D&D 5E New UE Classes

[Xeviat]

Ah, so the primary difference is mental/fluffable, if I am understanding correctly. I can entirely understand the want for that. On the healing/"healing" subject, That is certainly something I can understand causing some issues, with the whole "you, be inspired by me" thing. That is certainly a thing to be handled among tables, and I am not sure of a good mechanical way to handle that...

It's only fluffable if two caveats are made: 1) the game never has anything like an anti magic field and you can ignore the somatic components for said healing spells, and 2) a bard or other healing class could be altered so that it's spells were short Rest Recovery, because daily recovery feels weird for martial abilities for a lot of people.

I for one am mostly okay with using a valor bard as a warlord. I recognize that the paladin is the fantasy knight in shining armor, and that the ranger is the fantasy woodsman and hunter. So, I'm like 80% okay with the valor bard being the fantasy inspiring leader.

I'd like it's own class, with short Rest Recovery abilities and abilities which grant temp HP. A Battle Master Fighter with the Healer feat and the Inspiring Leader feat can almost do this, but they have too much offensive capabilities of their own, so it doesn't feel the same.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Jester David]

Still doesn't mean those wanting a Warlord should be denied one.

Wanting something isn't enough.
The warlord desire is really localized to a small number of posters here. And an even fewer number on Reddit. It's not a huge number of people.

, but are you a True Scotsman?

Born in Paisley. Married in a kilt.

Possibly almost as many as wizard fans who would be quite happy to have only the Eldritch Knight, Arcane Trickster, and Charlatan to choose from.

Right. Those all exist. So a new magic user subclass for the rogue or fighter would get pushback as redundant.

You exagerate wildly. Both in number, there might a few, and in that they're not 3pp, but DMsG.

First, there is literally a dozen on the DMsGuild alone. And even more on Reddit:
https://www.reddit.com/r/UnearthedArcana/search?q=Warlord&restrict_sr=on

There's a fine line between 3PP and DMsGuild. If there is one.

But, even if there were a great 3pp Warlord in a published 5th edition of the world's first RPG compatible supplement somewhere it wouldn't blunt the desire for an official version. If D&D fans were so easily molified, there'd've been no edition war in the first place, as d20 made 3pp material of the sort desired available in perprtuity. No edition war, no rift to heal, no 5e. That there is a 5e is proof positive that you can't just toss some of your fans and expect 3pps to take up the slack.

There *are* official ones. The valor bard, battle master, and purple dragon knight. Do you think WotC will do better a fourth time?
How many do they need to make?

Why wouldn't fans of the warlord make a better class that appeals to your needs more?

 

[Tony Vargas]

It's only fluffable if two caveats are made: 1) the game never has anything like an anti magic field and you can ignore the somatic components for said healing spells, and 2) a bard or other healing class could be altered so that it's spells were short Rest Recovery, because daily recovery feels weird for martial abilities for a lot of people.

There's a third caveat. The game would have to be designed around what classes and their abilities accomplished, not how they accomplished them. There might be 4 classes in such a system.

, with the whole "you, be inspired by me" thing. That is certainly a thing to be handled among tables, and I am not sure of a good mechanical way to handle that...

There is no mechanical way to handle basic respect for fellow players. I suspect it'd be the same kind of issue a group might deal with if it had a cleric PC alongside an atheist one or a Noble and a rebellious peasant, or basic inspiration or the Inspiring Leader feat.

Like I mentioned, above, the various bits are present in 5e already, just not in quality not quantity to cobble together anything much resembling the Warlord.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Wanting something isn't enough.

It's not like we're asking for some novel new thing out of the blue. The Warlord was a core class in a PH1.

Right. Those all exist. So a new magic user subclass for the rogue or fighter would get pushback as redundant.

So, if there were no Wizard class, relatively few wizard fans would be happy with just those options. The current options that faintly resemble the Warlord do not even come as close as the AT does to the Wizard. It is patently absurd to suggest the Warlord isn't needed because of the PDK.

The warlord desire is really localized to a small number of posters here. And an even fewer number on Reddit.

First, there is literally a dozen on the DMsGuild alone. And even more on Reddit:
https://www.reddit.com/r/UnearthedArcana/search?q=Warlord&restrict_sr=on

So which is it? No interest in the Warlord, or such extensive interest there are dozens of attempts at it?

No amount of fan-created material substitutes for an official class, though, as I already explained. We are where we are now, trying to 'heal the rift in the fanbase' because fans wouldn't be satisfied with just doing there own thing with 3pp product and letting the official game go a different way.

here's a fine line between 3PP and DMsGuild.

There's a vast gulf between the two.

