How to handle Warlord abilities in D&D Next

The handling of the Warlord in Next is obviously a controversial topic. On the one hand, you have 4e fans who feel generally slighted and ignored, and who have a great deal of affection for the Warlord class in particular for various reasons (think its fun to play, feel it fills a niche not handled well by other classes, etc.). On the other, you have people who object to it for various reasons, typically: they think it should be folded into the fighter, nonmagical healing bothers their sense of verisimilitude in some way, they think it is too inherently tied to the battle grid, or they believe it causes too much action bloat or slows down combat.

I personally fall somewhere between the two camps. 4e has been my system of choice for the last few years, and my favorite character in that time was an Eladrin Battle Captain I played from level 1 to level 24. I have a lot of affection for the warlord. I think its the best 4e class, I think it absolutely fills a niche that historically has not adequately filled by other classes (which I'll get to in a minute), its an archetype I very much want D&D to continue to explore. But I'm also sympathetic to those who feel that martial healing doesn't always "feel" right, and I can certainly sympathize with anyone who feels like 4e combat in later levels became a slog when it got too bogged down with fiddly bonuses and extra actions and whatnot--making sure that classes don't turn combat into a slog is definitely a valid concern IMO.

That said...I think there's a way to resolve this tension between those who really value what the Warlord brings to D&D, and those who have issues with the implementation of the archetype.

First, let me start off by delineating by what I love about the Warlord, and what I'm looking for D&D Next to explore (I touched on this in another thread, but its worth repeating for the point I want to make here):

The ability to play a "tactical genius" or "master strategist", and actually have significant mechanical support for that designation. The great thing about D&D is that it lets you take on roles and competencies that you don't actually possess in real life. You might be an awkward person most of that time, but play that high charisma bard and you can be the most charming guy around. The rules let you do that, you don't just have to "rp it out" and hope for the best with your DM. You might be weak, and you probably don't know magic, but you can play that badass fighter mage (although what exactly that's called has varied from edition to edition). The warlord is wish fulfillment for people like me who like the idea of getting to play the master tactician, without requiring that we actually be master tacticians (cause as anyone who's played chess against me could tell you, I'm no strategic genius). Maybe other people have just played D&D very differently than I have, but in my games in any edition fighters have rarely received much in the way of mechanical support for tactical brilliance. In some earlier editions they eventually got the followers and castle, but that isn't at all the same thing as rules support for the strategic mastermind archetype. I don't see Warlords taking away anything from Fighters, because frankly they let me play out one of my favorite archetypes in a way that no version of the fighter class has.

The ability to actively employ that tactical brilliance in combat. Passive bonuses and the like are fine as far as they go, but they don't give the player anything additional to do in a fight--or at least, not in a way that reinforces the archetype. The fun thing about the Warlord is he has all these little "aha, but I actually have this brilliant tactical trick up my sleeve", and the mechanics give you some mechanical tricks to employ. Using them intelligently still helps, of course, but as a player you aren't just expected to be this genius who's constantly inventing brilliant strategies in order to play one in the game, there is mechanical support for when you "want a plan to come together"/Hannibal. It gives you something to do as a player, beyond going "I"m attacking like a fighter, but with a passive aura!"

The ability to neatly slot into and effectively contribute to a small party. To me (and others may disagree, this is just my imo), the important thing about Warlords' having healing ability in 4e wasn't that "tactical geniuses with healing go together like PB and J", it was that D&D parties tend not to have a ton of people, so there are always tradeoffs when bringing classes along--if you've got 4 players, and someone wants to play a warlord, that means someone isn't playing one of the core 4 or some equivalent. If the Warlord can't fill in for the cleric, then that means swap him for the fighter (which can be counderproductive or gimp the warlord's ability to actually do warlordy things, since warlords tend to do best when they have fighters to support), or do without a rogue or wizard, which can really screw you. Hoiwever...if the Warlord can't "true heal", but could inspire temps and defense bonuses balanced to be on par with decent amount of healing, I'd frankly be fine with that, so long as the ultimate result is a character that you can play in a small party without creating headaches.

So, for me at least, any D&D Next implementation of the Warlord class absolutely must deliver on these points. However, what I'd also like to see is an effort made to satisfy some of the objections to the class, namely:

Create some distinction between Warlord healing and Cleric healing, ideally in a way that helps preserve versimilitude for those who believe HP should have a meaningful physical component. A warlord who can't keep a party on their feet can easily have problems finding a place in a lot of D&D parties, as I outlined above. However, that doesn't necessarily mean that warlord "healing" has to be identical to Cleric magic. There have been numerous games that have successfully balanced damage mitigation and avoidance against true healing, such that two different "support" characters can be effective, but in different ways. If a Warlord could give out temp HPs for example, that could simulate getting people more amped up and ready to fight on through anything (and, unlike actual healing, it can be used preemptively rather than reactively--the big speech that inspires everyone before the battle, for example. which fits better with the Warlord as strategic leader more than reactive medic). But if characters do take true damage once the adreneline surge from the speech wears off (i.e. temps have been worn down), that would still require magic or rest to heal--someone down to their last few HP could be temporarily induced to keep fighting (i.e.give them a bunch of Temps), but after the fights over and the adrenaline wears off, they're worn out and ready to fall over. There are other ways Warlords can "buff defenses" without doing anything to infringe on suspension of disbelief. For example, a perfectly timed "Get Down!" or "Snap out of it!" could be used to give a bonus or advantage to an ally's saving throw or AC. If balanced properly, I absolutely believe you could end up with a character whose support abilities end up being as effective as those of a Cleric, but without directly imitating Cleric healing. Now, obviously balancing these mechanics isn't as simple as just saying "Inspiring Word and CLW are the same", but I think it'd be worth taking the time, because it could be very helpful in reconciling what some people really want in the Warlord class with what some people really don't.

Avoid action bloat, lots of fiddly bonuses, and a reliance on the grid. A warlord who slows down play or forces groups to play with a grid hurts everyone's fun--luckily, there's no reason either of these have to occur with a well designed class. The three components to this have pretty straightforward solutions:

To avoid action bloat, simply require action "tradeoffs" such that the overall number of actions being taken remains the same. For example, if a Warlord gets a manuever that lets an ally move, require that the Warlord give up their own movement. If the Warlord gives out a "bonus" attack to an ally, make that attack require either the Warlord's standard action, or the ally's Opportunity attack. Now, to make these tradeoffs worthwhile you can give bonuses--for example, the Warlord forgoes his attack to give an ally an attack that adds the Warlord's Int bonus to damage (sound familiar?). After all, the intent of this sort of design is not to "gimp" the Warlord, but simply to keep play moving quickly by cutting down on extra actions. "Give up action x, in order to give an ally a similar sort of action but with a buff" is a good way to do that.

To avoid lots of fiddly bonuses, endeavor to make the warlord's buffs resolve immediately. "Give up your move, an ally within 50 ft. can move their speed+20 ft." Doesn't require any tracking beyond the resolution of that action. "Give up your move, an ally within 50 ft can move their speed, and gains +1 to AC and +20 ft. to movement until the end of your next turn is the sort of stuff that requires additional tracking--not that its too complicated in of itself, but problems set in when there are a ton of little buffs with different durations like this, so IMO they should be avoided whenever possible. The rule of thumb is if the Warlord lets someone do something cool, try to fold as much of that into one easily resolved action rather than ongoing bonuses.

To avoid relying on the grid, just avoid powers that rely too much on the grid. A simple rule of thumb is that if you're letting allies do better versions of stuff they already do, the game shouldn't suffer at all. "An ally within 50 ft. can make an attack" doesn't need a grid (unless you think the simple 50 ft. designation necessitates one, in which case any nonmelee class makes a grid mandatory, which I don't believe). "An ally within 50 ft. can move their speed." Doesn't need a grid. "As long as the party can hear you, they gain advantage on Initiative rolls" Doesn't need a grid. Nothing about the Warlord concept makes a grid mandatory, so long as you design with that goal in mind.


