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

[ECMO3]

Buuuut, D&D ain't exactly designed for solo stuff so I'm not sure if "Can this class function solo" is the best thing given I'm not sure all base classes would survive if we turned that lens on them

They all would survive, except like I said Bard, but the subclasses give even Bard an out.

5E is unique compared to other versions in that classes don't have a defined, locked in role. Some are inherently better than others at certain things but other than healing (which is uneccessary in 5E) every class can fill every role with the right build choices and generally do a good job at it.

 

[Mecheon]

5E is unique compared to other versions in that classes don't have a defined, locked in role. Some are inherently better than others at certain things but other than healing (which is uneccessary in 5E) every class can fill every role with the right build choices and generally do a good job at it.

Yeah I'ma just. Doubt that one significantly. I know Bladesinger is an uncannily good tank but, you can't draw a tank out of every class. Plus, with healer out? The only roles left are... DPS and tank, which, yeah, the other classes are doing, but not well

If we're using "Can't be a tank" to exclude classes then we'd be kicking the rogue out of the game and would only end up with Fighter, Cleric, Wizard (barely saved due to Bladesinger), Barbarian and, maybe Monk (and I know a lot of folks argue monks aren't pulling their weight on the damage dealing side so that's a maybe)

 

[Reynard]

By the way, as per usual, Laserllama -- a fantastic homebrewer on Patreon -- has created an amazing Warlord class for anyone that's interested in it. Find it, free, here. Maybe @Reynard should read it so he can be sold on the concept?

I will check it out. Thanks for the link!

 

[TwoSix]

Sometimes it feels like half-assing a point-buy system. And the synergy between certain classes (or lack thereof) is all over the place. Sometimes your get a Sorcadin and other times you try to make a sneaky Cleric and it falls flat.

If you want the system to lean into it then it should be treated as a core part of the game and not an optional rule.

I would agree with you.

"5e CAN do it" and "5e does it well" are two very distinct arguments.

 

[CreamCloud0]

Honestly I think there already exists most of the tools a warlord needs to exist in 5e, they’re just scattered across various classes, like, paladin auras, healing word, bardic inspiration, protection/interception fighting styles, an appropriate selection from the BM manoeuvres, there are feats that let you perform a pre-battle rousing speech or the help action at range or to multiple allies, hobgoblin also has a tweaked help action with extra effects like extra movement or temp HP,

All the pieces are there they just need to be fitted together appropriately in a single class designed for it.

 

[Reynard]

I feel like this thread has exposed the underlying problem that no one agrees what the Warlord is (class wise), let alone agrees how to implement that in the framework of 5E. Given that, it really isn't surprising WotC hasn't weighed in -- especially since many people STILL think WotC can't get something as well defined as the Ranger right.

 

[Minigiant]

I feel like this thread has exposed the underlying problem that no one agrees what the Warlord is (class wise), let alone agrees how to implement that in the framework of 5E. Given that, it really isn't surprising WotC hasn't weighed in -- especially since many people STILL think WotC can't get something as well defined as the Ranger right.

I don't see what you say.

I see people who agree with what a Warlord is and people who don't know what a Warlord is.

Almost every Warlord fan agrees on a scaling tier maneuver system of some type.

 

[Reynard]

I don't see what you say.

I see people who agree with what a Warlord is and people who don't know what a Warlord is.

Almost every Warlord fan agrees on a scaling tier maneuver system of some type.

That is absolutely not how it looks from the outside of this discussion between Warlord fans.

 

[Hexmage-EN]

I decided to try and brainstorm how to make the most Warlord-like Fighter using features in official 5E. The answer was basically to take the Banneret (that's right, not Battle Master) archetype and be in a long-running Dragonlance campaign that lets you be in multiple knightly orders at once.

• Background: Knight of Solamnia. Required for the feat chain.
• Class: Fighter.
• Feat: Squire of Solamnia. Needed for the feat chain.
• Archetype: Banneret.
  • Rallying Cry. When using Second Wind, allies within 60 feet regain hit points equal to your Fighter level.
• Feat: Knight of the Crown
  • Commanding Rally. As a bonus action, you can command one ally within 30 feet of yourself to make one weapon attack as a reaction. If the attack hits, the ally can roll a d8 and add the number rolled as a bonus to the attack's damage roll. You can use this bonus action a number of times equal to your proficiency bonus, and you regain all expended uses when you finish a long rest.
• Feat: Knight of the Rose.
  • Bolstering Rally. As a bonus action, you or an ally within 30 feet gain temporary hit points equal to 1d8 + your proficiency bonus + the ability modifier of the ability score increased by this feat (Constitution, Wisdom, or Charisma). You can use this bonus action a number of times equal to your proficiency bonus, and you regain all expended uses when you finish a long rest.
• Feat: Martial Adept.
  • Maneuvering Attack. When you hit a creature with a weapon attack, you can expend one superiority die to add the superiority die to the attack's damage roll, and you choose a ally. That ally can use its reaction to move up to half its speed without provoking opportunity attacks from the target of your attack.
  • Bait and Switch. When you're within 5 feet of a creature on your turn, you can expend one superiority die and switch places with that creature, provided you spend at least 5 feet of movement and the creature is willing and isn't incapacitated. This movement doesn't provoke opportunity attacks. Roll the superiority die. Until the start of your next turn, you or the other creature gains a bonus to AC equal to the number rolled.
• Banneret Feature: Inspiring Surge. When using Action Surge, choose one ally within 60 feet. That ally can make one melee or ranged weapon attack with its reaction.
• Magic Item: Sword of the Paruns (pretty please, DM?)
  • You gain a +1 bonus to attack and damage rolls made with this magic weapon. Additionally, once on each of your turns, you can use one of the following properties if you're holding the sword:
    • Immediately after you use the Attack action to attack with the sword, you can enable one creature within 60 feet of you to use its reaction to make one weapon attack.
    • Immediately after you take the Dash action, you can enable one creature within 60 feet of you to use its reaction to move up to its speed.
    • Immediately after you take the Dodge action, you can enable one creature within 60 feet of you to use its reaction to gain the benefits of the Dodge action.

It's a very specific build and with few decision points other than the exact order you take the feats in, but between these you get high AC along with the means to heal allies non-magically as well as let them attack and move out of turn.

I was a little bit surprised to find that Battle Master and its most Warlord-like options are actually trap options. You don't need Commander's Strike or Rally because you've already gotten superior versions from Knight of the Crown and Knight of the Rose. Commander's Strike is made obsolete by Crown's Commanding Rally, which lets you use only your Bonus Action instead of requiring both one of your attacks and your Bonus Action. Rose's Bolstering Rally lets you add your proficiency bonus whereas Rally does not, plus you can use Constitution instead of Charisma to avoid MAD. Martial Adept also only gives you a single d6 for your superiority die, whereas Crown and Rose have built-in d8's and let yiu use both a number of times equal to your proficiency modifier.

If the rule is really to only potentially introduce a new class with a new setting, I guess the boat was missed when a Warlord wasn't created for Dragonlance and instead we got this campaign setting-specific background and feat tree.

 

[Vaalingrade]

I feel like this thread has exposed the underlying problem that no one agrees what the Warlord is (class wise), let alone agrees how to implement that in the framework of 5E. Given that, it really isn't surprising WotC hasn't weighed in -- especially since many people STILL think WotC can't get something as well defined as the Ranger right.

Warlord had a number of builds, each of which has its fans.

4e builds were way more fluid than subclasses, so there's a lot of translation error and prioritization. There's no Warlord Overclass in 4e to make the base class out of for 5e's subclass system, so there's little understanding of what that is, not so much what the warlord is.