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

MuhVerisimilitude · May 7, 2024

Clint_L said:
To me this seems like a false dichotomy. Battle masters are widely regarded as one of the best sub-classes in 5e, and are highly effective at all levels. They definitely play nothing like wizards, but they are a very popular choice and every party is happy to have one.

And their maneuvers do scale, because they are designed to offer situational advantages to abilities that scale. For example, when you use maneuver dice to grab the rogue an off-turn attack, a pretty classic BM maneuver, the rogue gets an extra sneak attack. Which scales. When you grant your ally advantage on their next attack, that scales. And so on.

The battle master is among the best fighter sub classes for sure, but far from the best subclass in the game. I will not repeat my reply up here, so see below in this post:

Mirrorrorrim said:
Don't maneuvers and weapon masteries automatically scale as Fighters get higher level and get more attacks? The multiple attacks are the power increase. The maneuvers and masteries are the tactical option increase.

That's exactly what I mean! The fighter scales based on number of attacks and attack power. That's why I mentioned that they had good attack scaling. That is not what the Warlord is about, though.

The fighter gets more attacks, but their maneuvers don't individually improve. The scaling of maneuvers is 100% about how the number of attacks scale.

It is the case that some maneuvers improve opportunistically thanks to a secondary thing improving and the maneuver improving "by proxy". But most maneuvers are completely static.

Want to talk about something more appropriate for high level? What about a maneuver that allows everyone else in the party to move half their movement speed as a reaction without triggering opportunity attacks?

That is the kind of scaling that maneuvers currently do not support, because individual maneuvers do not improve and there are no high level maneuvers gated behind any kind of obstacle.

Paul Farquhar · May 7, 2024

Minigiant said:
DMs

There is a significant amount of DMs who will add home rew of their choosing but will not accept homebrew of the players choosing.

Which is understandable as there is a TON of busted homebrew stuff out there and so little time to vet it

I read through it first to make sure it’s not broken. But if it passes muster it’s fine.

Minigiant said:
Content creators make money laughing at busted house rules and homebrew

That’s a highly cynical attitude. I’m certain the vast majority of content creators work very hard to make content as good as possible. Harder than WotC, the people who gave us the twilight cleric.

Reynard · May 7, 2024

Minigiant said:
Content creators make money laughing at busted house rules and homebrew

A lot of -- maybe most -- content creators are just releasing their own busted house rules and homebrew. Which is fine. Balance in 5E isn't that important. But let's not pretend most YouTubers are better designers than your average ENWorlder.

MuhVerisimilitude · May 7, 2024

Paul Farquhar said:
The hostility is more to the “I want this therefore WotC has to make it for me” entitled attitude. D&D has always been a do it yourself game, and as has been pointed out that that there are plenty of 3pp versions which are “perfectly good”.

I'm not really seeing any whining tbqh. I'm seeing some people saying "plz add this thing" and other people saying "we have this already" or "we don't need this" or "we don't want this".

This thread is proof of it.

I don't even care about the darned class myself. It's just baffling to me that people are opposed to having it. There has to be some kind of underlying reason for why this thing always becomes a debate.

Mirrorrorrim · May 7, 2024

MuhVerisimilitude said:
I find this absolute resistance to the Warlord class very interesting. The class itself is conceptually uninteresting to me, but I can imagine people want it. Especially since PF2 is just play testing their own attempt at this class.

I really don't understand the hostility to a D&D implementation.

It's so many things people disagree about.

The divide between Narrativist, Simulationist, Gamist, Verisimilitude, and other perspectives of "Warlord" as a concept, both in name and function.
Shouting at peers and strangers to do as you command? Who in the franksnbeans are you, L1 half-assed warrior who never really commanded soldiers in war, who thinks he knows better than the L1 fighter or L1 paladin how to fight?
HP as meat? Can you shout at a dying person (as defined per rules) to heal them to a full fighting state, and after than fight, even without magical healing, are fully healed after a long rest?

Ultimately, I want "command" and "support" abilities to exist. But stuffing them into only one "Warlord" class is too limiting in concept for me.

Laurefindel · May 7, 2024

Mirrorrorrim said:
...Barbarian Thanes...

Why is this not a thing already? Such a promising concept, and one that hasn't have to go blatantly supernatural barbarian at that.

Reynard · May 7, 2024

Mirrorrorrim said:
Shouting at peers and strangers to do as you command? Who in the franksnbeans are you, L1 half-assed warrior who never really commanded soldiers in war, who thinks he knows better than the L1 fighter or L1 paladin how to fight?

Laurefindel said:
Why is this not a thing already? Such a promising concept, and one that hasn't have to go blatantly supernatural barbarian at that.

Just bring back the prestige class already.

Mirrorrorrim · May 7, 2024

Reynard said:
Just bring back the prestige class already.

Which is covered by Subclasses. You have decent combat experience by L3, and by that time are expanding into a more advanced focus.

CreamCloud0 · May 7, 2024

Mirrorrorrim said:
Which is covered by Subclasses. You have decent combat experience by L3, and by that time are expanding into a more advanced focus.

remind me again which subclasses are the ones that multiple classes can take and at levels beyond 1-3 in addition to the base class's subclass?

they are not the same thing, give us actual prestige classes in 5e.

Mephista · May 7, 2024

MuhVerisimilitude said:
I don't even care about the darned class myself. It's just baffling to me that people are opposed to having it. There has to be some kind of underlying reason for why this thing always becomes a debate.

I think its because I never see people saying "hey, here's my homebrew <insert class name here>, what y'all think of it?" They're saying "Why hasn't WotC made this yet!?" or "This concept is missing from the game!"

So, then you get the people who come in and say, "hey, the concept does exist. Its <insert subclass here>." Then you get people who object and declare it not good enough. Replies to the tune of "how would that be implemented while keeping with 5e design?" Which get answered with "ITS EASY!" and shows a thing that many think is very much not easy, or whatever. Things devolve into its just a group of hardliners arguing with each other as those with more nuanced approaches have left the thread or we end up with groupthink brain drains, etc.

You can put Warlord, Psion, Spellsword, shapeshifter, whatever in that class name, and its the same conversation over and over.

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

MuhVerisimilitude

Hero

Paul Farquhar

Legend

Reynard

Legend

MuhVerisimilitude

Hero

Mirrorrorrim

Hero

Laurefindel

Legend

Reynard

Legend

Mirrorrorrim

Hero

CreamCloud0

One day, I hope to actually play DnD.

Mephista

Adventurer

Similar Threads