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

[TheCosmicKid]

Do you mean something like..

At the start of each of your turns, Roll 5d6, and select one of the following options, the bonus lasts until the start of your next turn.

*You get a bonus to-hit equal to number of 1's rolled.
*You get a bonus to AC equal to the number of 2's rolled.
*You get a bonus to your saving throws equal to the number of 3's rolled.
...
*If all 5 numbers are the same, replace any d20 roll you make turn with a natural 20.

At level 5, you can spend your bonus action to reroll any of the dice. You must use this before taking any other action.
At level 11, you can select 2 different options, gaining both bonuses.

More like...

At some point, possibly at the start of each of your turns, possibly less often, roll 5d6.

As an action, you can spend three even dice to perform the Gruesome Disemboweling Strike, which may do something based on the numbers on the dice.
As an action, you can spend two even dice to perform the Stab of Extreme Discomfort.
As a reaction when a creature attacks you, you can spend three odd dice to perform the Contemptuously Easy Parry.
As a bonus action, you can spend two odd dice to enter the Stance of the Paranoid Turtle.

...and so on. With, yes, various ways to manipulate and reroll your dice.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Do you mean something like..

At the start of each of your turns, Roll 5d6, and select one of the following options, the bonus lasts until the start of your next turn.

*You get a bonus to-hit equal to number of 1's rolled.
*You get a bonus to AC equal to the number of 2's rolled.
*You get a bonus to your saving throws equal to the number of 3's rolled.
...
*If all 5 numbers are the same, replace any d20 roll you make turn with a natural 20.

At level 5, you can spend your bonus action to reroll any of the dice. You must use this before taking any other action.
At level 11, you can select 2 different options, gaining both bonuses.

Don't care for it - lots of dice rolling to roll and modify other dice. I'm a gamer, I do like dice, but...

More like...

At some point, possibly at the start of each of your turns, possibly less often, roll 5d6.

As an action, you can spend three even dice to perform the Gruesome Disemboweling Strike, which may do something based on the numbers on the dice.
As an action, you can spend two even dice to perform the Stab of Extreme Discomfort.
As a reaction when a creature attacks you, you can spend three odd dice to perform the Contemptuously Easy Parry.
As a bonus action, you can spend two odd dice to enter the Stance of the Paranoid Turtle.

...and so on. With, yes, various ways to manipulate and reroll your dice.

points for maneuver/stance names.

I'd make it based on the die rolls of others in the combat, rather than introducing a new roll. E.g.:

- When an enemy rolls maximum damage dice...
- When an ally rolls a natural 1 on an attack roll...

Etc.

Perfect for maneuvers that use a reaction, which, in spite of reactions being scarce in 5e, does make sense for anything opportunistic around an 'opening.'

Reacting to ally's rolls is also a nice idea, but, reactions are so action-economy-scarce.... Protection Style + Sentinel already runs into issues, right?

Hmm...

...nah. I was thinking cascading trigger, you have an ability that's triggered by something like the above, that you pass to the ally who can use a reaction to do something cool... but, no, same problem, just inflicting it on the ally.

 

[Guest 6801328]

Reacting to ally's rolls is also a nice idea, but, reactions are so action-economy-scarce.... Protection Style + Sentinel already runs into issues, right?

It wouldn't have to be. It could be, "When such-and-such happens, on your next turn..." Or even, "When such-and-such happens, one of your non-magical-but-somehow-not-at-will-bonus-dice refreshes"

The thing I'm trying to model, but in a really abstract way, is that the bad-ass moves you get to do are in some sense dependent upon others setting you up for it, intentionally or otherwise. Captain America doesn't get to do the exact same spectacular move every fight: he needs the set-up.

 

[Tony Vargas]

It wouldn't have to be. It could be, "When such-and-such happens, on your next turn..." Or even, "When such-and-such happens, one of your non-magical-but-somehow-not-at-will-bonus-dice refreshes"

Good. (funny about the 'but somehow not at will,' when you go on to explain one very plausible why-not-at-will, immediately)

The thing I'm trying to model, but in a really abstract way, is that the bad-ass moves you get to do are in some sense dependent upon others setting you up for it, intentionally or otherwise. Captain America doesn't get to do the exact same spectacular move every fight: he needs the set-up.

