D&D 5E What the warlord needs in 5e and how to make it happen.

[Tony Vargas]

My favourite toon in 4e was my Avenger. I loved the Holy Slayer aspect to it, ala Assassin's Creed but with a big weapon. It's too hard mechanically to pull off the build in 5e, and, just as I don't want a hugely multi-attacking warlord, I don't grok my Avenger becoming a spellcaster as much as the 5e paladin is.

I'd somehow blanked on the big-weapon angle, I guess DEX-based melee doesn't go there. But I seem to recall the Avenger having no shortage of implement prayers.

Having said that, I get that the Vengeance Paladin was the way 5e brought the Avenger into the game and, unlike the Fighter with a tiny bit of warlord maneuvers, they incorporated more than 70% of it. I'm just bitter I can't recreate her in this game. :/

I know the feeling. There were fighter-based builds and sorcerer ideas I had for 3.5 that I never got to use because they didn't work in 4e, and wouldn't in 5e, for that matter. :shrug: It sure seems like they're trying though, looking at all the sub-classes in UA.

And the Mystic just got a third treatment, this time the sub-classes include an Ardent ('Avatar' for some reason - I mean, I saw that and half expected a divine tie-in, but, nope, it's the Ardent with its Mantles called simply auras) and even even a Soul Knife (odd that's the one psionic class name they'd retain, having apparently dumped Ardent, Pyschic Warrior, Psion, & battlemind).

As for the invoker...I haven't looked. Maybe there are enough cleric blasty spells to make it work. That or go favoured soul?

The 4e Cleric was, well, a cleric, with enough of the controllery spells paired away or toned down to pass as a 'secondary controller.' The Invoker struck me as just the reverse, controller, secondary leader, not a lot of traditional cleric spells that I recall, but the sentiment was there.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Agreed. Though i think barbarian is a better fit for the avenger. (big weapon, light armor, extra movement, and advantage).

That said, I have no issue with reusing the name.

Eehhhhh

IMO, the entire concept is divine, first and last.

The main thing the Avenger does that others don't, is that their faith guides their hand. Like...physically guides their hand. To me, that has to be mechanically represented as distinct from how a fighter uses their weapons, or what is the point of even putting he concept into the game?

I could see a Monk that does some kind of wisdom benefit to either attack or damage, or a Paladin that gets to ditch armor and add Cha+X to AC, but so far the best I've found is a hexblade warlock with some divine spells.

But ideally I would want a 5e Avenger to use Wisdom for attack, damage, and defense, be a divine half caster.

 

[Guest 6801328]

Here's a list of mechanics/features that I think would be really fun (regardless of whether it's in a sub-class or a new class) and that don't cross my Line of Death of player agency.

- Abilities that allow Saving Throws are against DC of 8 + Proficiency + Int bonus. (Saves are described as Int, but I vacillate between that and Wis.)

- You may use your Int bonus in place of Dex when rolling for Initiative.

- On the first round of combat you may use your bonus action to alert your allies. Any allies within 30' with initiative lower than yours may add your Int bonus to their own initiative, up to but not exceeding your own initiative.

- If you study a battleground for at least 1 minute before combat starts, you and any allies with whom you can communicate will start the fight with Inspiration (the Advantage sort, not the Bardic sort)

- As a bonus action, provoke an Attack of Opportunity from an enemy within 5'. The target may make an Intelligence saving throw to avoid making the attack. If the attack is made, it provokes Attacks of Opportunity from enemies within 5'. Creatures who save have Advantage on future saving throws when you use this ability on them.

- When the Attack or Dodge action is used, as a bonus action you may maneuver an enemy into any adjacent 5' square of your choice. The enemy may make an Intelligence saving throw to avoid moving. This movement counts as voluntary and may provoke Attacks of Opportunity. Creatures who save have Advantage on future saving throws when you use this ability on them.

- You may use your reaction to Help an ally who is attempting the Shove or Attack action against a creature that you are within 5' of.