So, putting it all together, what might some of these hypothetical Warlord abilities look like? I like the idea of giving Warlords their own dice mechanic in the way that other martial characters/nonspellcasters get stuff like manuever or skill dice. Call them "tactical dice". I'd like to see a Warlord with a suite of abilities that looks something like:

Plan of Action
The Warlord spends at least one extended rest with his allies, during which he goes over plans and strategy.
All allies gain advantage on Initiative rolls, so long as they can hear the warlord.

Commander's Strike
As a standard action, give an ally within 50" who can hear you a free attack. They add your tactical dice to their damage role

Create Opening
Make an attack and spend a tactical dice to give an ally a melee opportunity attack against your target (ally must be within melee range). For each additional dice you spend, an additional ally may make a melee opportunity attack against your target, provided each additional ally is within melee range.

Spur Onward
Give up your move action, an ally within 50" who can hear you can move their speed.

Motivate the Troops
Once per day, you can spend 5 minutes giving an inspirational speech. Allies gain temp HP equal to the maximum result of your tactical dice. These last until destroyed by damage, or until the party takes an extended rest.

Tactician's Warning
Give up your opportunity attack, add your tactical dice to an ally's AC or saving throw.

Inspiring Word
As a standard action, give an ally within 50" who can hear you Temp HP equal to your Tactical Dice. These last for the next 5 minutes.

Voila. None of these require a grid. None of them add to action bloat, or involve tracking lots of fiddly bonuses. There are interesting tradeoffs with the Warlord "healing" vs Cleric healing--warlords get more of it (since dice are at-will), and via their "Motivate Troops" ability they can use it preemptively. They can also, via their "warning" manuever help allies avoid getting hit or tagged with spells in the first place. On the other hand, restoring true HP damage remains the province of the Cleric. The dice mechanic presents interesting tactical considerations (do I hang back to use inspiring word and commander's strike? or should I close the distance to give my allies opportunity attacks? should I spend my dice now on offense, or save them in case I need to help an ally with a save?), without requiring lots of finnicky positioning.

Now, there's one final thing I want to address, the "Warlord is just a Fighter" point.

As I said earlier, no version of the fighter class has ever provided mechanical support for tactical brilliance. Depending on edition they might get followers and a castle, but that is entirely different from the game giving them tools to let players play the "brilliant strategic mastermind" even if the player is not themselves the second coming of Bobby Fischer.

However, if WotC felt like this is something the fighter should get, I wouldn't have an objection to that. (I think the fighter's sole schtick being "guy who hits things hard" is sort of crummy anyway)..with one critical caveat. Namely, that in giving these tactical and support to the fighter, they not be watered down at all. If the designers want the fighter to be able to replicate the warlord, then it should replicate the warlord. It shouldn't be a minor, secondary watered down role to supplement him being a beatstick--if the fighter as warlord can not hang back and deliver orders and play purely as an ally support if he wants and still be effective, then the class has failed to deliver what I and many people want from the warlord.

In other words, if the designers say

"You know what, fighters just being the dudes who are skilled in personal combat (but not as angry as barbarians) is sort of a lame and limited schtick. We're letting them keep all the manuevers they already have to let them be good at that for people who prefer that, but we're also giving them an entire set of tactical manuevers to reflect their mastery of all levels of war. That means defensive buffs and "healing" (whether temp HPs or true healing), manuevers to give allies additional mobility or attacks, etc. Whether your fighter is on the front lines keeping the orcs away from the back line, or he is the back line, calling out orders to keep the party functioning like a well oiled machine, he can do all that and be effective. You aren't gimping yourself if you play your fighter like a warlord, because he gets to do all the awesome stuff warlords do."

Then I'm ok with that.

However, if they say

"We see warlord as sort of a weak schtick for a class, so we're making it a theme fighters or anyone else can take. Because its just a theme supplementing other class abilities, we're watering it down to one or two fairly weak manuevers, stripping out the abilities that put the warlord on par with other support classes."

Then I am very much NOT ok with that.

I find myself being pulled into these warlord threads even though I promised myself I wouldn't.


I guess I'm trying to get my head around what it is folks want out of the class. Thanks for this post and I'm glad I read it because you're right, the game should accomodate characters like this.


I'm not convinced we need a dedicated character class to do it, but these things deserve a place and it should certainly be one of the builds possible in the game. I actually think that if some or all classes got something like this, we could actually see some really interesting variations and a broader range of strategic thinking. A wizard that's taken the "warlord" tradition would do things that are totally different from the paladin that took their "warlord" vow and again different from a fighter that took the same.


A wizard that's taken the "warlord" tradition would do things that are totally different from the paladin that took their "warlord" vow and again different from a fighter that took the same.




In this case, what's wrong with having the class, then a kind of "Class-Lite" speciality that lets other classes dabble in the class a bit without needing to multiclass, but at the cost of feats instead.

This could be good to do for other classes as well. 
Forgive me if this is a little off topic.  I think this is a well organized essay on the warlord abilities.  After seeing the pictures of warlords threads recently posted, I keep wondering how a term like "support class" is attached to the warlord.  I don't see the heroic leader pictures fitting the mechanics of a support class in D&D.  Or maybe, I don't see the mechanical aspect of the warlord class fitting the player's fantasy of the cinematic protaganist. 

I guess I don't mind to see a class mechanic that supports a player's character concept, but I really want to get away from any class being defined as a supporting role.

"The Apollo moon landing is off topic for this thread and this forum. Let's get back on topic." Crazy Monkey


A wizard that's taken the "warlord" tradition would do things that are totally different from the paladin that took their "warlord" vow and again different from a fighter that took the same.




In this case, what's wrong with having the class, then a kind of "Class-Lite" speciality that lets other classes dabble in the class a bit without needing to multiclass, but at the cost of feats instead.

This could be good to do for other classes as well. 



sounds like what they had planned for multiclassing anyway... yes it does indeed.
  Creative Character Build Collection and The Magic of King's and Heros  also Can Martial Characters Fly? 

Improvisation in 4e: Fave 4E Improvisations - also Wrecans Guides to improvisation beyond page 42
The Non-combatant Adventurer (aka Princess build Warlord or LazyLord)
Reality is unrealistic - and even monkeys protest unfairness
Reflavoring the Fighter : The Wizard : The Swordmage - Creative Character Collection: Bloodwright (Darksun Character) 

At full hit points and still wounded to incapacitation? you are playing 1e.
By virtue of being a player your characters are the protagonists in a heroic fantasy game even at level one
"Wizards and Warriors need abilities with explicit effects for opposite reasons. With the wizard its because you need to create artificial limits on them, they have no natural ones and for the Warrior you need to grant permission to do awesome."

 

A wizard that's taken the "warlord" tradition would do things that are totally different from the paladin that took their "warlord" vow and again different from a fighter that took the same.

In this case, what's wrong with having the class, then a kind of "Class-Lite" speciality that lets other classes dabble in the class a bit without needing to multiclass, but at the cost of feats instead.


This could be good to do for other classes as well. 


Never said that couldn't work either. I'm just not convinced it's necessary. Whether something's necessary is in no way the only rubric to hold a class against.

If they put the warlord in because "they like it" that's fine.

Forgive me if this is a little off topic.  I think this is a well organized essay on the warlord abilities.  After seeing the pictures of warlords threads recently posted, I keep wondering how a term like "support class" is attached to the warlord.  I don't see the heroic leader pictures fitting the mechanics of a support class in D&D.  Or maybe, I don't see the mechanical aspect of the warlord class fitting the player's fantasy of the cinematic protaganist. 

I guess I don't mind to see a class mechanic that supports a player's character concept, but I really want to get away from any class being defined as a supporting role.



"Support class" to my mind just means any class whose abilities are primarily oriented around improving or helping their allies, rather than doing most of their awesome stuff on their own (the way a rogue does). If a class is going to be first and foremost a "master strategist" rather than a frontline combatant, "support" abilities make sense--you don't want a character that just runs in and does it all themselves, you want a guy who can figure out how the entire team can function more effectively. I don't see "support" is pejorative or a bad thing--the 4e Warlord is very much a support class, but if built well he supports so well he can be the star of the show. Thats not to say he's helpless on his own, just that what he really excels at it issuing commands that help his allies achieve better outcomes.
A wizard that's taken the "warlord" tradition would do things that are totally different from the paladin that took their "warlord" vow and again different from a fighter that took the same.

