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

[Fenris-77]

We don't have to make everything 15' either. We can call all abilities gambits (or whatever) but some could affect the battle front, and other could affect "and ally within 30' " or whatever. We aren't hamstringing ourselves.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I mean, it's your (and Lowkey's) thread, so of course, you know what your intent is.

I may be unclear on a few things, though. Like why the title and some text in the first post still say "Warlord?" Clearly, the decision to switch to Marshal was made before it was moved here, and before any consensus was sought. Likewise, the choice of Monk as template.
So I'm trying to contribute & stay positive on the basis of a Monk-based 5e version of the Marshal.

If the intent is more generic than that, I'd've expected the choice of template and concept to have waited for a consensus.

Ultimately, in any game, names are just jargon labels, they could be changed at any time, but if we want to follow the 5e "concept first" philosophy, we do need a clear idea of that before getting started.

"Aura," in the context of the Marshal, was obviously just a label, so I won't be sad to see it go.
Ki Points, OTOH, are a fine combination of the two, Ki describes the concept, Points the mechanic.

It might be a good idea to summarize the concepts we're shooting for, I guess.

Sounds like a solid adaptation of the Monk mechanic.

You don’t spend ki points, though. You spend ki.
As for the name and template, we did get consensus on the name, and the template was split enough that we just went with what we had already started brainstorming for.

either way, we were never going to recreate any class from any edition. We are making a new class for 5e.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

We don't have to make everything 15' either. We can call all abilities gambits (or whatever) but some could affect the battle front, and other could affect "and ally within 30' " or whatever. We aren't hamstringing ourselves.

Exactly.

 

[Fenris-77]

Thinking about it, perhaps we should call the abilities that affect the battlefront one thing, and the other abilities some thing else. As placeholders we could keep using gambits for the battle front and maybe commands for the longer range targeted stuff? Just to keep them separate.

 

[Bawylie]

I don’t like the idea of gambit abilities only being usable within the aura.

the rest, maybe, but I don’t think we need to go much bigger on the level 1 ability. It feels pretty in line with the melee abilities it replaces.

Yeah I mean like those might be upgrades or options at higher levels. Not a “get everything at once” type deal.

And really not even as proposals. Just like brainstorming.

 

[Xeviat]

If you're going with Monk as the base template, you're going to need a damage booster at 5th level on par with Extra Attack because the monk chassis is a half-casters chassis, not a full caster. In my work to switch everything to short rest MP recovery, I found the full casters MP divided by 3 scaled very similarly to 2 mp per level, so the Monk's 1 ki per level makes it a half caster (it also fits with the four element's spell levels for the most part).

I don't want the base warlord to have extra attack, but it should be making its own attack and granting an attack-value bonus to someone else on an action at fifth level.

The more stand up fighter subclass can get extra attack at 6th level as a separate action so they can choose between being competent on their own (toned down from not having Fighting Style) or boosting allies.

I think there should be four starting Subclasses:

Int focused - tactical warlord, geared more for lead from the rear but with choices of manuevers so one can build a true Lazylord or a more martial tactician. Focuses mostly on attack granting and improving attacks.

Cha focused - inspiring warlord, geared more for leading from the front but could be from the rear. Focuses more on healing/temp hp and defense improvement and overcoming conditions, inspires you to fight on.

Wis focused - observant warlord, geared more for "controlling" the enemy by predicting their actions. Would be doing a bit of the attack improvement from tactical and defense improvement from inspiring, but through debuffs on the opponent.

Martial focused - bravura or other style in your face lead from the front type, fighter-light. Heavier armor, extra attack, leads by example. Probably leans charisma, but I think it deserves to be separate.

 

[Tony Vargas]

<redacted>

 

[Tony Vargas]

<redacted>

 

[Xeviat]

The Monk does get Extra Attack. My impression was that's a reason it was chosen over Cleric or Bard... but, now that I think of it, I don't know if it was picked by lowkey or drbadwolf?

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.

 

[Tony Vargas]

<redacted>