Why we need Warlords in D&DN

[GMforPowergamers]

One of the guys who travels in the same circles of players as I do created his own hack of 4e, it redid alot of the healing (and reintroduced Save or DIE) but part of it I had him email me so I could include it here.

This is far from complete what he does, he also has injuries that follow 4e desises tracks (I have seen dislocated shoulder, spranged wrist/anke, bruised ribs, and mild concusion) and 'anti boons' were injuries can lead to perm negatives (I have seen bumb knee -1 speed, bad back -3 endurance, and flash backs).

here are the part that I think might make the warlords more palatable:

Heroic Reserves:
Everyone has the ability to push past there limits in times of stress and emergency, however true heroes can do so somewhat regularly.

Everyone starts with so many HR points, how many is to be determained in play test.

Everyone still has a bloodied value and a healing surge value (maybe renamed)
Everyone can once per encounter spend a heroic reserve to do one of the following: take an extra action, reroll a D20, or something determained by class (every class has an HR power)
Everyone can once per day “Second wind” (Some people can multi time per day if they have the right ability) to gain +2 defenses, and heal equal to their healing surge value.
At the end of every fight, if the PCs have enough time to regroup and “tend there wounds” (aka short rest, but can’t stack mulit) every PC may spend 1 heroic reserve point to regain hp equal to there surge value. (This is abig difference from 4e only 1 surge per person so no complet refill of hp, and since it is only after a fight you can’t take multi rests)
All character can take (be it a skill, a non wapo prof or a feat is based on rest of system) a first aid that allows them to treat themselves and others, allowing them to once per day per target (so no multi first aiders) let the target spend a heroic reserve to heal there surge value.
All Characters can take (be it a skill, a non wapo prof or a feat is based on rest of system) a herbalism/nature lore that allows them to if they have supplies (a kit) or a half hour to forage in an exceptable enviorment (by dm) ability to let there allies gain +1d6/2d8/3d10(by tier) extra healing from there own reserves from “first aid” or “tend there wounds”
All the ‘leader’ classes (Warlord, Bard, and Cleric being the most important in my mind) gain an encounter power (twice at 11th and thrice at 21st) inspireing word that lets an ally within 5 act as if he used his second wind.
All ‘leader’ classes (Warlord, Bard, and Cleric being the most important in my mind) gain a way to improve the others in there parties “tend there wounds” ability. Bards add there cha mod to hp regained, clerics can let extra HR points equal to half there wis mod be spent, brokn up to characters as he sees fit, Warlords can recharge there own or an allies second wind.
Clerics have daily ‘prayers’ that heal as well. Cure light heals 1d8+wis mod hp, cure mod heals 2d10+ ½ wis score, Cure series heals 3d12+ wis score, and Cure crit heals 4d20+wis score +target con score. Heal heals the target there bloodied value+ the the casters Wisdom score

it wasn't in the email he sent, but I know he doesn't give you all your HR points back with a nights rest, I think it is 1/3 or 1/2 or 1/4 max HR points per nights rest, along with Prime stat hp back with a nights rest. I also belive that he has something (not sure if it is firstaid/herblism or a leader power) that you can be tended by someone and get double hp and one extra HR point back per night.

I only played in 1 campaign of his, although he has had afew useing these rules. So I am far from the best judge, and I think that it is far from perfect, but could something like this be a start?

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Ok, what fantasy archetype does the warlord allow OTHER than non-magical healer, that a fighter or ranger could not? I can not think of any heros in any books or movies or TV shows, or legend of yore that can be made as a warlord, but not a fighter. The healing aspect (the part a lot of us don’t like) is tacked on for the game, and is not part of the archetype.

Barbarian, Ranger and Rogue also seem to be classes to me that could just be covered by "Fighter". Rage, sneak attack, two-weapons, bow, being a scoundrel, that all still seems to be that a "Fighting" guy type does. Only Cleric/Paladin and Wizard seem to be something really different.

Which is kinda what power sources tried to express. These guys are all "martial". They develop fighting styles and techniques, they rely on training and experience, with a healthy dose of luck.

I think "non-magical healer" and "leads by inspiration and tactical cunning" are good enough to distinguish a Warlord from a Fighter. Or to say that all these are just subclasses or builds.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

This whole conversation presumes that 5e will continue HP healing in previous edition traditions.

What if they go with something simple in core? Like, no healing at all? You simply regain all your HP after any encounter but, you only have a much lower number of hit points during an encounter and very little (if any) in combat healing.

So, Warlords interupt damage (and/or) give temp HP, the same as any other Leader class.

That would resolve a lot of the believability issues, retain non-magical healing, and allow a much higher paced game without having to worry about 15 minute adventuring days.

I like such an approach. And I wonder if the problem in 4E was that they didn't have enough ideas how to balance outright healing vs more "preventive damage" mechanics. That could be something they may be able to figure out for 5E. I Certainly hope so.

 

[Greg K]

T
What if they go with something simple in core? Like, no healing at all? You simply regain all your HP after any encounter .

You are going to run into the same complaints you do about healing all hit points after an extended rest only more so.

 

[igniz13]

Barbarian, Ranger and Rogue also seem to be classes to me that could just be covered by "Fighter". Rage, sneak attack, two-weapons, bow, being a scoundrel, that all still seems to be that a "Fighting" guy type does. Only Cleric/Paladin and Wizard seem to be something really different.