In this case, what's wrong with having the class, then a kind of "Class-Lite" speciality that lets other classes dabble in the class a bit without needing to multiclass, but at the cost of feats instead.


This could be good to do for other classes as well. 


Never said that couldn't work either. I'm just not convinced it's necessary. Whether something's necessary is in no way the only rubric to hold a class against.

If they put the warlord in because "they like it" that's fine.




Because in 4e they were different enough from a FIghter and had enough unique class features and abiltiies that it should be a class as well in 5e.

I would honstly love anyone to tell me they played both a Fighter and a Warlord in 4e and noticed zero difference.


I guess I don't mind to see a class mechanic that supports a player's character concept, but I really want to get away from any class being defined as a supporting role.



There are different kinds of supporting roles .. in movies it means you arent a central character in this case the Warlord makes the whole team go boom (they make teh party and battle faster not slower not sure how anyone got that impression) and they supporting from dead center in the middle of the action. Its been commented that you could optimize a warlord to the point they probably were over powered ie there impact on the party capability was disporportionate but they did so in a way that doesnt make the other players feel left out.

Real Leaders in history talk about serving there people there role is support, but they do so from the top and front. The Warlord in some sense manages to captures the round table of king arthur... where arguably Lancelot and Gawaine are Arthurs superior with a weapon.

A lazylord is a variant which is fully dependent on the party ... its interesting but very much an aquired taste and why I easily see it being a back door character build.
  Creative Character Build Collection and The Magic of King's and Heros  also Can Martial Characters Fly? 

Improvisation in 4e: Fave 4E Improvisations - also Wrecans Guides to improvisation beyond page 42
The Non-combatant Adventurer (aka Princess build Warlord or LazyLord)
Reality is unrealistic - and even monkeys protest unfairness
Reflavoring the Fighter : The Wizard : The Swordmage - Creative Character Collection: Bloodwright (Darksun Character) 

At full hit points and still wounded to incapacitation? you are playing 1e.
By virtue of being a player your characters are the protagonists in a heroic fantasy game even at level one
"Wizards and Warriors need abilities with explicit effects for opposite reasons. With the wizard its because you need to create artificial limits on them, they have no natural ones and for the Warrior you need to grant permission to do awesome."

 

Because in 4e they were different enough from a FIghter and had enough unique class features and abiltiies that it should be a class as well in 5e.

I would honstly love anyone to tell me they played both a Fighter and a Warlord in 4e and noticed zero difference.

Forgive me if I misunderstand but I struggle to see your objectives with this exchange. I've all ready said they don't need a reason to include it at all and they can just go ahead and that's fine, so what's the deal?

In 4E the Warlord had a significant support role.  That much is clear.  IMO it was very much so a product of 4E's core rules. 

One of the assumptions I am making is the closed playtesting has taken a 5E Warlord for a ride using a very basic rules set that has removed several of 4E's components.  And from what I understand, a case for the fighter absorbing the warlord has been made.  The validity of that remains to be playtested at my table.

I have to say, I am somewhat eager to be able to take any class and, with that class, walk a warlord's path on occasion.  As I work on making a homebrew warlord, I have to keep that in mind, as I outline key abilities of a class and try to create classes that are not too similar in their mechanics.

"The Apollo moon landing is off topic for this thread and this forum. Let's get back on topic." Crazy Monkey

Warlord commands:

as a part of your action you may spend 1 point to commnd an ally to move (donat more points to move more allies)

as part of your action you may spend 1 point to command an ally to, as a reaction, make an attack (donate more points to have mor allies attack)

when you hit with an attack you can spend 1 point to cause an enemy to grant advantage on the next attack against it, have disadvantage on its next save, or have disadvantage on its next attack (donate more points to have more of the effects go off)

as a reaction to an ally being attacked, needing to make a save, or needing to roll initiative you may spend 1 point to grant that ally advantage on their check, or they grant disadvantage to the attacker (I like resist options in here as well if they fail the save or still get hit they have resist) (more points to include more people in the reaction, just incase your team gets fireballed)

As an action you can spend 2 points to command an ally to, as a reaction, take an action (donate more points to allow more people to take an action 2 points per added character)


I think that covers a bulk of warlord capability.

there's other bits and bobbles that need to be added.  I like the idea of a bonus to knowledge checks for sizing up enemies I think knowledge warfare is a requirement of this guy as well.  Literally knowledge warfare becomes a skill tax for this character if he isn't given it by default.  Though I am down for making it a part of a choice pool Knowledge warfare, knowledge history, knowledge heraldry, or persuaision. However these "Powers" really target the stuff the warlord really needs to do round to round in combat. 

OK so this is a good base. Rather than go down the road of moaning about the warlord's place (the OP establishes that), I'd love to see how we can do this ourselves given what we know at the time of this writing:



  • There's probably not going to be a warlord class

  • The fighter is a prime candidate for picking up some of the warlord's stuff

  • The bard is the other likely recipient of the warlord's stuff


OK so how should this work? I'm leaning toward class schemes rather than feats. The feats can have the watered down versions for everyone.

The handling of the Warlord in Next is obviously a controversial topic. On the one hand, you have 4e fans who feel generally slighted and ignored, and who have a great deal of affection for the Warlord class in particular for various reasons (think its fun to play, feel it fills a niche not handled well by other classes, etc.).

There is another problem.  The developers seem to be having trouble using Next to create a Warlord.  They are also still struggling to get the Fighter right.  This points to a deep deficiency in Next, itself.  Overcoming whatever that deficiency is would make Next a better game.

On the other, you have people who object to it for various reasons, typically: they think it should be folded into the fighter, nonmagical healing bothers their sense of verisimilitude in some way, they think it is too inherently tied to the battle grid, or they believe it causes too much action bloat or slows down combat.

Or they simply harbor a deep prejudice against 4e and don't want any reminders that 4e ever existed.  They want to stick it to fans of 4e out of sheer spite.  In no way does including a great class like the Warlord hurt the game.  Does who dislike it for legitimate reasons will be content to simply not play it themselves or not include it in campaigns they run.  The only reason to demand it be purged or bowdlerized is spite, and that is entirely contrary to the inclusive spirit in which Next was conceived.


The ability to neatly slot into and effectively contribute to a small party. 
To me (and others may disagree, this is just my imo), the important thing about Warlords' having healing ability in 4e wasn't that "tactical geniuses with healing go together like PB and J", it was that D&D parties tend not to have a ton of people, so there are always tradeoffs when bringing classes along--if you've got 4 players, and someone wants to play a warlord, that means someone isn't playing one of the core 4 or some equivalent.
In other words, any new class has to be able to stand in for one of the "core four."  Classes need to be grouped into 4 roles.  How about that?  Tactics are a big part of the warlord's appeal, but the Tactical build was only one of six.  Inspiring was the other build first presented, and restoring hit points definitely fits.  Calling "healing" might be what triggered the controversey over "martial healing," but with 4e using keywords for everything, there needed to be a keyword for "restores hit points."

if the Warlord can't "true heal", but could inspire temps and defense bonuses balanced to be on par with decent amount of healing, I'd frankly be fine with that, so long as the ultimate result is a character that you can play in a small party without creating headaches.

Temporary hit points and other forms of "damage mitigation" cannot replace actually restoring hit points.  The player of the warlord would have to be infallible to do so.  The Warlord, if he is to be a contributing member of a party, and not just a luxury class practical only after you have a Fighter, Wizard, Rogue, and most importantly, Cleric, must be able to restore hit points.

Inspiration makes sense for restoring hit points.  A wounded character is, of course, demoralized and shaken.  Inspiration gets him back in the fight.  Bestoring hit points is how the game handles that, but it doesn't need to be visualized by anyone at the table as closing wounds to do so.


