Warlord Homebrew Collaboration (+) (Create a 5e Warlord)

[Fenris-77]

I like 15' because it's small enough that we can play with some cool effects, and also that there's lots of room to scale the range up at leveled intervals for a big boost in character effectiveness.

From a philosophical standpoint, I see the 15' as the effective area within which the Marshal can not only be heard, but anticipate and orchestrate events, which translates into what is essentially an aura effect. Other abilities, things that might be explained more as a single shouted command, could have longer ranges but effect less targets (perhaps just one), essentially trading power for distance.

I'm fine shifting the extra attack to a subclass. It fits with our rough sketch of what those might look like anyway.

 

[TwoSix]

Okay I’ll allow time for others to chime in, and if no one objects I’ll finalize it later today.

I think it makes a lot of sense. Messing with initiative seems like a flavorful secondary trope for the concept.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[TwoSix]

Right right. So the warlord would either need extra attack at 5th or something equivalent. I vote for equivalent, then the subclass(es) that get extra attack can get it in place of a "breadth" ability rather than a "vertical power" ability.

That's been my vote as well. My personal advocacy has been Extra Attack at 5th, and then a 6th level subclass feature expanding the Marshal's attack granting ability (Vanguard - ally gets advantage on their attack [possibly within 30'], Tactician - grant attacks to two different allies, Magical - unsure, possibly allow ally to cast cantrip [although that has balance/scaling concerns]).

But, yea, I think Extra Attack needs to be a staple. It emphasizes the Marshal's, well, martial character.

 

[Garthanos]

The +d6 damage is at-will, because it is the bread and butter active ability of the marshal. Like you said, it’s martial arts. You can spend gambit (morale just flows better in such a statement) to increase it to granting an attack with a +d6 bonus to damage, but even when you’re totally tapped, you can always add a little damage to someone’s turn.

Rallying strike your successful attack grants a nearby ally who can see it d6 temp hit points OR bonus damage on their next attack.

Mearls used the same resource for heal and harm do that here.

 

[Garthanos]

3. I am to blame (or credit) for putting the Monk in there to start with. I was playing with a tester thread, and we just went ahead and made it live.

I think it introduces a somewhat different paradigm that might result in some creative solutions that a bard WOULD not have.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Oh, the Warlord wouldn't be based on the Monk, anyway, it'd need a Support template.

But, we're not doin' a Warlord, here.

In that case we should pick a name free of past-edition baggage and expectations.

Marshal, Warlord, and Warden have all been taken, and 13A has used commander. Looking at this thread,

D&D 5E - Best Name For A “Leader” Class?

Who needs a so-called heal-bot, when 100% recovery from every (EVERY) wound is just 8 ? 'Herald' sounds like it should be a subclass of Bard. So does this entire class concept, tbh. Inspiring allies on the battlefield, rallying troops, offering support at the front lines, researching and...

www.enworld.org

the next up would be ...

Captain!

(And, for clarity, whatever name you choose or accept from consensus, it should go in the Title & the explanation.)

No. While my preference is Captain, marshal works fine.

and in this thread we chose Monk because a few of us who agreed on a basic focus agreed it worked. I’d be happy to help with a separate project that puts out a warlord on a bard or cleric template, but since I was spearheading this one, I had to just make a choice at some point and I don’t want to try to replace full casting just because the bard and cleric share conceptual space.

Please stop trying to make this about recreating old mechanics.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I'm fine shifting the extra attack to a subclass. It fits with our rough sketch of what those might look like anyway.

I’m not, for what it’s worth.

The Marshal should live somewhere between the warrior classes and the support fullcasters. And “support abilities that key off making attacks as part of the attack action” is soemthing that will play nice with 5e without retreading what another 5e class has done.

 

[Garthanos]

Rallying strike your successful attack grants a nearby ally who can see it d6 temp hit points OR bonus damage on their next attack.

Mearls used the same resource for heal and harm do that here.

I am using Nearby but it gets bigger as you up to higher tiers I just paced off 15 feet guys how bloody cramped that is.

 

[Fenris-77]

Do we need to do sublcasses really? Why not just make the one Marshal, and identify which effects would be subclass abilities were we to add other SC options. Once class seems like a big enough job. So we can leave the attack in but tagged as a potential swap out for later subclass design work.

On the nomenclature side we could run with the more generic 'command points' that can be spent issuing commands or managing effects in the Marshal's command radius. I like 'gambit' better because it's got some flavor and feels fresher than command points, but whatevs..

@ Garthanos - the range for the aura would scale, that was the discussion anyway.