D&D 5E The Warlord shouldn't be a class... change my mind!

[Manchurian]

I like Rob Schwalb (Shadow of the Demon Lord is one of my favorite games), but not a big fan of his Warlord attempt. It's OK, but didn't quite hit the nail on the head.

I think Character Classes is up to the flavor the P wants.....Cause in any result fun is main attempt......The fact that acharacters build is flavor set for specific player is good ....But what y'all ignore is that every class abilities don't always stack with other classes Subclasses and templates.....The Warlord Labyrinth Lord Is Not 5e but for all attempts and purposes can be used with minor Tweeks.. But Keep every class or subclass pertanent cause not all things stack.. SO YES WARLORD CAN BE BOTH CLASS AND SUBCLASS DEPENDING ON GEOGRAPHCAL AREA OR SPHERE.....NOT ALL LIKE CLASSES THE SAME IN EACH SPHERE IF INFLUENCE ...I would like to point out even the Monk class got variant monks beyond Ad&d1st Edition.....So being thats the case....There Can Be In Existence Variant Type Warlords .....Warlord Don't Have To Be A Subclass But It Can....Most My Games Are open To The Point My Players Can Planar Travel or Spelljam So It Adds Culture To Them Knowing You Came up on them and there so many planets away ....this class evolved Differently In That Sphere.....SO I WOULD SAY IF YOU THE TYPE LIKE DETAIL OF DIFFERENCES IN YOUR GAME KEEP IT PERTANENT.....Once Something Goes off Cannon It's Hard To Get It To Be Cannon Again.....KEEP WARLORD CLASS ALIVE

 

[Manchurian]

I'd like a warlord class, and I didn't like 4e. I liked the old commander class which popped up near the end of the 3.5 run, which was inspiration for 4e warlord. I really like the commander class in 13th Age. I think it's a neat concept, so for sure WOTC could include one. No biggie. I'm sure I'm not the only one who is not looking for mythical perfection, just a redo of a fun class concept.

This Warlord Labyrinth Class Is Good....Kinda Like Man Of Arms From Masters Of The Universe.....All Weapons available to him armor and shields....Most Fighter Classes Stack Benefit With It.....This Warlord More A Man Of Arms And Excellent Support Character....for the whole party.....spell list can be better but that can be tweeked depending on the PC's God he serves....Easy Adjustments... Effortless

 

[Manchurian]

Attaching a subclass to a fighter and calling it a warlord is like bringing a sex doll into the bedroom and calling it a threesome. It works out mechanically but it just doesn't feel the same, and it certainly isn't official.

The class is pertinent....and skills Alottment can improve leadership..... abilities

 

[Anoth]

Personally. I am for classes and archetypes. Makes lots of them. Make a warlord class. Make warlord archetypes for various classes. Give the people a choice to choose what is best for then. I hope they come out with a splat book with 100 classes and archetypes. Same goes for the psion.

now The real challenge is to make an effective warlock without eldritch blast and agonizing hex.

 

[Manchurian]

Personally. I am for classes and archetypes. Makes lots of them. Make a warlord class. Make warlord archetypes for various classes. Give the people a choice to choose what is best for then. I hope they come out with a splat book with 100 classes and archetypes. Same goes for the psion.

now The real challenge is to make an effective warlock without eldritch blast and agonizing hex.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

This allowed you to reskin the warlord as effectively a complete non-combatant character but with the player still having contributions to make during combat.

One of the big differences between 4E and 5E is that 5E is much less open to re-skinning. Fourth Edition pretty much assumed that a player could re-skin anything, and it would be fine as long as it didn't change the numbers. Fifth Edition is more traditional, and merely suggests that the DM use the stats of an existing thing when it would accurately model a new thing they otherwise wanted to introduce.

That being the case, wanting to re-skin the mechanics would not be a sufficient reason to add the class in 5E. If you wanted to play a non-combatant, you would have to propose adding the non-combatant character concept as its own class, based entirely on its own merit.

 

[Don Durito]

4E wasn't really all that open to reskinning either. The culture that developed around that was somewhat strange.

The main difference is really in the culture of play that has developed.

 

[Manchurian]

5e is just a reskinning of d&d 4th ,and 5th....but it still depends on 2nd edition content....the mechanics is not better in 5e....it caters to the fact they believe new players may come not be able an put 2and 2 together. 5e creatures/classes and templates Nice. But I Due Use Alot Of Core Material From Previous Editions..... For example This 5e attunement was unnecessary. The 2e mechanics was simple.....Either alignment class or if weapon intelligent ego check. This was simple. But now you got to quest to get certain powers to turn on doesn't give me feeling an artifact is an artifact....So I Definitely think to this day d&d-Ad&d 3.5 was perfect....As is......But Really I didn't mean to low blow your opinion on justification of lack of flare 5e mechanics.....but I am truly a fan.. You must admit the spectrum for power in core way more clear than just assuming power levels or attunement

 

[Tony Vargas]

4E wasn't really all that open to reskinning either.

It explicitly was. As in 3e, you could, of course, describe your character & gear as desired. In addition, the fluff description of powers was separate from the rules text, and explicitly subject to change by the player, short of altering keywords.

 

[Don Durito]

It explicitly was. As in 3e, you could, of course, describe your character & gear as desired. In addition, the fluff description of powers was separate from the rules text, and explicitly subject to change by the player, short of altering keywords.

Well yes. But it wasn't really all that well designed around the idea of reskinning. Feats with racial prerequisites that were meaningless if reskinned, powers that were linked that to specific energy sources - endless paragon paths that had no reason to exist other than to enable a character concept that could have been just as easily been enabled by reskinning something that already existed.

I really don't see 5e as being any more difficult to reskin.