- Warlords! Join the 'Officer Country' Group! Join Grognards for 4e, the D&D that changed D&D.


D&D Home Page - What Class Are You? - Build A Character - D&D Compendium

I'd love to see how we can do this ourselves given what we know at the time of this writing:

  • There's probably not going to be a warlord class

  • The fighter is a prime candidate for picking up some of the warlord's stuff

  • The bard is the other likely recipient of the warlord's stuff


OK so how should this work?


Given that, Next fails in its goal of including the fans of all editions.  
Minimum necessary for Next to include the 4e D&D experience with regard to the Warlord:


  • There must be a Warlord class in the Core game at release

  • The Warlord must have meaningful tactical options in combat that make an infrequent, but dramatic difference, whether a "tactical module" is in use or not.  That would mean encounter or daily exploits, or abilities with some sort of "set up" or that are very specific to certain tactical situations.  At-will abilities fail for this purpose, though, obviously, the Warlord will be able to swing his sword at-will. 

  • The Warlord must be able to restore hit points to wounded and, most critically, to dropped allies.


There is no point in trying to "compromise" with those who hate the Warlord, they're still going to hate it, just like there are those who hate Vancian casting.  Next is supposed to be inclusive, it will have things that any given fan won't like, so that it can have everything that each fan needs.  We just aren't required to use the parts we don't like.


- Warlords! Join the 'Officer Country' Group! Join Grognards for 4e, the D&D that changed D&D.


D&D Home Page - What Class Are You? - Build A Character - D&D Compendium

That's very well presented. and the options are all unique and reasonably balanced.  But i'm an optimizer, so i'm gunna nit-pick.

Commander's Strike doesn't needs bonus damage, since martial damage is per turn, there's no need to buff it further.  Giving an attack where needed, or with the biggest hitter, is reward enough.

Create an opening should not let muliple allies attack.  Again, everyone is doing full damage, so that's a bit much.

You should probably have a cap on how many times you can inspire someone.

Motivational THP should not stack.  Though it could stack with other kinds (shield spells and such).

Tactician's Warning should work off damage (see Protect).  You don't want a scaling bonus to d20 rolls.  (either that or tactical dice don't scale, and can't be used for damage).

It's just "action", not "standard action"

I also feel Int and Cha need to be represented somewhere.  (Motivate Cha times per day?  Minimum roll of Int on your tactical dice?)



And a few more ideas.

Something to prevent oppertunity attacks.
Reorient the Axis
As an action, each ally within 50' who are apart of your plan of action can immidiatly move 5' per Int.  They do not provoke oppertunity attacks.

And while i agree that warlords should not have "true" healing, they should be able to get a downed ally back on his feat long enought of finish the fight, or flee.
Fight On
As an action, you can wake and stand up one adjacent dying ally.  They gain temporary hit points equal to your tactical dice, and can stay concious as long as it lasts (maximum Cha minutes).  They still must make death saves as usual.  If they took an action, they make it with disavantage.  The ally must be healed before you can do this again.

guides
List of no-action attacks.
Dynamic vs Static Bonuses
Phalanx tactics and builds
Crivens! A Pictsies Guide Good
Power
s to intentionally miss with
Mr. Cellophane: How to be unnoticed
Way's to fire around corners
Crits: what their really worth
Retroactive bonus vs Static bonus.
Runepriest handbook & discussion thread
Holy Symbols to hang around your neck
Ways to Gain or Downgrade Actions
List of bonuses to saving throws
The Ghost with the Most (revenant handbook)
my builds
F-111 Interdictor Long (200+ squares) distance ally teleporter. With some warlord stuff. Broken in a plot way, not a power way.

Thought Switch Higher level build that grants upto 14 attacks on turn 1. If your allies play along, it's broken.

Elven Critters Crit op with crit generation. 5 of these will end anything. Broken.

King Fisher Optimized net user.  Moderate.

Boominator Fun catch-22 booming blade build with either strong or completely broken damage depending on your reading.

Very Distracting Warlock Lot's of dazing and major penalties to hit. Overpowered.

Pocket Protector Pixie Stealth Knight. Maximizing the defender's aura by being in an ally's/enemy's square.

Yakuza NinjIntimiAdin: Perma-stealth Striker that offers a little protection for ally's, and can intimidate bloodied enemies. Very Strong.

Chargeburgler with cheese Ranged attacks at the end of a charge along with perma-stealth. Solid, could be overpowered if tweaked.

Void Defender Defends giving a penalty to hit anyone but him, then removing himself from play. Can get somewhat broken in epic.

Scry and Die Attacking from around corners, while staying hidden. Moderate to broken, depending on the situation.

Skimisher Fly in, attack, and fly away. Also prevents enemies from coming close. Moderate to Broken depending on the enemy, but shouldn't make the game un-fun, as the rest of your team is at risk, and you have enough weaknesses.

Indestructible Simply won't die, even if you sleep though combat.  One of THE most abusive character in 4e.

Sir Robin (Bravely Charge Away) He automatically slows and pushes an enemy (5 squares), while charging away. Hard to rate it's power level, since it's terrain dependent.

Death's Gatekeeper A fun twist on a healic, making your party "unkillable". Overpowered to Broken, but shouldn't actually make the game un-fun, just TPK proof.

Death's Gatekeeper mk2, (Stealth Edition) Make your party "unkillable", and you hidden, while doing solid damage. Stronger then the above, but also easier for a DM to shut down. Broken, until your DM get's enough of it.

Domination and Death Dominate everything then kill them quickly. Only works @ 30, but is broken multiple ways.

Battlemind Mc Prone-Daze Protecting your allies by keeping enemies away. Quite powerful.

The Retaliator Getting hit deals more damage to the enemy then you receive yourself, and you can take plenty of hits. Heavy item dependency, Broken.

Dead Kobold Transit Teleports 98 squares a turn, and can bring someone along for the ride. Not fully built, so i can't judge the power.

Psilent Guardian Protect your allies, while being invisible. Overpowered, possibly broken.

Rune of Vengance Do lot's of damage while boosting your teams. Strong to slightly overpowered.

Charedent BarrageA charging ardent. Fine in a normal team, overpowered if there are 2 together, and easily broken in teams of 5.

Super Knight A tough, sticky, high damage knight. Strong.

Super Duper Knight Basically the same as super knight with items, making it far more broken.

Mora, the unkillable avenger Solid damage, while being neigh indestuctable. Overpowered, but not broken.

Swordburst Maximus At-Will Close Burst 3 that slide and prones. Protects allies with off actions. Strong, possibly over powered with the right party.

Or they simply harbor a deep prejudice against 4e and don't want any reminders that 4e ever existed.  

I sincerly doupt this.

Granted, they may not be the biggest 4e fans.  And 4e may even be the last edition they cater too,  but they very well know it exists an will very much want to get as many people possible to buy their new edition.

Even if they do rename surges to hit-dice, warlord to marshal, and "standard action" to "action".

guides
List of no-action attacks.
Dynamic vs Static Bonuses
Phalanx tactics and builds
Crivens! A Pictsies Guide Good
Power
s to intentionally miss with
Mr. Cellophane: How to be unnoticed
Way's to fire around corners
Crits: what their really worth
Retroactive bonus vs Static bonus.
Runepriest handbook & discussion thread
Holy Symbols to hang around your neck
Ways to Gain or Downgrade Actions
List of bonuses to saving throws
The Ghost with the Most (revenant handbook)
my builds
F-111 Interdictor Long (200+ squares) distance ally teleporter. With some warlord stuff. Broken in a plot way, not a power way.

Thought Switch Higher level build that grants upto 14 attacks on turn 1. If your allies play along, it's broken.

Elven Critters Crit op with crit generation. 5 of these will end anything. Broken.

King Fisher Optimized net user.  Moderate.

Boominator Fun catch-22 booming blade build with either strong or completely broken damage depending on your reading.

Very Distracting Warlock Lot's of dazing and major penalties to hit. Overpowered.

