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

[Hussar]

I mean, the level 5 Extra Attack is just what non-full casters get instead of cantrips, but okay. You could swap cantrips for extra attack on a cleric and it would be absolutely fine.

Well, not quite. Rogues don't get extra attacks.

 

[Garthanos]

Competence doesn't require Extra Attack, Proficiency reflects competence. Keeping DPR above the cantrip baseline of full casters requires Extra Attack - at the cost of significant resources.

The inspiring umm focused attack is only subtly Bravura in a sense sounds just as much like other archetypes as anything until you look closer at what you pass up vs 2 attacks, it could be an option for more than one archetype and maybe make the Bravura build get a better one. (maybe while sacrificing personal armor class too). 4e said pick two they are small on at-wills. And your other choices decided which ended up being best (far too often non-tactically but that is a different discussion).

And, really, only one Warlord concept, the Bravura calls for more than mere competence, and one, the 'lazy' build, calls for the opposite (that is, I'd consider it to be a separate subclass, in 5e - I like 'Prince(ess),' but the genderless 'Icon' or something is probably a better name).

Icon is certainly not bad at all actually I am copacetic and yes I only call it lazy lord out of expediency.

The term Vanguard imples the guy who who goes first and protects allies by risking self but misses the encourages allies to risk themselves element which is Bravura bread and butter.

It's worth noting that in 4e the 'lazy'lord and the Taclord used mostly the same features, but just had different stat arrangement, but, in 5e, it'd make more sense for them to be separate sub-classes.

Yes in part the lazylord didnt have a class feature all its own except its granted attacks were stronger from attribute shifting ... although one could do some of the other builds moves too for instance the Bravura risky running to the side of an ally an risking your hide to inspire the target while doing it and a few attacks actually worked better if you missed... lol

 

[Garthanos]

Well, not quite. Rogues don't get extra attacks.

Which is the impressive strike concept it is an all in one egg basket form of focus fire.

 

[Garthanos]

The inspiring umm focused attack is only subtly Bravura in a sense sounds just as much like other archetypes as anything until you look closer at what you pass up vs 2 attacks, it could be an option for more than one archetype and maybe make the Bravura build get a better one. (maybe while sacrificing personal armor class too).

The Tacticians focus fire might not be inspiring but enable a disengage by an ally.
The Hector warlords focus fire might not be inspiring but trigger fear in a nearby enemy.

Each are technically riskier which has been pointed out is like a Rogue in some ways. (Rogues riders basically being does even more damage)

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Well, not quite. Rogues don't get extra attacks.

A nitpick. The point stands.

 

[GameOgre]

It needs to be the class because it's the only healer class I ever had fun playing.
I guess it only needs to be a class if you want me to heal, or anyone else like me.
Otherwise, shrug.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Keeping DPR above the cantrip baseline of full casters requires Extra Attack - at the cost of significant resources.

Well, not quite. Rogues don't get extra attacks.

Some significant at-will source of DPR, yes. The point is that higher-than-cantrip-DPR at-will damage-grinding rapidly removes meaningful resources from a class template. A single extra attack will punch you down to 1/2 caster; collecting the full Fighter set of Extra Attacks or the Rogue's SA, to "1/3rd" caster, and /that/ is apparently meant to be valued about the same as the Champion's improved crit, &c.

I mean, the level 5 Extra Attack is just what non-full casters get instead of cantrips.

Instead of cantrips, and full casting

, but okay, You could swap cantrips for extra attack on a cleric and it would be absolutely fine.

Or would it be obliged to turn into a half-caster Paladin?

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Or would it be obliged to turn into a half-caster Paladin?

No

 

[Tony Vargas]

No

So your hypothetical Cleric should be able to stand in combat the equal of a 1/2-caster, while also getting spells up to 9th level instead of only 5th because...?

Divine Right?

 

[doctorbadwolf]

So your hypothetical Cleric should be able to stand in combat the equal of a 1/2-caster, while also getting spells up to 9th level instead of only 5th because...?

Divine Right?

Having extra attack, by itself, wouldn’t put them on the same footing as a 1/2 caster warrior. It would put them on equal footing with a cleric with cantrips.