Why we need Warlords in D&DN

[GMforPowergamers]

Because I can't actually imagine why these classes would logically have any abilities to heal themselves - although they could buy healing potions (or steal them - Rogue) as part of their equipment before they go adventuring. Essentially, though, it would be a weakness in these Classes, and a feature of others. Same way that wearing armour and choosing weapons are class determined too.

but you just included like 5 or 6 classes that never had healing, but kept 2 out. it seams almost like saying "no homers" in a vlub house

edit: You give rangers and barbarians healing, try this, every soldier knows basic first aid, they can heal themselves and others, and rouges know anatamy to know how to make you bleed, so they also know how to stop it.

 

[Wormwood]

This would not only possibly appeal to 4th edition fans of the Warlord, but also bring in an important archetype back into the game.

I like the idea, and this is coming from a huge fan of both 4e and Warlords.

 

[Nemesis Destiny]

but you just included like 5 or 6 classes that never had healing, but kept 2 out. it seams almost like saying "no homers" in a vlub house

Yeah, and I couldn't help but notice how it was okay in that list for a bard to "sing" someone healthy, but at the same time it was bad for a warlord to "yell" them so. Fighters Can't Have Nice Things, indeed.

As for the "roles" argument - I suggest you drop it. That's what got the other thread shut down.

 

[HardcoreDandDGirl]

um Aragorn could be a warlord just as easy as a fighter... and way easier then a ranger. King Arthur comes to mind. I will even go to modern stories and go to the Justice League and the Avengers. Batman in his own comic is played as sherlock homes or a ninja or a mix of those, but when in the JLA he is a warlord, tacticle and corradanating others to fight better. Captian America is also a warlord, inspireing and leading the charge.

infact when I got PHB1 all those years ago I thought Cap and the Bat were the insperation for the two builds.

You even admit that Aragorn was as much a fighter. I bet in any edition I can make a ranger or a fighter and get pretty close to him in LotR. King Arthur, wow are you stretching here. He was a Fighter through and through, maybe a paladin. Batman and Captain America, both can be made without ever touching the warlord class(batman might have every other class depending on the fan boy who draws him up).

I will tell you what, find me examples of Inspiring word from any of them.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

I will tell you what, find me examples of Inspiring word from any of them.

Ok, fine… captian America (inspiring warlord/Battle captian) Maximum Carnage, a spiderman story. The whole thing is breaking down and hurting spiderman more and more. Finaly he is laying flat on his back with no fight left in him, giving up. Then in one panel all you see is a hand out stretched to him and the words “Son, you look like you could use a friend” and the next page is a splash page of cap and spiderman standing there, spiderman refreshed.
Just about everytime he shouts “avengers assemble”

 

[Aldarc]

Because I can't actually imagine why these classes would logically have any abilities to heal themselves - although they could buy healing potions (or steal them - Rogue) as part of their equipment before they go adventuring. Essentially, though, it would be a weakness in these Classes, and a feature of others. Same way that wearing armour and choosing weapons are class determined too.

When did HP cease being an abstract?

 

[TrippyHippy]

but you just included like 5 or 6 classes that never had healing, but kept 2 out. it seams almost like saying "no homers" in a vlub house

edit: You give rangers and barbarians healing, try this, every soldier knows basic first aid, they can heal themselves and others, and rouges know anatamy to know how to make you bleed, so they also know how to stop it.

Yes, because I think the role of healing is so important to a group, that the burden should become less reliant on just one or two classes. I can rationalise that anybody working in the wilderness would have basic survival skills to be able to self heal (probably not as effective as a Cleric or Druids skills, but nevertheless something that could keep them alive if they've been injured. I also recall Aragorn (a Ranger) aiding Frodo after he had been struck with the RingWraith's blade in Lord of the Rings.

But your rationale for both Fighters and Rogues are very weak. Firstly, Soldiers in medieval times didn't know first aid by default, and always had to find a healer to be able to recover from their wounds. Secondly, not all Rogues know anatomy!

Like I say, as a DM I wouldn't object to healing potions (and maybe some other really minor potions, 'love') being freely available in a fantasy marketplace. Characters like fighters and Rogues could spend their cash on a few vials of healing potions before they set out on adventure, resource manage, and just be mindful that they need to be nice to others if they run out!

The only significant difference between a magic using class and fighters, is that the magic -users can make their own potions rather than buy them (where do you think they came from?), but this may require the aquisition of levels, feats and aquiring the ingredients of course.

 

[TrippyHippy]

When did HP cease being an abstract?

Around the same time defensive gamers tried to contrive reasons to explain why rules defy logic, perhaps?

 

[TrippyHippy]

Yeah, and I couldn't help but notice how it was okay in that list for a bard to "sing" someone healthy, but at the same time it was bad for a warlord to "yell" them so. Fighters Can't Have Nice Things, indeed.

As for the "roles" argument - I suggest you drop it. That's what got the other thread shut down.

Well, I'm not intending to end up in heated arguments each time - but I do think that some of the staunch defenders of 4E need to start thinking that 5E is an opportunity to engage in dialogue. At the moment, sometimes it feels like there is such entrenchment in 4E rules that the fans are as bad as those entrenched in previous editions designs.

In the case of the Bard, my feeling is that their songs are supposed to be magical in a fantasy setting - and one can probably site some fantasy examples of the power of Bardic tales, in some cultures.

The Warlord, however, doesn't have any such archetype to fall back on, as it was a Class contrived for a functional role only, not a thematic one.

You'll note that I highlighted 'Group Healing' for Bards, and again it may be somewhat restricted by Bards having to choose particular songs (or spells) that actually heal. Like I say, some Classes will be really good at healing, some with limited ability to heal, and some will be crap. You make your choice, like everything else, when you pick a class. What I do think the game needs to move away from is a dependence of the party upon one designated 'healer'. There needs to be more ways that party healing can be done.

 

[Aldarc]

Around the same time defensive gamers tried to contrive reasons to explain why rules defy logic, perhaps?

That doesn't narrow down the timeframe any.