NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 7373810" data-attributes="member: 996">There were 8 in 4e, and it didn't even do faux-MCing via multi-classing, so shouldn't be hard...One thing, I think, is that each type of Warlord should have an emphasis, class features that point to it's schtick, and be able to use gambits that reflect that /better/, rather than just having a very short, fixed-progression list of features that, one each, suggest that emphasis and restrict it to only that.  Rather like how the other INT-based class works with it's traditions.  Any Warlord might use any Gambit, but some will be particularly suited to the talents and doctrines of a given one. Should be the faux-Fighter/Warlord MC sub-class. Not necessarily back-line - you could be executing some of your own tactical plans, surely - but yeah. Should emphasize healing, and fighting on type abilities.  The overhealing rule would work very well with it, though obviously shouldn't be limited to it. Adding group stealth to Skirmisher is a nice idea. I suppose if we can have both EK & Bladesinger, we can have both non-casting Ranger, and outdoorsy Woodlord. Seems narrow, and medieval medicine is ill suited to much of anything.  But, it could be /a/ feature of a Resourceful Warlord.  The one that focuses on preparedness and improvisation involving equipment and the environment.  With a very pragmatic approach to 'doctoring' using, yeah, healing kits, since they're surprisingly effective. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />  But also with gambits that make use of whatever sort of gear he just might have slipped into your pack when your weren't looking, or whatever advantage might be wrung from the battlefield, itself.   Not as strange as it sounds.  Animals - horses, hounds, hawks - were the status-symbols of the era, like a hot car or the latest iPhone.  It could work for a Warlord with the Noble background, for instance.  But, it's pretty specific, again.  (See 'Marshal' below) Not sure I see it. (but, again, see the Marshal idea) It could be broadened.  The Warlord had several powers, that'd be reactions in 5e, in which it dashed to an ally's rescue in some sense or another, either providing hps or a save or temps off turn, or jumping in and attacking (even marking) an enemy, or a combination.  One of them was literally called "Fearless Rescue" and it healed the ally you were helping for more hps the more OAs you provoked in rushing to help...   Sure.The Art-of-War(lord):  The Insightful build focused on WIS.  The big, obvious, use of that is in spotting & understanding your enemy.  A 'Know your enemy' style of Warlord would focus a bit more on buffs and debuffs, as he counter's the enemy's methods and ferrets out their weaknesses.  I suppose this could include the 'watchman' idea of the warlord, always alert for the enemy, with an 'Overwatch' feature like the zone of control, maybe?The Artillerist:  Whether actual medieval siege weapons, archers, or casters provide it, the advantage of a stand-off capability cannot be overstated.  Setting up and making the most of that advantage is the specialty of this Warlord, and the focus of the gambits at which he excels.  Where there are not source resource to direct, the Artillerist takes up whatever weapons are available to provide the direct advantages of ranged support to his allies - taking a shot at just the right moment, even if it is easily dodged or blocked, can give an ally an advantage or opening, or put an enemy out of it's best tactical position as it seeks over or crouches behind its shield...The Hector:  this was a classification of Warlord powers that wrecan came up with on the WotC boards.  It was a pretty small set of powers, because it shaded heavily into controller, which was verboten when your place is in the Leader Box.   This is the warlord who harangues, taunts, deceives, and outmaneuvers the enemy into making tactical mistakes and generally playing into his hands.  It should involve gambits that change de-buff and even 'control' the enemy (in the sense of getting them to make bad choices, though it might well involve making WILL saves on their part.).The Marshal:  I'm just lifting the name for some of it's implied meaning, not for anything to do with the Marshal pseudo-class in the Mini's Handbook.  This is the Warlord who, by whatever means, 'marshals' lesser troops - volunteers, conscripts, villagers, bandits, whatever - into an effective fighting force.  It's a classic trope, 'training the villagers to fight for themselves' for instance, and, it side-steps one of the problems with attack-granting and barking commands:  this Warlord doesn't have to do it PCs, mussing their precious bad-boy doesn't-work-well-with-others edginess.  He has his own NPC grunts to abuse.  It also side-steps the problem with pet classes and henchmen: that they impact the action economy.  The Marshal would have his unit of recruits that he commands to move around, holding positions, or making concerted attacks ("when you see the whites of their eyes!") of high value.  All of which would be resolved by the player of the Marshal.  A volley from his unit of archers, for instance, wouldn't be a bunch of attacks rolled by the DM one on each archers turn, rather, it'd be done on the Marshals' turn, and crate a beaten zone, enemies in it would get skewered (save:1/2).  That kinda thing.   And, yes, it could include a warlord that 'marshals' animals bred & trained for combat, or a posse comitatus under the mantle of the law.  (or those could be broken out and be good at similar gambits)The Princess (Lazylord):  Though not intended by the designers, a Warlord that isn't a capable fighter in its own right, and instead uses it's actions to inspire and incite allies, can cover a range of concepts not ever otherwise viable in D&D (nor most RPGs, really).  The plucky side-kick who can't measure up his heroes but who's antics, cooperation, and frequent need of saving bring out the most heroic in them.  The psychologically important symbol (mascot, literal prince or princess, ringbearer, etc) who everyone in the party cares about on some level, and thus binds them together into a stronger whole.  The victim in need of rescue.  etc...... and, sure, if your group like the idea, the effete commander, "sipping Sancerre & directing the battle" from a safe distance.Then, in the spirit of adapting to 5e, the faux-MCing it seems to go for:Crusader:  The 1/3rd Cleric or half-Paladin  Warlord, a leader of zealots and champion of a divine cause, who, in the D&D world, obviously can't get away with it without displaying actual divine powers.Arcane Battlemaster (name lifted from a Paragon Path):  In the D&D, spells very often turn the tide of battle, if not decide it from the beginning, so it only makes sense that there are commanders who shape their tactics around the effective use of caster assets, and, probably, pick up wizardry second-hand, INT-focused as the warlord can be.Infernal Strategist (ditto):  Some will pay any price for victory.  The Infernal Strategist employs both magical powers and diabolical gambits gleaned from the darkest and most perilous of arcane sources.The Thaneborn (name lifted from barbarian build - and thanks for reminding me of this one, Vince):  A traditional leader of a clan or tribe or the like, by right of birth.  The Thane leads 'his people' in battle, and others call those people 'barbarians').  A faux-Barbarian-MC who's rage is not as potent, but is 'contagious' to his allies.</blockquote>

Verification