D&D 5E Why is There No Warlord Equivalent in 5E?

[Minigiant]

Could I kindly ask to tone down the "you're doing it wrong" rhetoric?

Maybe you actually aren't the enlightened one that knows how the game truly is to be played?

Maybe 5e is enjoyed and successful because of and not in spite of the designers' efforts?

Thanks

I'm not saying people are not having fun.

I am saying 5e literally wasn't designed to be played the way many 5e players play it.

 

[Undrave]

I find people have an illogical fear of taking AOOs. When I am playing a Monk I rarely use step of wind to disengage, Instead I will take Patient Defense and make them use their reaction at disadvantage (along with all other attacks over the following round against me to be at disadvantage). Protecting you from 4 or 5 AOOs a day is not worth a feat IMO.

That's still wasting your Ki!

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Don't forget the Rogue can do all their damage at range so they don't risk as much as a monk does in melee (where they need to be to use their bonus attack).

No, they can't if they don't take the crossbow expert feat.
2 weapon attack is only possible at close range. Ok, you can throw daggers, but you can only draw 1 dagger per round. So you need twf feat to use both attacks for more than 2 rounds.

The Monk should just get the Mobility feat.

No, they should not. The rogue does not get the other feats for free either. The monk already is very mobile.
Instead I think the monk should get one more ASI or two.

I meant in the movie.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

That's still wasting your Ki!

No, it is not. It is using exactly for what it is intended. Taking the mobility feat instead of +2 dex or wis could also be a waste. +2 dex could very well save you more opportunity attacks and deal more damage than a single point of ki used for flurry of blows.

 

[Justice and Rule]

I am not a fan of the mobility feat on a Monk. Monk is MAD and you really need to boost Wisdom and Dexterity unless you had fabulous rolls at character creation.

I also have problem getting an entire feat to do what you can do better by simply spending a bonus action and ki for SOW (or many times a ki and stunning strike).

The Monk should just get its own version of Cunning Action, tbh. Make Step of the Wind into a free combination Move/Disengage, which might actually be worth a proper Ki point. Turn Patient Defense into something interesting, like maybe a reaction attack against a miss while Dodging for a ki point.

Really, let's stop having the Monk pay for stuff a second level Rogue gets for free.

I find people have an illogical fear of taking AOOs. When I am playing a Monk I rarely use step of wind to disengage, Instead I will take Patient Defense and make them use their reaction at disadvantage (along with all other attacks over the following round against me to be at disadvantage). Protecting you from 4 or 5 AOOs a day is not worth a feat IMO.


I don't think this aversion to AOOs is specifc to Monk, but a lot of people feel like once they are engaged they have to stay put or find a way to disengage. This is a bit true at low level when an AOO can one shot you even with full hit points, but once you hit level 4 or so taking an AOO in combat every couple rounds is not generally the end of the world and is often better than staying engaged.

No one likes getting hit, period, especially given how easy it typically is to tag someone in 5E given bounded accuracy.

Edit: If you want to make the Monk less MAD, you could probably replace the Wisdom part of their AC with just a flat bonus based on level. I was thinking Proficiency, but that's a bit lower than I'd like. Maybe a 3+/4+/5+, dolled out every 6-7 levels.

 

[Jadeite]

The response to that is like I said before.

WOTC locked themselves in a policy of not creating new classes

So if surveys stated that the community wanted a new class, WOTC had already stated that they would not create a new class not linked to a setting

This is what breaks the "WOTC follows the research" argument. Quality and Costs are on their own policy guidelines.

Jeremy Crawford literally said that he and the team had fixes that they wanted to put into 54 years that they would not implement because they did not want to invalidate the 2014 player handbook.

They sat on bad rules for a decade in order to not print errata.

So, the obvious solution for the problem would be to release a setting that needs the Warlord. There's already a setting that was created with the Warlord in mind: Nenthir Vale. So they just have to release a Nenthir Vale Campaign Setting for 5e and they could easily justify the addition of the Warlord class to it.

 

[ECMO3]

That's still wasting your Ki!

I think FOB is by far the biggest offender when it comes to wasting ki.

Once you get to the top of tier 2 you can do patient defense most of the time. Later on you can do it all the time.

 

[Undrave]

So, the obvious solution for the problem would be to release a setting that needs the Warlord. There's already a setting that was created with the Warlord in mind: Nenthir Vale. So they just have to release a Nenthir Vale Campaign Setting for 5e and they could easily justify the addition of the Warlord class to it.

And maybe release a Warden subclass for the Barbarian

 

[Undrave]

No, it is not. It is using exactly for what it is intended. Taking the mobility feat instead of +2 dex or wis could also be a waste. +2 dex could very well save you more opportunity attacks and deal more damage than a single point of ki used for flurry of blows.

I think FOB is by far the biggest offender when it comes to wasting ki.

Once you get to the top of tier 2 you can do patient defense most of the time. Later on you can do it all the time.

Again, defensive options don't advance the game state, it doesn't make you win the encounter. It's a stupid design for a limited resource and Monk shouldn't have to rely on it to get baseline toughness.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Again, defensive options don't advance the game state, it doesn't make you win the encounter. It's a stupid way to use a limited resource.

Again. You don't have to use it. If you think it is stupid, don't use it.

But better not play team games. Why put a goalie on the field? Why not more offensive players?