- You have proficiency in a new Intelligence-based skill, Battle. Battle represents situational and environmental awareness, and quick decision-making. You may, at your DM's discretion, use Battle in place of other skills when the the task takes place during Combat. Examples might include: in place of Strength (Athletics) when taking the Shove action, in place of Dexterity (Acrobatics) to avoid dangerous terrain, or in place of Wisdom (Insight) to anticipate an enemy's move.

 

[TwoSix]

Eehhhhh

IMO, the entire concept is divine, first and last.

The main thing the Avenger does that others don't, is that their faith guides their hand. Like...physically guides their hand. To me, that has to be mechanically represented as distinct from how a fighter uses their weapons, or what is the point of even putting he concept into the game?

I could see a Monk that does some kind of wisdom benefit to either attack or damage, or a Paladin that gets to ditch armor and add Cha+X to AC, but so far the best I've found is a hexblade warlock with some divine spells.

But ideally I would want a 5e Avenger to use Wisdom for attack, damage, and defense, be a divine half caster.

Huh. To my mind, the success of the Avenger was that it filled that anime aesthetic of "fast, unarmored guy with a big weapon" that a lot of people (me, included) wanted. Using a mental stat for attacks just compounded that "mind over body" concept.

 

[Satyrn]

Agreed. Though i think barbarian is a better fit for the avenger. (big weapon, light armor, extra movement, and advantage).

That said, I have no issue with reusing the name.

But the paladin's the one with Oath of Vengeance!

Although it would be cool to have a barbarian subclass called Path of the Avenger, his rage fueled by his faith in the gods of Justice and Vengeance.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Although it would be cool to have a barbarian subclass called Path of the Avenger, his rage fueled by his faith in the gods of Justice and Vengeance.

UA Path of the Zealot.

To my mind, the success of the Avenger was that it filled that anime aesthetic of "fast, unarmored guy with a big weapon" that a lot of people (me, included) wanted.

I wish* I could say that no one had played a 'magical girl' like that in D&D before the Avenger.














* not really, I was fine with magical girls running around in 3.0 and pre-Avenger 4e games, too, it just sounds funnier phrased that way.

 

[TwoSix]

I wish* I could say that no one had played a 'magical girl' like that in D&D before the Avenger.

* not really, I was fine with magical girls running around in 3.0 and pre-Avenger 4e games, too, it just sounds funnier phrased that way.

Heh. Magical Girl would have made a pretty fantastic 4e class, actually. Although Ardent does make a pretty good base for one with some reskinning.

 

[Satyrn]

UA Path of the Zealot.

Yeah, after making my comment I noticed your other post at the top of the page mentioning this.

. . . however, I would like to pedantically point out that something called Path of the Zealot is not something called Path of the Avenger

 

[Tony Vargas]

. . . however, I would like to pedantically point out that something called Path of the Zealot is not something called Path of the Avenger

Making it that much easier to miss, among other things, yeah. (Of course, if one is hoping for an Avenger full class, that could be taken as a hopeful sign.)

I wonder how they make their decision to name something after something it isn't, or use a name for something that's now completely different, or use a new name for an old thing? Because it's not like the game has a long, involved history, and exacting fans that have been playing it since the 20th century, nor like it isn't already complicated enough without adding further needless confusion.

 

[Guest 6801328]

Making it that much easier to miss, among other things, yeah. (Of course, if one is hoping for an Avenger full class, that could be taken as a hopeful sign.)

I wonder how they make their decision to name something after something it isn't, or use a name for something that's now completely different, or use a new name for an old thing? Because it's not like the game has a long, involved history, and exacting fans that have been playing it since the 20th century, nor like it isn't already complicated enough without adding further needless confusion.

Not just since the 20th century...SINCE THE LAST MILLENNIUM.

Hmm.

As I alluded to previously, I think the potential for a bit of confusion and forum angst is better than letting some ill-advised decision from 10 or 20 years ago forever remove a name from circulation. We've only got so many to choose from.