Pocket Protector Pixie Stealth Knight. Maximizing the defender's aura by being in an ally's/enemy's square.

Yakuza NinjIntimiAdin: Perma-stealth Striker that offers a little protection for ally's, and can intimidate bloodied enemies. Very Strong.

Chargeburgler with cheese Ranged attacks at the end of a charge along with perma-stealth. Solid, could be overpowered if tweaked.

Void Defender Defends giving a penalty to hit anyone but him, then removing himself from play. Can get somewhat broken in epic.

Scry and Die Attacking from around corners, while staying hidden. Moderate to broken, depending on the situation.

Skimisher Fly in, attack, and fly away. Also prevents enemies from coming close. Moderate to Broken depending on the enemy, but shouldn't make the game un-fun, as the rest of your team is at risk, and you have enough weaknesses.

Indestructible Simply won't die, even if you sleep though combat.  One of THE most abusive character in 4e.

Sir Robin (Bravely Charge Away) He automatically slows and pushes an enemy (5 squares), while charging away. Hard to rate it's power level, since it's terrain dependent.

Death's Gatekeeper A fun twist on a healic, making your party "unkillable". Overpowered to Broken, but shouldn't actually make the game un-fun, just TPK proof.

Death's Gatekeeper mk2, (Stealth Edition) Make your party "unkillable", and you hidden, while doing solid damage. Stronger then the above, but also easier for a DM to shut down. Broken, until your DM get's enough of it.

Domination and Death Dominate everything then kill them quickly. Only works @ 30, but is broken multiple ways.

Battlemind Mc Prone-Daze Protecting your allies by keeping enemies away. Quite powerful.

The Retaliator Getting hit deals more damage to the enemy then you receive yourself, and you can take plenty of hits. Heavy item dependency, Broken.

Dead Kobold Transit Teleports 98 squares a turn, and can bring someone along for the ride. Not fully built, so i can't judge the power.

Psilent Guardian Protect your allies, while being invisible. Overpowered, possibly broken.

Rune of Vengance Do lot's of damage while boosting your teams. Strong to slightly overpowered.

Charedent BarrageA charging ardent. Fine in a normal team, overpowered if there are 2 together, and easily broken in teams of 5.

Super Knight A tough, sticky, high damage knight. Strong.

Super Duper Knight Basically the same as super knight with items, making it far more broken.

Mora, the unkillable avenger Solid damage, while being neigh indestuctable. Overpowered, but not broken.

Swordburst Maximus At-Will Close Burst 3 that slide and prones. Protects allies with off actions. Strong, possibly over powered with the right party.

Temporary hit points and other forms of "damage mitigation" cannot replace actually restoring hit points.  The player of the warlord would have to be infallible to do so.  The Warlord, if he is to be a contributing member of a party, and not just a luxury class practical only after you have a Fighter, Wizard, Rogue, and most importantly, Cleric, must be able to restore hit points.


I disagree.

Thought experiment: Say there was a Warlord class who had the ability to starting at level 1, at will, give any ally they could see 100 temp HP and a +5 bonus to AC and all saves that would last until the end of the day. This class wouldn't have any "true healing" ala the Cleric, but would be CLEARLY superior by a massive margin to any lvl 1 Cleric when it comes to improving party survivability. "Mitigation", in this case, would be a hugely better option tha true healing. Far from asking whether the Warlord was an adequate replacement for the Cleric, we'd be asking if the Cleric was an adequate replacement for the Warlord (the answer would be no).

Another thought experiment: Say there was a Warlord who had the ability to give 1d6 temps twice per day that last for five minutes. This class would be a wholly inadequate replacement for the Cleric, being pretty much strictly inferior.

Presumably, somewhere between these two extremes of "OMG so much mitigation it blows the Cleric out of the water and breaks the game" and "such feeble mitigation that the Warlord in no way substitutes for a Cleric" there is a happy middle ground, where Warlords get an impressive amount of mitigation that really does enhance party survivability on a level commensurate with that of a "true" healer, but not so much they simply break the game.

I'm not saying its as easy as balancing two abilities that are basically identical in function, but I'm not at all convinced its impossible either. I believe that there is a proper amount of mitigation, available at a proper frequency, that will on average allow a party to keep going just as well as classes that straight up heal, just in a different way. Obviously, there would be some scenarios in which one or the other might thrive slightly more, but for most scenarios the ultimate ability of the party to keep pushing after fights would be equal. And in some cases, the Warlord would be superior--for example, if Temps are at-will and last a decent while (but don't stack, obviously), then they can be easily given to everyone in the party...meaning if the party walks into a trap or an aoe ambush, the Cleric might be able to reactively heal one or two party members (assuming they don't die), but the Warlord can ensure they don't die in the first place, and his buffs protect the entire party. The Cleric might leave you with a Fighter and Cleric back near full, but a Rogue who's still in bad shape and a Wizard who plain didn't survive the trap going off. The Warlord leaves you with a full party, with everyone having taken a bit of damage (but not too much since the temps ate most of it), and then he can reapply a new temp buffer. Of course, that's just one scenario, but strictly stating "mitigation is always worse than healing" regardless of numbers involved or frequency just isn't accurate imo.

That's very well presented. and the options are all unique and reasonably balanced.  But i'm an optimizer, so i'm gunna nit-pick.

Commander's Strike doesn't needs bonus damage, since martial damage is per turn, there's no need to buff it further.  Giving an attack where needed, or with the biggest hitter, is reward enough.

Create an opening should not let muliple allies attack.  Again, everyone is doing full damage, so that's a bit much.

You should probably have a cap on how many times you can inspire someone.

Motivational THP should not stack.  Though it could stack with other kinds (shield spells and such).

Tactician's Warning should work off damage (see Protect).  You don't want a scaling bonus to d20 rolls.  (either that or tactical dice don't scale, and can't be used for damage).

It's just "action", not "standard action"

I also feel Int and Cha need to be represented somewhere.  (Motivate Cha times per day?  Minimum roll of Int on your tactical dice?)



And a few more ideas.

Something to prevent oppertunity attacks.
Reorient the Axis
As an action, each ally within 50' who are apart of your plan of action can immidiatly move 5' per Int.  They do not provoke oppertunity attacks.

And while i agree that warlords should not have "true" healing, they should be able to get a downed ally back on his feat long enought of finish the fight, or flee.
Fight On
As an action, you can wake and stand up one adjacent dying ally.  They gain temporary hit points equal to your tactical dice, and can stay concious as long as it lasts (maximum Cha minutes).  They still must make death saves as usual.  If they took an action, they make it with disavantage.  The ally must be healed before you can do this again.



I like these additions. And yes, my preliminary draft wasn't focused so much on exact balance numbers so much as general concept and approach in design (and yes, I do sometimes still lapse into 4e terminology--its a symptom of having played that edition for the most part for the last few years).

I agree tactician's warning buffing d20 rolls seems too strong at the moment, unless its like flat +1 per tactical dice spent (which is still very strong in a flat math system, but perhaps not gamebreakingly so). And yes, perhaps Create an Opening should be capped at letting one additional ally attack (I was cribbing from Hail of Steel, an iconic Warlord power, but it may be too strong given the math in Next).
Thought experiment: Say there was a Warlord class who had the ability to starting at level 1, at will, give any ally they could see 100 temp HP and a +5 bonus to AC and all saves that would last until the end of the day.

I'm glad to see that I'm not the only fan of the pinching theorem. This sort of analysis is invaluable when it comes to game design.

The metagame is not the game.
Temporary hit points and other forms of "damage mitigation" cannot replace actually restoring hit points.  The player of the warlord would have to be infallible to do so.  The Warlord, if he is to be a contributing member of a party, and not just a luxury class practical only after you have a Fighter, Wizard, Rogue, and most importantly, Cleric, must be able to restore hit points.


Thought experiment: Say there was a Warlord class who had the ability to starting at level 1, at will, give any ally they could see 100 temp HP and a +5 bonus to AC and all saves that would last until the end of the day. This class wouldn't have any "true healing" ala the Cleric, but would be CLEARLY superior by a massive margin to any lvl 1 Cleric when it comes to improving party survivability.

