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

[CreamCloud0]

Arcane is Blue
Shadow is Purple

primal is green
divine is gold
demonic is red
bardic is...hmmm, white/silver i'd say.

 

[Yaarel]

For me, the "magical" colors are:

The mystical spectrum across emerald green, sky blue, and amethyst purple.

Watery white is pure compassion.

Fiery red is justice (sometimes ardent advocate sometimes judgmental destroyer).

Gold is hard-earned well-deserved power.

 

[James Gasik]

Sure. My point was mainly that you can't just translate "Inspiring word 2-3x/encounter" in 4e to "healing word 2-3x/short rest" in 5e, because the limiting factors on both are very different.

I can agree to that. It should, however, be capable of healing on par with a non-life cleric, or a bard or druid focusing on healing.

I mean, the whole point of the warlord is to make sure you don't need a cleric. It's fine though if they do their "healing" in a somewhat different manner, such as a steady stream of temporary hit points which prevent damage rather than heal it (though since THP are worse than actual healing, you should probably get more of them).


But sacred cows make for the tastiest hamburgers!


That's ridiculous. Arcane energy is pink. Purple, particularly veering on dark blue, is shadow magic.

It's actually Octarine

 

[James Gasik]

I was talking about where you said 1d6 damage with a 20 Dex and a +3 PB ..... that is a minimum of level 5.

Your claim was that was better than 3 from using something else not resistant or that kills regeneration. At higher level (where you have a +3 and a 20 in your main stat) that is true.

It's only a limit of level 5 if you don't use option 1 for character generation.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

This is actually pretty simple to change. I've shown the work. Components and effects that interact with magic and even damage types (though I didn't include those) are not exactly load bearing. This can be embedded into an alternative class feature pretty easily.

Let's take my Martial Exploits feature and see if we can fill out a 20th-level paladin's list of stuff that's not too magical:

• 2 5th-level spells, let's go circle of power and geas. Could hypothetically work in raise dead and/or summon celestial, (you are a commander of such skill angels are volunteering to join your campaign) too. But providing advice to nearby folks and giving unbreakable commands are very warlordcore. I'd like another option or two here, but we're doing OK.
• 3 4th-level slots. There's an abundance of possibility here, but let's go death ward and staggering smite. The latter is a little support-y while also adding to damage (but since we're using the Paladin, damage isn't really our main concern).
• 3 3rd-level slots. Let's do some good heals - aura of vitality for being able to speak a word as a bonus action to heal, and revivify for restoring consciousness. Another level where another spell or two could be useful.
• 3 2nd-level slots. Lesser Restoration for our battlefield medic, and let's say Zone of Truth, because being too scary to lie to is warlordcore.
• 4 1st-level slots. Bless, command, compelled duel, and heroism.

It might be nice to have an alternate class feature to Divine Smite that deals weapon damage instead of radiant damage, and it'd be cool if Lay on Hands maybe could work at range in a pinch (maybe by only doing half the healing or something), but my main point is that you can fluff enough spells as martial exploits that it's viable. Though a few extra spells wouldn't go amiss, there's no strict need to burn the edition down as a failure that cannot possibly deliver on this idea.

But if you don't like 5e in general, then it won't really work for you, because your problems aren't really with warlords, it's with design choices you don't like. (Which is valid! People are allowed to not like design choices! I just think if we want to talk about those choices, let's talk about those choices, not about the warlord as a proxy for those choices)

This is legitimately just a Paladin. You have not even tried to make it non-magical.

You even literally made it a summoner of angels, for God's sake. It's literally Angel Summoner!

 

[I'm A Banana]

This is legitimately just a Paladin. You have not even tried to make it non-magical.

You even literally made it a summoner of angels, for God's sake. It's literally Angel Summoner!

I wonder if you read the relevant bit upthread. You did read the bit about the alternative spellcasting mechanic?

Here it is again.

Martial Exploits
You know how to produce extraordinary effects that don't rely on magic. Though the effects mimic spells, you produce these wonders using your personal charm and training, not magic. For you, spells are called exploits, and instead of casting a spell, you use a martial exploit. Using a martial exploit follows all the rules for casting a spell, except as discussed below.

It's Not Magic
Martial exploits are not subject to effects that interfere with magic or spellcasting.

Required Components
You produce your exploit's effects through your own charismatic appeal and ability to command others. You must be able to speak when you use an exploit with this feature (meaning the exploit has a V component when you use it). Your exploits only require verbal components.

At-Will Powers (0-Level Exploits)
At 1st level, you know two at-will powers of your choice chosen from the warlord martial exploit list {this list includes warlordy spells}. At higher levels, you learn additional at-will powers of your choice, as shown in the At-Will Powers Known column of the Warlord table.

When you gain a level in this class, you can replace one of the at-will powers you know with another at-will power from the warlord exploit list.

Exploit Slots
The Warlord table shows how many exploit slots you have to use your warlord exploits of 1st level and higher. To use one of these martial exploits, you must expend a slot of the exploit's level or higher. You regain all expended exploit slots when you finish a long rest.

Knowing Exploits of 1st Level and Higher
You know two 1st-level exploits of your choice from the warlord exploit list.

The Exploits Known column of the Warlord table shows when you learn more warlord exploits of your choice. Each of these exploits must be of a level for which you have exploit slots. Additionally, when you gain levels in this class, you can choose one of the warlord exploits you know and replace it with another exploit from the warlord exploit list, which also must be of a level for which you have exploit slots.

