dice to heal, but it's fine; it's not a dealbreaker. And I can come up with reasons as to how it works on my own. I was just wishing that there was a canonical reason for what method is involved.

 

[Morrus]

As you know, what hit points truly represent has been one of those points of contention for basically ever.

It won't be in contention in our book. Like I said, we'll be extremely clear.

 

[tetrasodium]

I will say I kind of miss poisons that dealt stat damage from 3e, but I can also see how they'd be a pain to implement in math-lite 5e.)

Me as well. The removal of attribute damage that lasted longer than the hangover from that cask you drank before sleeping it off last night is a huge hindrance for the gm in doing things like making creatures scary.

 

[Hurin70]

It won't be in contention in our book. Like I said, we'll be extremely clear.

Clarity is good, but I'm not sure it is going to solve the problem. Some people see hit points as meat, and will be annoyed with any system that suggests they are something more. Other people see hit points as something more, and will be annoyed with any system that suggests they are just meat. Thus the Warlord stirred up the hornet's nest.

The problem may have been exacerbated by a historical lack of clarity, but the root is a philosophical difference that at times looks like a holy war.

 

[Morrus]

Some people see hit points as meat, and will be annoyed with any system that suggests they are something more.

I guess they won't buy our game then. We're comfortable with that. It's not for everybody.

 

[Tinker-TDC]

but one of the main criticisms of the Warlord class in 4e was that they could 'shout a severed arm back on'.

I've always found this one funny (even not having played 4e) because you can't 'Cure Wounds' a severed arm back on either, only restore HP. In 5e to heal a severed arm you'd need to be at least level 14 before you can cast 'Regenerate'.

 

[tetrasodium]

Clarity is good, but I'm not sure it is going to solve the problem. Some people see hit points as meat, and will be annoyed with any system that suggests they are something more. Other people see hit points as something more, and will be annoyed with any system that suggests they are just meat. Thus the Warlord stirred up the hornet's nest.

The problem may have been exacerbated by a historical lack of clarity, but the root is a philosophical difference that at times looks like a holy war.

What are hit points always felt more like a thought experiment than anything relevant to the game. I frequently* get rather gritty with my combat narration & aside from maybe "wait didn't you say we shattered the bones in that guy's arm?">"maybe, it's more descriptive & exciting to go a bit gritty on combat it's not a mechanical condition I decided to apply or something">"oh ok cool that explains it. I thought I needed to keep track of all that"
Whatever they are defined as I can't see affecting me
* but not always. Sometimes I just describe narrow misses & such. It just depends on the story needs

 

[Grantypants]

At times, the luck these warlords have bordered on being miraculous, though many say their success is a matter of skill, not talent.

I'm not sure what this sentence is supposed to mean, exactly. Aren't skill and talent effectively the same thing? Or is this meant to highlight a distinction between learned skill and innate talent or something like that?

 

[Darth Palpy]

There's a concept from 3.5, I think it was the dragon disciple, that had the various auras you could switch between. Before that would be a concept for the warlord, he has multiple auras of "command, leadership, whatever" that gives the party passive bonuses all the time, and he can switch between them freely. So no expendable resources, but also no action economy buster.

That was the "Marshal", actually. I played one back in the day, so I remember it quite fondly ^^
It was quite bland compared to a bard, or a warlord in 4th Ed. but it did have some nice perks. It also wasn't very proactive. A mostly passive "being here, being inspirational" kind of class.
This warlord has a great many choices, but the multiplication of pools is indeed a problem. Options shouldn't go the way to overcomplexity .

 

[glass]

The problem may have been exacerbated by a historical lack of clarity, but the root is a philosophical difference that at times looks like a holy war.

There is no lack of clarity. There have been extremely clear direct statements in that hit points are not meat points going back at least to AD&D 1e.

While the mechanics have never been entirely coherent, even in 4e, they have always been more consistent with not-meat than with meat. That has never stopped people claiming they were totally meat points, so I doubt anything can stop them at this point. "Holy war" is probably about right.

I've always found this one funny (even not having played 4e) because you can't 'Cure Wounds' a severed arm back on either, only restore HP. In 5e to heal a severed arm you'd need to be at least level 14 before you can cast 'Regenerate'.

It was an edition-warrior talking point. Any resemblance to reality is bound to be coincidental at best.

That was the "Marshal", actually. I played one back in the day, so I remember it quite fondly ^^

There was also the Dragon Shaman (not Disciple) that had something similar IIRC.