Think it through.  If no enemy attacks that one character, the rest of the party could be TPK'd as if that Warlord had no abilty at all.  That's what I mean about mitigation demands infallibility.  Combat is random, you can't tell who's going to need to be able to stand up to a lot of damage until the damage is actually done. 


But, sure, if you take any ability, no matter how lame and limitted and turn it up to 11 on a scale of 1-5, it'll be overpowered.  It'll still be lame and limitted, though.  The Warlord in your thought experiment is not an adequate replacement for the Cleric.  He has one overpowered ability that fails to do what a reasonable alternative to the Cleric could: keep his all allies up and fighting a little longer in spite of the unpredicatable dangers of combat.

- Warlords! Join the 'Officer Country' Group! Join Grognards for 4e, the D&D that changed D&D.


D&D Home Page - What Class Are You? - Build A Character - D&D Compendium

Think it through.  If no enemy attacks that one character, the rest of the party could be TPK'd as if that Warlord had no abilty at all.  That's what I mean about mitigation demands infallibility.  Combat is random, you can't tell who's going to need to be able to stand up to a lot of damage until the damage is actually done. 



Or, he just uses it on everyone in the party, since its at-will...

Preemptive only loses out to reactive if its unduly limited. If temps and defense/save buffs only last a bit or are so limited you can only use them on one guy, then yes, you're stuck playing guessing games in a way that doesn't work. If temps and defense/save buffs last a while and aren't limited, then you can consistently count on mitigation, and not worry about having to play guessing games. Just make sure everyone has a temp buffer, and mid-fight if someone is taking a lot of damage, reapply that buffer. This is especially potent if paired with defense/save buffs, because the party will just plain be getting hit less and suffering less overall damage from spells.
Think it through.  If no enemy attacks that one character, the rest of the party could be TPK'd as if that Warlord had no abilty at all.  That's what I mean about mitigation demands infallibility.  Combat is random, you can't tell who's going to need to be able to stand up to a lot of damage until the damage is actually done. 



Or, he just uses it on everyone in the party, since its at-will...

Somehow, I read it as 1/day.

Obviously, that would be wildly overpowered.  That it would have to be wildly overpowered to do what hp restoration could do in a moderately powered fashion is just further proof that damage mitigation is not an adequate substitute for hp restoration.

- Warlords! Join the 'Officer Country' Group! Join Grognards for 4e, the D&D that changed D&D.


D&D Home Page - What Class Are You? - Build A Character - D&D Compendium

Think it through.  If no enemy attacks that one character, the rest of the party could be TPK'd as if that Warlord had no abilty at all.  That's what I mean about mitigation demands infallibility.  Combat is random, you can't tell who's going to need to be able to stand up to a lot of damage until the damage is actually done. 



Or, he just uses it on everyone in the party, since its at-will...

Somehow, I read it as 1/day.

Obviously, that would be wildly overpowered.  That it would have to be wildly overpowered to do what hp restoration could do in a moderately powered fashion is just further proof that damage mitigation is not an adequate substitute for hp restoration.




But it would not have to be "wildly overpowered to do what hp restoration could do in a moderately powered fashion." That version would be simply, strictly, wildly superior to hp restoration. To be commensurate with hp restoration, you'd simply have to scale it back. Scale it back too far, and it becomes inferior--but somewhere between "wildly overpowered" and "inferior", there is a level of mitigation that would add to party survivability on a level commensurate with Hp restoration. what exactly that level of mitigation is, I don't know, I think it's the sort of thing that would require a lot of playtesting to get right. You might also need an ability like mellored proposed (Fight On As an action, you can wake and stand up one adjacent dying ally.  They gain temporary hit points equal to your tactical dice, and can stay concious as long as it lasts (maximum Cha minutes).  They still must make death saves as usual.  If they took an action, they make it with disavantage.  The ally must be healed before you can do this again. ) which could be used as a "panic button" in case of emergency.
The Warlord in your thought experiment is not an adequate replacement for the Cleric.

Every class should be an adequate replacement for the cleric.

Clerics should not be needed.  Warlord should not be needed.  Both should be able to play together.

guides
List of no-action attacks.
Dynamic vs Static Bonuses
Phalanx tactics and builds
Crivens! A Pictsies Guide Good
Power
s to intentionally miss with
Mr. Cellophane: How to be unnoticed
Way's to fire around corners
Crits: what their really worth
Retroactive bonus vs Static bonus.
Runepriest handbook & discussion thread
Holy Symbols to hang around your neck
Ways to Gain or Downgrade Actions
List of bonuses to saving throws
The Ghost with the Most (revenant handbook)
my builds
F-111 Interdictor Long (200+ squares) distance ally teleporter. With some warlord stuff. Broken in a plot way, not a power way.

Thought Switch Higher level build that grants upto 14 attacks on turn 1. If your allies play along, it's broken.

Elven Critters Crit op with crit generation. 5 of these will end anything. Broken.

King Fisher Optimized net user.  Moderate.

Boominator Fun catch-22 booming blade build with either strong or completely broken damage depending on your reading.

Very Distracting Warlock Lot's of dazing and major penalties to hit. Overpowered.

Pocket Protector Pixie Stealth Knight. Maximizing the defender's aura by being in an ally's/enemy's square.

Yakuza NinjIntimiAdin: Perma-stealth Striker that offers a little protection for ally's, and can intimidate bloodied enemies. Very Strong.

Chargeburgler with cheese Ranged attacks at the end of a charge along with perma-stealth. Solid, could be overpowered if tweaked.

Void Defender Defends giving a penalty to hit anyone but him, then removing himself from play. Can get somewhat broken in epic.

Scry and Die Attacking from around corners, while staying hidden. Moderate to broken, depending on the situation.

Skimisher Fly in, attack, and fly away. Also prevents enemies from coming close. Moderate to Broken depending on the enemy, but shouldn't make the game un-fun, as the rest of your team is at risk, and you have enough weaknesses.

Indestructible Simply won't die, even if you sleep though combat.  One of THE most abusive character in 4e.

Sir Robin (Bravely Charge Away) He automatically slows and pushes an enemy (5 squares), while charging away. Hard to rate it's power level, since it's terrain dependent.

Death's Gatekeeper A fun twist on a healic, making your party "unkillable". Overpowered to Broken, but shouldn't actually make the game un-fun, just TPK proof.

Death's Gatekeeper mk2, (Stealth Edition) Make your party "unkillable", and you hidden, while doing solid damage. Stronger then the above, but also easier for a DM to shut down. Broken, until your DM get's enough of it.

Domination and Death Dominate everything then kill them quickly. Only works @ 30, but is broken multiple ways.

Battlemind Mc Prone-Daze Protecting your allies by keeping enemies away. Quite powerful.

The Retaliator Getting hit deals more damage to the enemy then you receive yourself, and you can take plenty of hits. Heavy item dependency, Broken.

Dead Kobold Transit Teleports 98 squares a turn, and can bring someone along for the ride. Not fully built, so i can't judge the power.

Psilent Guardian Protect your allies, while being invisible. Overpowered, possibly broken.

Rune of Vengance Do lot's of damage while boosting your teams. Strong to slightly overpowered.

Charedent BarrageA charging ardent. Fine in a normal team, overpowered if there are 2 together, and easily broken in teams of 5.

Super Knight A tough, sticky, high damage knight. Strong.

Super Duper Knight Basically the same as super knight with items, making it far more broken.

Mora, the unkillable avenger Solid damage, while being neigh indestuctable. Overpowered, but not broken.

Swordburst Maximus At-Will Close Burst 3 that slide and prones. Protects allies with off actions. Strong, possibly over powered with the right party.

The Warlord in your thought experiment is not an adequate replacement for the Cleric.

Every class should be an adequate replacement for the cleric.

Clerics should not be needed.  Warlord should not be needed.  Both should be able to play together.

I don't know how that could be possible, since healing is so vital a function.  

