D&D 5E (2014) The Warlord shouldn't be a class... change my mind!

Tony Vargas · Jan 20, 2020

Aebir-Toril said:
Hey! I disagree with both of those assertions, with extreme prejudice, mind you!

Proof that Warlord fans can't agree on anything, so there should never be a warlord.

generic · Jan 20, 2020

Tony Vargas said:
Proof that Warlord fans can't agree on anything, so there should never be a warlord.

No, it is proof that there should be a Warlord, because the class is an excellent implementation of an idea that would appeal to many, certainly more than the Artificer appeals to.

1 more page...

generic · Jan 20, 2020

So, everyone.

Warlord or no Warlord?

Thoughts?

Tony Vargas · Jan 20, 2020

Aebir-Toril said:
1 more page...

OK, keep plug'n.

generic · Jan 20, 2020

Tony Vargas said:
OK, keep plug'n.

I shall.

Bumped because we need to come to a decision, together, with no outliers. That's how threads work, right?

generic · Jan 20, 2020

In an honest effort to convince @Urriak Uruk, I point simply to the relative desire for a Warlord when compared to the desire for an Artificer. Yes, a Warlord is more divisive, but I doubt that people will quit the game due to the implementation of an additional class.

Fenris-77 · Jan 20, 2020

Just a thought, way out in left field. What about designing Warlord subclasses for more than one existing class instead of building a whole new cl;ass with multiple subclasses? You have a lot less design space, but there's also a lot less to balance. I know this won't appeal to the serious fans who want the whole enchilada, but it's very doable.

generic · Jan 20, 2020

Fenris-77 said:
Just a thought, way out in left field. What about designing Warlord subclasses for more than one existing class instead of building a whole new cl;ass with multiple subclasses? You have a lot less design space, but there's also a lot less to balance. I know this won't appeal to the serious fans who want the whole enchilada, but it's very doable.

So, like adding support-Warlord elements to multiple classes in the form of subclass features? Eh, it's a good idea, but not one that I'd support unless there was a bit more of a clear structure as to what the implementation would be.

Fenris-77 · Jan 20, 2020

The WL conversation tends to be about three brands of WL that roughly conform to martial, half martial and full support. I'd probably build a subclass each on the Fighter, Paladin, and Cleric platforms, although elements of the current build on the rogue chassis would work in the middle there too. Generally, that would equal 1/3 WL, 1/2 WL and full WL if we wanted to steal some terminology from spell casting, If you built the 1/3 WL first, you could just add to it for the 1/2 WL and add some more to the full WL. Tie the three together with some overlapping abilities, whether identical or just similar and just add some juice at each step. That's the broad strokes of a very fresh idea anyway.