That's in a less abstract way than some of the alternatives (like CS dice or 'player resource,' above), which is possibly to the good in 5e class design. D&D's very abstract indeed when it comes to hps and basic combat - once you want to get beyond the basics, more interest is called for, more detail, less abstraction. Maybe only a teeny bit less, but still, anything that makes it more interesting than pushing a button or modifying a die roll or reading off a card....

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Thoughts on granted attack, from a thread where my ideas were unwelcome.

Also, there should be a lower level ability to grant an attack. Just give it restrictions. It's fine if the ability defines exactly what their attack looks like, even. The point is, the tactical benefit of letting the Barbarian clobber something instead of the Warlord stabbing the guy in front of them, or letting the ranger shoot the enemy mage, etc. It'd be easier if 5e had Basic Attacks, including for spellcasters, but the Warlord feature could simply define such a thing.

Basic attack. The character makes a weapon attack or spell attack, using the appropriate attack stat. This attack is never made with Advantage.

Weapon attacks are made as if you had taken the Attack Action, except that they do not benefit from the Extra Attack feature.


Spellcasters can either use one of their known cantrips, cast as if they were 1st level, or make a Basic Spell Attack, which deals 1d8 damage of any type the character can normally deal with their known cantrips, uses their Spellcasting Ability Modifier to attack and damage, and has a range of 60ft. Components are Verbal and Somatic.


Letting the Warlord do that instead of making an attack, as an Action, seems about right to me. I get that people don't want rogues getting extra Sneak Attacks, which is why I made Basic Attacks never have Advantage. Dual Wielders and Monks kinda get hosed, since they can't spend a Bonus Action to get their normal extra damage, but that's hard to help. Most of the time, the weapon user with the longest range or biggest damage die will be the best person to give an attack to.

I'd say that starting with this, and then giving limited access to full extra Action granting, or even just letting the attacker use a feature that would normally cost a Bonus Action as part of the attack, would work.

I don't think this should cost both the warlord's Action and the recipient's Reaction. What if you could use your Reaction when granted an attack, and instead of a Basic Attack, you get to attack as if you had taken the Attack Action, including stuff like having Advantage, or use your Reaction in place of a Bonus Action to modify your attack? Maybe as a level 5 improvement of the ability?

 

[Hussar]

I haven't read the whole thread, so maybe. Personally, I'm find with a warlord that has a lot of short rest and long rest abilities. Although I personally like them to have at least Commander's Strike style ability at-will, but I understand I'm in the minority on that one, even among warlord fans.

I wouldn't say that. I'm perfectly fine with that.

 

[Eubani]

Mike Mearls is asking what would be good in a new book on Twitter. I suggest a pure martial support character as well as extra downtime activities. Maybe if more people were to ask for a Warlord or similar something may happen if not just putting the thought in his head that it is wanted and being discussed.

 

[tuxgeo]

The only thing I saw that mearls posted recently on Twitter was his asking Dungeon Masters what one thing he could put into a new book to make DMs' lives easier. That tweet wasn't a call for player material.

Of course, any Twitter user who wanted to could tweet about a desire for a Warlord class, including "@MikeMearls" as a user tag in the tweet, and he'd see it; however, he has also tweeted that the best way to inform the design and development process is through feedback through the polls, because they base their decisions more heavily on data rather than on tweets.

 

[Tony Vargas]

, he has also tweeted that the best way to inform the design and development process is through feedback through the polls, because they base their decisions more heavily on data rather than on tweets.

Nod. I took all the playtest polls, the Warlord wasnt ever a topic, not any martial power, that I recall. In fact, the only poll that had anything from 4e in it was the very first one, which had a long list of spells and asked you to pick the most iconic, a few 4e spells were on that list - they're all in the 5e PH. I think there were 4e-like elements, here and there though. Of course the UA polls are all feedback on the last UA, right?

 

[Eubani]

The only thing I saw that mearls posted recently on Twitter was his asking Dungeon Masters what one thing he could put into a new book to make DMs' lives easier. That tweet wasn't a call for player material.

Of course, any Twitter user who wanted to could tweet about a desire for a Warlord class, including "@MikeMearls" as a user tag in the tweet, and he'd see it; however, he has also tweeted that the best way to inform the design and development process is through feedback through the polls, because they base their decisions more heavily on data rather than on tweets.

Try this: "A warlord class would make my life easier as a DM because my players want it, it would represent some npc's in my game and I could spend more time world building instead of fighting for a Warlord class".