Exploit Ability
Charisma is your martial exploit ability for your warlord exploits, since the power of your exploits relies on your ability to inspire and lead others. Your martial exploit ability functions as your spellcasting ability for your martial exploits. You use your Charisma whenever an exploit refers to your spellcasting ability. In addition, you use your Charisma modifier when setting the saving throw DC for a warlord exploit you use and when making an attack roll with one

Exploit Save DC = 8 + your proficiency bonus + your Charisma modifier
Exploit Attack Modifier = your proficiency bonus + your Charisma modifier

The idea is that it's pretty easy to make a martial character able to access a list of non-magical "spells." No more complicated than bards and artificers, really. If that's the issue, then that's solvable without a big lift. My assumption is that this is not the actual issue.

But you also seem to assume my position relies on summoning angels, so maybe you're not exactly acting in good faith here.

 

[Clint_L]

I agree that you can't just port the 4e Warlord, you need reinvent it through the 5e prism. I think, if the Warlord is to endure beyond 4th edition, it NEEDS to show it can be reinterpreted for a different rule systems. When I went through my various versions of the Warlord I realized I had to focus on what I wanted it to FEEL like to play the Warlord and not how it worked in previous incarnations. I hit on a system that focused on reactions to help allies (including extra reactions), a few core abilities you can actively do, handing out bonuses at initiative, being effective at helping with skill rolls, and then I added a couple ribbons to fluff up the class. I don't think it would play like a 4e Warlord, at all, but it should feel like a good support class.

There is indeed some options already in 5e, but they're not all in the same class. I actually tried not to copy any of them word for word.

I think that is a good approach to creating warlord as a 5e support class. "Support class" is a forbidden term in 5e, where every class is supposed to be able to function well autonomously, so I don't see that kind of a class ever being made official. However, for your own use that seems like a clever way of squaring the circle.

 

[Undrave]

I think that is a good approach to creating warlord as a 5e support class. "Support class" is a forbidden term in 5e, where every class is supposed to be able to function well autonomously, so I don't see that kind of a class ever being made official. However, for your own use that seems like a clever way of squaring the circle.

I wish Support Class wasn't verbotem...

 

[Mecheon]

Arcane is Blue
Shadow is Purple

Arcane can be blue or violet, but always lighter blues, closer to sky blue. The violets can also verge towards pink
Shadow is deep indigo, never really hitting the warmer shades
Druid magic is, of course, green.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

I wonder if you read the relevant bit upthread. You did read the bit about the alternative spellcasting mechanic?

Here it is again.

I didn't, no. It was in the jump between the first unread posts and recent posts.

This is literally just spellcasting, but with a "it's totally not spells! Everything else is identical but it's totally not spells you guys!" disclaimer. Like... it's there, verbatim. "It's Not Magic" is a word for word subheading. If I did not know better, I would think you were being sarcastic, because this is genuinely at the level of parody.

The idea is that it's pretty easy to make a martial character able to access a list of non-magical "spells." No more complicated than bards and artificers, really. If that's the issue, then that's solvable without a big lift. My assumption is that this is not the actual issue.

I'm not clear as to what "this" refers to in that last sentence.

Most spells are not acceptable things for a Warlord to do. This is not a particularly controversial opinion. I would even dare say it is one of the exceedingly few things that both Warlord haters and Warlord fans agree upon, given the whole "can shoot lightning from their arses" canard I'm sure you've seen someone use at some point.

Warlords (with the one exception, as I have noted, of an EK/AT-style subclass) should not be using magic. Period. It should be a genuinely distinct mechanic. At absolute most, some of the exploits (or whatever we call them) might be equivalent to certain healing spells, since that's a subsystem that doesn't really allow for a lot of variation, but if possible they should definitely still be distinct.

Taking literal, actual spells and just saying, and I quote, "It's Not Magic" is not acceptable. Edit: And something I just noticed. You phrase it as "access a list of nonmagical 'spells.'" But what you have actually proposed is a list of "nonmagical" spells. They are spells. You have made no effort to make them not spells. Your efforts have extended only so far as to insert a (again, genuinely humorous, almost parodic) "It's Not Magic" disclaimer and to find-replace all instances of "spell(s)" with "exploit(s)", "cast" with "use", etc. Well, that and explicitly saying that they are spells in the opening paragraph: "For you, spells are called exploits...."

But you also seem to assume my position relies on summoning angels, so maybe you're not exactly acting in good faith here.

I was simply using the low-hanging fruit, because it was there. I did not add summon celestial to the list. You did that. If you wanted people to not draw the conclusion that your proposed spellcaster masquerading as a Warlord could summon angels...perhaps it would have been better to not mention that they could summon angels. Angel Summoner and BMX bandit being such a popular example of the problems with how spellcasters are designed vis-à-vis martials, it seemed warranted to point out that you had made something so overtly magical, hilarious "It's Not Magic" disclaimer notwithstanding, others entirely outside the D&D sphere had already used it as a joke for overwhelming magical superpowers.

Spells that outright conjure something from the void are absolutely not thematically appropriate for a completely nonmagical class. They just aren't, and I struggle to take seriously the notion that you sincerely believe they are a fitting component of any proposal for a 5e Warlord.