Actually, I guess we do know.  Have healing surges and minor action second wind, with some difficult way of taking more than one, and you wouldn't need a healer in 4e.  

HD clearly aren't enough, but maybe they could be taken to the level of healing surges.

- Warlords! Join the 'Officer Country' Group! Join Grognards for 4e, the D&D that changed D&D.


D&D Home Page - What Class Are You? - Build A Character - D&D Compendium

 Scale it back too far, and it becomes inferior--but somewhere between "wildly overpowered" and "inferior", there is a level of mitigation that would add to party survivability on a level commensurate with Hp restoration.

No amount of washing your hands is a replacement for anti-biotics.


- Warlords! Join the 'Officer Country' Group! Join Grognards for 4e, the D&D that changed D&D.


D&D Home Page - What Class Are You? - Build A Character - D&D Compendium

The Warlord in your thought experiment is not an adequate replacement for the Cleric.

Every class should be an adequate replacement for the cleric.

Clerics should not be needed.  Warlord should not be needed.  Both should be able to play together.

I don't know how that could be possible, since healing is so vital a function.  

Actually, I guess we do know.  Have healing surges and minor action second wind, with some difficult way of taking more than one, and you wouldn't need a healer in 4e.  

HD clearly aren't enough, but maybe they could be taken to the level of healing surges.

Cleric should definalty heal.  That's it's main thing.

But not so much that it's a required class.

guides
List of no-action attacks.
Dynamic vs Static Bonuses
Phalanx tactics and builds
Crivens! A Pictsies Guide Good
Power
s to intentionally miss with
Mr. Cellophane: How to be unnoticed
Way's to fire around corners
Crits: what their really worth
Retroactive bonus vs Static bonus.
Runepriest handbook & discussion thread
Holy Symbols to hang around your neck
Ways to Gain or Downgrade Actions
List of bonuses to saving throws
The Ghost with the Most (revenant handbook)
my builds
F-111 Interdictor Long (200+ squares) distance ally teleporter. With some warlord stuff. Broken in a plot way, not a power way.

Thought Switch Higher level build that grants upto 14 attacks on turn 1. If your allies play along, it's broken.

Elven Critters Crit op with crit generation. 5 of these will end anything. Broken.

King Fisher Optimized net user.  Moderate.

Boominator Fun catch-22 booming blade build with either strong or completely broken damage depending on your reading.

Very Distracting Warlock Lot's of dazing and major penalties to hit. Overpowered.

Pocket Protector Pixie Stealth Knight. Maximizing the defender's aura by being in an ally's/enemy's square.

Yakuza NinjIntimiAdin: Perma-stealth Striker that offers a little protection for ally's, and can intimidate bloodied enemies. Very Strong.

Chargeburgler with cheese Ranged attacks at the end of a charge along with perma-stealth. Solid, could be overpowered if tweaked.

Void Defender Defends giving a penalty to hit anyone but him, then removing himself from play. Can get somewhat broken in epic.

Scry and Die Attacking from around corners, while staying hidden. Moderate to broken, depending on the situation.

Skimisher Fly in, attack, and fly away. Also prevents enemies from coming close. Moderate to Broken depending on the enemy, but shouldn't make the game un-fun, as the rest of your team is at risk, and you have enough weaknesses.

Indestructible Simply won't die, even if you sleep though combat.  One of THE most abusive character in 4e.

Sir Robin (Bravely Charge Away) He automatically slows and pushes an enemy (5 squares), while charging away. Hard to rate it's power level, since it's terrain dependent.

Death's Gatekeeper A fun twist on a healic, making your party "unkillable". Overpowered to Broken, but shouldn't actually make the game un-fun, just TPK proof.

Death's Gatekeeper mk2, (Stealth Edition) Make your party "unkillable", and you hidden, while doing solid damage. Stronger then the above, but also easier for a DM to shut down. Broken, until your DM get's enough of it.

Domination and Death Dominate everything then kill them quickly. Only works @ 30, but is broken multiple ways.

Battlemind Mc Prone-Daze Protecting your allies by keeping enemies away. Quite powerful.

The Retaliator Getting hit deals more damage to the enemy then you receive yourself, and you can take plenty of hits. Heavy item dependency, Broken.

Dead Kobold Transit Teleports 98 squares a turn, and can bring someone along for the ride. Not fully built, so i can't judge the power.

Psilent Guardian Protect your allies, while being invisible. Overpowered, possibly broken.

Rune of Vengance Do lot's of damage while boosting your teams. Strong to slightly overpowered.

Charedent BarrageA charging ardent. Fine in a normal team, overpowered if there are 2 together, and easily broken in teams of 5.

Super Knight A tough, sticky, high damage knight. Strong.

Super Duper Knight Basically the same as super knight with items, making it far more broken.

Mora, the unkillable avenger Solid damage, while being neigh indestuctable. Overpowered, but not broken.

Swordburst Maximus At-Will Close Burst 3 that slide and prones. Protects allies with off actions. Strong, possibly over powered with the right party.

The Warlord in your thought experiment is not an adequate replacement for the Cleric.

Every class should be an adequate replacement for the cleric.

Clerics should not be needed.  Warlord should not be needed.  Both should be able to play together.

I don't know how that could be possible, since healing is so vital a function.  

Actually, I guess we do know.  Have healing surges and minor action second wind, with some difficult way of taking more than one, and you wouldn't need a healer in 4e.  

HD clearly aren't enough, but maybe they could be taken to the level of healing surges.

Cleric should definalty heal.  That's it's main thing.

But not so much that it's a required class.

Fine.  All characters will need more self-healing than they currently get from HD, if classes who restore hit points to their allies are to be entirely optional.

Even in 4e, which gave every character lots of healing surges, the leader role would be missed when absent.

- Warlords! Join the 'Officer Country' Group! Join Grognards for 4e, the D&D that changed D&D.


D&D Home Page - What Class Are You? - Build A Character - D&D Compendium

 Scale it back too far, and it becomes inferior--but somewhere between "wildly overpowered" and "inferior", there is a level of mitigation that would add to party survivability on a level commensurate with Hp restoration.

No amount of washing your hands is a replacement for anti-biotics.





I don't really see how this is revelant. If a Cleric heals 1d8+4 HP a few times per day, and a Warlord gives (just spitballing) 1d8 +4 temps at will which last until you take an extended rest, there is a very good chance the Warlord's version is going to end up keeping more of his party members alive for longer, especially if he can also buff defenses and saves--traps or ambushes that might kill an unlucky party member will be absorbed by a temp buffer (and since its at-will and has long duration, there's no guessing game of "who will get attacked", you just keep a temp buffer on the party at all times and reapply as needed), and unlike the Cleric he's never gonna run out. (actually, even that might be too strong and still need to be scaled back further, but the exact right amount could be nailed down via playtesting).
Even in 4e, which gave every character lots of healing surges, the leader role would be missed when absent.

Missed, and required are 2 seperate things.

I've seen
All striker parties, they kill things fast enough to not need healed.
All controler parties, shut down enemies hard enough to need any healing.
All defender parties, can take enough punishment to not need healing.
All leader parties, heal so much they can outlast the monsters.

Generally, they are not as effective as a mixed party, but they are all certainly playable.  Same should be true in 5e.

(I had an all revenant pacifist cleric|paladin party.  Only damage was from Stormhawk Vengence and mark punishment.  They went 5 battles before they used a surge.  And then the DM called for a reboot.).

guides
List of no-action attacks.
Dynamic vs Static Bonuses
Phalanx tactics and builds
Crivens! A Pictsies Guide Good
Power
s to intentionally miss with
Mr. Cellophane: How to be unnoticed
Way's to fire around corners
Crits: what their really worth
Retroactive bonus vs Static bonus.
Runepriest handbook & discussion thread
Holy Symbols to hang around your neck
Ways to Gain or Downgrade Actions
List of bonuses to saving throws
The Ghost with the Most (revenant handbook)
my builds
F-111 Interdictor Long (200+ squares) distance ally teleporter. With some warlord stuff. Broken in a plot way, not a power way.

