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

[cbwjm]

A warlord seems to me as someone who is in the midst of the fray and so I believe that a warlord class should gain extra attack at level 5 just like the paladin and ranger.

 

[Garthanos]

Sarcasm?

Extreme analogy and merger of distinct persons into something of a caricature with enough truth to recognizable?

 

[Undrave]

So ... do y'all want a + thread for Warlording?

Here's what I would recommend:

1. Have someone set up the thread ("PERSON A"). Decide what you want as the "base class" (Monk, Bard, Warlock, whatever).

2. The base class OGL text will be copied into the first post on the thread, along with basic instructions (GO FORTH AND MAKE A WARLORD).

3. Then have someone else be designated as the moderator/caller ("PERSON B"). PERSON B decides when a consensus is reached on a feature in the thread, and will @ PERSON A to make changes to the "official" version in the first post.

4. Continue on until the class is finished.

Dividing up between A and B should simplify things, edits, etc. One person to make edits to the "main" doc, one person to decide when the consensus is reached, etc.

Since we don't have group-editable posts anymore, this is what I've been brainstorming. For something else, but it should work for this.

Is that something that had success in the past?

 

[Eubani]

I suppose with the introduction of the idea of alternate class features, with enough alternate features and some Warlordesque fighting styles and manoeuvres. You would only need an alternate feature on nearly all features

 

[Eubani]

oops double up

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Undrave]

There used to the ability to create a wiki thread the people could edit.

in between bouts of insulting Paladins and insulting everyone else (sometimes on purpose) I’ve been trying to think of more useful things.

As momma always told me, “Boy. If you can’t be part of the solution, become a part of the problem.”

Wait . Dang it! That explains so much.

I guess there's always the Homebrewery?

 

[Xeviat]

Committee creations are hard. Reddit is trying to build a community ranger and the group kept losing people at each step. I bowed out when they added its own damage increase mechanic aside from it's spells, because I felt it wasn't going to be balanced and was going in a bad direction.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

So the burning question I would have is this- what do you call a multiclassed Warlord/Warlock?

The Lordlock?
The Locklord?

.....the WARWAR? That's the Kool-Aid Man .... OH YEAH!

Well this is why Captain is a better name.

Captain/Warlocks is CAPSLOCK!

Extra Attack is very much a "striker" feature, at-will, single-target, DPR maximization, and the way 5e 6-8-encounter-balance focuses on average DPR over a long time, is too highly-valued for any more-versatile (as support must be) class to get more than one (like the Valor Bard for instance).

Could run into the same issues as MDDs, where they couldn't strike a balance making the alternatives useful enough to be worth giving you the damage, some of the time, but not others.

As a Warlord sub-class, like the Bravura, it could get a single helping of Extra Attack and better armor (there's certainly precedent for a sub-class adding things like that), more like a War Cleric than a Paladin, though, really, there's not a huge gulf between them, anyway.

In 5e, Extra Attack is not a striker feature outside of the Fighter. Every other warrior uses some other feature on top of EA to attain “striker” damage. Extra attack is there to create a similar damage baseline to cantrips.

The point of a few “instead of attack” features combined with extra Attack, is to be able to use 1 attack as a balance baseline for that abilities, and give the ability to elegantly allow a Captain to switch between front line and “lazy” leadership, even doing both with the same action, and still maintain their status as a warrior.

Having only 1 subclass that can be in the front hitting things effectively feels completely wrong, to me.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

So ... do y'all want a + thread for Warlording?

Here's what I would recommend:

1. Have someone set up the thread ("PERSON A"). Decide what you want as the "base class" (Monk, Bard, Warlock, whatever).

2. The base class OGL text will be copied into the first post on the thread, along with basic instructions (GO FORTH AND MAKE A WARLORD).

3. Then have someone else be designated as the moderator/caller ("PERSON B"). PERSON B decides when a consensus is reached on a feature in the thread, and will @ PERSON A to make changes to the "official" version in the first post.

4. Continue on until the class is finished.

Dividing up between A and B should simplify things, edits, etc. One person to make edits to the "main" doc, one person to decide when the consensus is reached, etc.

Since we don't have group-editable posts anymore, this is what I've been brainstorming. For something else, but it should work for this.

I think this is a top notch idea.