There *are* official ones. The valor bard, battle master, and purple dragon knight.
How many do they need to make?

One.

None of those are the Warlord. None of them are even close. Again, would you be happy never playing a wizard again because you could play an AT with the Charlatan background? No.

Do you think WotC will do better a fourth time?

I'm willing to give them a chance. How many h4ters were still giving 4e a chance in early 2011?

Why wouldn't fans of the warlord make a better class that appeals to your needs more?

Even if there were a great 3pp Warlord in a published 5th edition of the world's first RPG compatible supplement somewhere it wouldn't blunt the desire for an official version. If D&D fans were so easily molified, there'd've been no edition war in the first place, as d20 made 3pp material of the sort desired available in perpetuity. No edition war, no rift to heal, no 5e. That there is a 5e is proof positive that you can't just toss some of your fans and expect 3pps to take up the slack.

 

[CapnZapp]

Wanting something isn't enough.
The warlord desire is really localized to a small number of posters here. And an even fewer number on Reddit. It's not a huge number of people.


Born in Paisley. Married in a kilt.


Right. Those all exist. So a new magic user subclass for the rogue or fighter would get pushback as redundant.


First, there is literally a dozen on the DMsGuild alone. And even more on Reddit:
https://www.reddit.com/r/UnearthedArcana/search?q=Warlord&restrict_sr=on

There's a fine line between 3PP and DMsGuild. If there is one.


There *are* official ones. The valor bard, battle master, and purple dragon knight. Do you think WotC will do better a fourth time?
How many do they need to make?

Why wouldn't fans of the warlord make a better class that appeals to your needs more?

Why do you waste your time arguing *against* a suggestion here?

It would be more fruitful if you focused on the UA classes *you* want, instead of trying to shoot down the ideas of others.

Sent from my C6603 using EN World mobile app

 

[Jester David]

Why do you waste your time arguing *against* a suggestion here?

It would be more fruitful if you focused on the UA classes *you* want, instead of trying to shoot down the ideas of others.

Sent from my C6603 using EN World mobile app

Because I posted something where I outlined what classes I was happy with here, saying I was pretty happy with just an artificer and the psion/mystic. Which wasn't acceptable apparently, as that idea was "shot down" here.
And I find it hard not to reply when people quote me, as it feels like leaving something unfinished and causes anxiety.

 

[TwoSix]

Because I posted something where I outlined what classes I was happy with here, saying I was pretty happy with just an artificer and the psion/mystic. Which wasn't acceptable apparently, as that idea was "shot down" here.

I think saying "Only X and Y need to be official, everything else should be third party" is going to invite some pushback in a thread about what classes you DO want to see. Classes you don't want to see wasn't part of the thread topic.

 

[Jester David]

I think saying "Only X and Y need to be official, everything else should be third party" is going to invite some pushback in a thread about what classes you DO want to see. Classes you don't want to see wasn't part of the thread topic.

I did say what I wanted to see. It was just a small list. And then I explained why I thought that.

In the last few editions we've just seen sooo many classes. So many there's a seperate Wiki page just listing "alternative" classes:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_alternative_Dungeons_&_Dragons_classes

When Paizo started Pathfinder they said they wanted to be conservative with classes. But then they wanted to make one. And then another one. And then another. And it adds up to the couple dozen classes in that game.

It's unneeded.
And it's inefficient. Classes take a lot of work. Because they need to cover 20 levels and have so many moving parts. In the time it takes to design, test, and develop a class, the team could do dozens of subclasses. I'd rather see more subclasses. They're easier to design, require less balancing, and are more contained in that you don't need to worry about multiclassing coming into play, and thus have fewer interactions to worry about: if you make a new rogue subclass, you don't need to worry about how it interacts with the assassin or the thief, but if you make a "spy" or "con artist" or "jester" class you do.

3rd Party classes can work just fine. And provide just as much - if not more - support for the game.

 

[TwoSix]

I did say what I wanted to see. It was just a small list. And then I explained why I thought that.

I know you did. And if your comment was "The classes I'd really like to see are the artificer and psion/mystic" that would have been fine.

If you have a theory about an expanding class list being bad, that's fine, but a wishlist thread isn't the place for it.

 

[Jester David]

I know you did. And if your comment was "The classes I'd really like to see are the artificer and psion/mystic" that would have been fine.

If you have a theory about an expanding class list being bad, that's fine, but a wishlist thread isn't the place for it.

True, but I did post my wishlist. Which is more than could be said about other posts in this thread (which were far longer than mine).
Threads like this never just become wishlists, because it's ENWorld and half the posters here just want to pick a fight.

But it doesn't matter anymore, because this thread has become yet another warlord thread of the type I thought had died out a year ago...