Which is kinda what power sources tried to express. These guys are all "martial". They develop fighting styles and techniques, they rely on training and experience, with a healthy dose of luck.

I think "non-magical healer" and "leads by inspiration and tactical cunning" are good enough to distinguish a Warlord from a Fighter. Or to say that all these are just subclasses or builds.

I was going to respond to the quoted post, but i'll respond to this and expand.

The core difference between Fighter and Warlord is psychology and approach to combat. This is largely inferred by role more than anything. Don't forget that Fighter is so generic a name it could elude or become any number of classes if given the option.

It is entirely possible that the Fighter in 5e be given numerous options that lead to it being a Warlord or Barbarian or Ranger or whatever. The concept is that broad. What the Warlord does in 4e is give specific representation of people who lead in battle with mechanics to back that up.

As an example, I had an Inspiring Warlord who was a Samurai, people we're inspired by his deeds and debonair, his effortless style and battle prowess. If I did that with a Fighter, he'd be forced to be a Defender and whatever stylistic tones to his powers would be pointless fluff. With him being a Warlord, people feel genuinely inspired to fight on just by being around him. The mechanics of the class bring depth and meaning to his actions and help sell the character.

 

[FireLance]

You are going to run into the same complaints you do about healing all hit points after an extended rest only more so.

I guess the underlying assumption would be that hit points are entirely non-physical (vigor, divine favor, luck, etc.) in this system. I think this would also need to be paired with rules for physical injuries such as long-term wounds to make it palatable for more players. Those that don't want to use the long-term wound system can just leave it out, and PCs in those games who drop to less than 0 hit points in a fight would just fully recover after each encounter.

 

[Dausuul]

I guess the underlying assumption would be that hit points are entirely non-physical (vigor, divine favor, luck, etc.) in this system.

That was the underlying assumption in 4E. Problem is, players had their own assumptions already. If you call them "hit points," people will expect them to work like traditional hit points. If they don't, a lot of folks are going to be unhappy. There's no way around that.

What you could do is change the name to "vitality" or some such (and change all other terms to match, like "healing" and "damage").

Of course, then you would get a ton of complaints about how you got rid of hit points.

 

[pemerton]

Meh, just split the difference and have the Warlord use an Interrupt that negates the damage he would "heal" rather than heals you after the fact. "Duck!" or whatnot would still use whatever heroic reserves mechanic is used for healing just to make sure a party with a Cleric and a Warlord can't double-dip.

Warlords interupt damage (and/or) give temp HP, the same as any other Leader class.

This gives us tactical warlords, but where are the inspiring ones?

I had an Inspiring Warlord who was a Samurai, people we're inspired by his deeds and debonair, his effortless style and battle prowess. If I did that with a Fighter, he'd be forced to be a Defender and whatever stylistic tones to his powers would be pointless fluff. With him being a Warlord, people feel genuinely inspired to fight on just by being around him. The mechanics of the class bring depth and meaning to his actions and help sell the character.

This is the sort of PC - one who is grounded in a romantic rather than a technical/modernist archetype - that is in danger of being lost in the attempt to make the warlord "believable".

As I posted upthread, I have nothing against the divine romantic hero - the paladin fills that niche well - but I don't see why romantic inspiration has to be confined to that niche.

 

[Hussar]

You are going to run into the same complaints you do about healing all hit points after an extended rest only more so.

Well, not really. As Firelance points out, damage gets abstracted. Anything that didn't kill you was never a serious wound. Since you can't really heal in combat, there's no problem with inconsistencies. Either you're beat up but essentially fine, or you're dead.

Granted, you lose the "long term serious wound" schtick, but, honestly, I think that ship has sailed a LONG time ago. And, it's probably easier to model that sort of thing with the disease track mechanics anyway. If you go into negative HP, but make your death save, you get some long term effect that is mitigated (or possibly gets worse) using the disease track mechanics.

Since no one can "shout you" better, or even magic you better in combat, there is no inconsistency.

 

[mlund]

Well, not really. As Firelance points out, damage gets abstracted. Anything that didn't kill you was never a serious wound. Since you can't really heal in combat, there's no problem with inconsistencies.

I agree wholeheartedly. If it were a serious wound it would impart your ability to hit enemies, cast spells, maneuver, etc. No core system in D&D has ever depicted serious injury. You're at 100% threat value or 0% with no degrees in between.

Sundering someone's weapon does more to hurt their ability to fight than hitting them for maximum damage with a broadsword or fireball, go figure.

Granted, you lose the "long term serious wound" schtick, but, honestly, I think that ship has sailed a LONG time ago. And, it's probably easier to model that sort of thing with the disease track mechanics anyway. If you go into negative HP, but make your death save, you get some long term effect that is mitigated (or possibly gets worse) using the disease track mechanics.

We've been kicking around house rules locally to that effect since at least Dragon Age: Origins popped onto the radar. Lingering wounds from being knocked into the dying state add a nice extra bit of grit to things and discourage flirting with death just because the healer's initiative is always before yours.

I've also toyed with having critical hits deal lingering wounds as well. It'd be a fare alternative to the current minion-fix we have where minions do double damage on a crit.

Even something as simple as having -1 to all attack rolls, checks, defenses, and your maximum healing surges per day would be a problem players would look out for. Fixing that could require multiple days of bed rest and heal / endurance checks, restorative rituals, or a few applications of healing powers that don't spend your own healing surges.

Since no one can "shout you" better, or even magic you better in combat, there is no inconsistency.

Indeed.

- Marty Lund