Thought Switch Higher level build that grants upto 14 attacks on turn 1. If your allies play along, it's broken.

Elven Critters Crit op with crit generation. 5 of these will end anything. Broken.

King Fisher Optimized net user.  Moderate.

Boominator Fun catch-22 booming blade build with either strong or completely broken damage depending on your reading.

Very Distracting Warlock Lot's of dazing and major penalties to hit. Overpowered.

Pocket Protector Pixie Stealth Knight. Maximizing the defender's aura by being in an ally's/enemy's square.

Yakuza NinjIntimiAdin: Perma-stealth Striker that offers a little protection for ally's, and can intimidate bloodied enemies. Very Strong.

Chargeburgler with cheese Ranged attacks at the end of a charge along with perma-stealth. Solid, could be overpowered if tweaked.

Void Defender Defends giving a penalty to hit anyone but him, then removing himself from play. Can get somewhat broken in epic.

Scry and Die Attacking from around corners, while staying hidden. Moderate to broken, depending on the situation.

Skimisher Fly in, attack, and fly away. Also prevents enemies from coming close. Moderate to Broken depending on the enemy, but shouldn't make the game un-fun, as the rest of your team is at risk, and you have enough weaknesses.

Indestructible Simply won't die, even if you sleep though combat.  One of THE most abusive character in 4e.

Sir Robin (Bravely Charge Away) He automatically slows and pushes an enemy (5 squares), while charging away. Hard to rate it's power level, since it's terrain dependent.

Death's Gatekeeper A fun twist on a healic, making your party "unkillable". Overpowered to Broken, but shouldn't actually make the game un-fun, just TPK proof.

Death's Gatekeeper mk2, (Stealth Edition) Make your party "unkillable", and you hidden, while doing solid damage. Stronger then the above, but also easier for a DM to shut down. Broken, until your DM get's enough of it.

Domination and Death Dominate everything then kill them quickly. Only works @ 30, but is broken multiple ways.

Battlemind Mc Prone-Daze Protecting your allies by keeping enemies away. Quite powerful.

The Retaliator Getting hit deals more damage to the enemy then you receive yourself, and you can take plenty of hits. Heavy item dependency, Broken.

Dead Kobold Transit Teleports 98 squares a turn, and can bring someone along for the ride. Not fully built, so i can't judge the power.

Psilent Guardian Protect your allies, while being invisible. Overpowered, possibly broken.

Rune of Vengance Do lot's of damage while boosting your teams. Strong to slightly overpowered.

Charedent BarrageA charging ardent. Fine in a normal team, overpowered if there are 2 together, and easily broken in teams of 5.

Super Knight A tough, sticky, high damage knight. Strong.

Super Duper Knight Basically the same as super knight with items, making it far more broken.

Mora, the unkillable avenger Solid damage, while being neigh indestuctable. Overpowered, but not broken.

Swordburst Maximus At-Will Close Burst 3 that slide and prones. Protects allies with off actions. Strong, possibly over powered with the right party.

Enabling attacks could be a job of trickster or lazy rogues, instead of anatomy and weapon mastery required to sneak attack or assassinate.
Even in 4e, which gave every character lots of healing surges, the leader role would be missed when absent.

Missed, and required are 2 seperate things.

I've seen
All striker parties, they kill things fast enough to not need healed.
All controler parties, shut down enemies hard enough to need any healing.
All defender parties, can take enough punishment to not need healing.
All leader parties, heal so much they can outlast the monsters.

Generally, they are not as effective as a mixed party, but they are all certainly playable.  Same should be true in 5e.

(I had an all revenant pacifist cleric|paladin party.  Only damage was from Stormhawk Vengence and mark punishment.  They went 5 battles before they used a surge.  And then the DM called for a reboot.).

OK.  So, if Next is going to have enough self-healing that a class that can restore hit points isn't strictly necessary, doesn't that create the same problem as having a warlord with adequate hit point restoration?  It would require classes without magical abilities to be able to heal.  All the same anti-martial healing hysteria would apply.  

That is, if any of that hysteria weren't spiteful edition war propaganda.

- Warlords! Join the 'Officer Country' Group! Join Grognards for 4e, the D&D that changed D&D.


D&D Home Page - What Class Are You? - Build A Character - D&D Compendium

Even in 4e, which gave every character lots of healing surges, the leader role would be missed when absent.

Missed, and required are 2 seperate things.

I've seen
All striker parties, they kill things fast enough to not need healed.
All controler parties, shut down enemies hard enough to need any healing.
All defender parties, can take enough punishment to not need healing.
All leader parties, heal so much they can outlast the monsters.

Generally, they are not as effective as a mixed party, but they are all certainly playable.  Same should be true in 5e.

(I had an all revenant pacifist cleric|paladin party.  Only damage was from Stormhawk Vengence and mark punishment.  They went 5 battles before they used a surge.  And then the DM called for a reboot.).

OK.  So, if Next is going to have enough self-healing that a class that can restore hit points isn't strictly necessary, doesn't that create the same problem as having a warlord with adequate hit point restoration?  It would require classes without magical abilities to be able to heal.  All the same anti-martial healing hysteria would apply.  

I see it as 2 separate issues.

1) Any class, including any kind of healer, should be missed, but not required.  I'm not sure anyone objects to that, at least in principle.  You should be able to run around with 4 fighters if you wanted.

To make healers not required, there needs to be either acquitted self healing (hit dice, regeneration durring rests), or just giving everyone enough hit points so they won't need healed in the first place.  And healing that is done has to be small.  (i.e. a cleric should heal 25%-50% of a PC total HP).


2) Martial healing.  I don't think even you imagine a warlord shouting a gash on someone's chest closed.

So here we need to find a compromise   A way to inspiring people to fight on, without having the gash on their chest healed.  THP seems like the best solution so far.  Inspiration wears off.

guides
List of no-action attacks.
Dynamic vs Static Bonuses
Phalanx tactics and builds
Crivens! A Pictsies Guide Good
Power
s to intentionally miss with
Mr. Cellophane: How to be unnoticed
Way's to fire around corners
Crits: what their really worth
Retroactive bonus vs Static bonus.
Runepriest handbook & discussion thread
Holy Symbols to hang around your neck
Ways to Gain or Downgrade Actions
List of bonuses to saving throws
The Ghost with the Most (revenant handbook)
my builds
F-111 Interdictor Long (200+ squares) distance ally teleporter. With some warlord stuff. Broken in a plot way, not a power way.

Thought Switch Higher level build that grants upto 14 attacks on turn 1. If your allies play along, it's broken.

Elven Critters Crit op with crit generation. 5 of these will end anything. Broken.

King Fisher Optimized net user.  Moderate.

Boominator Fun catch-22 booming blade build with either strong or completely broken damage depending on your reading.

Very Distracting Warlock Lot's of dazing and major penalties to hit. Overpowered.

Pocket Protector Pixie Stealth Knight. Maximizing the defender's aura by being in an ally's/enemy's square.

Yakuza NinjIntimiAdin: Perma-stealth Striker that offers a little protection for ally's, and can intimidate bloodied enemies. Very Strong.

Chargeburgler with cheese Ranged attacks at the end of a charge along with perma-stealth. Solid, could be overpowered if tweaked.

Void Defender Defends giving a penalty to hit anyone but him, then removing himself from play. Can get somewhat broken in epic.

Scry and Die Attacking from around corners, while staying hidden. Moderate to broken, depending on the situation.

Skimisher Fly in, attack, and fly away. Also prevents enemies from coming close. Moderate to Broken depending on the enemy, but shouldn't make the game un-fun, as the rest of your team is at risk, and you have enough weaknesses.

Indestructible Simply won't die, even if you sleep though combat.  One of THE most abusive character in 4e.

Sir Robin (Bravely Charge Away) He automatically slows and pushes an enemy (5 squares), while charging away. Hard to rate it's power level, since it's terrain dependent.

Death's Gatekeeper A fun twist on a healic, making your party "unkillable". Overpowered to Broken, but shouldn't actually make the game un-fun, just TPK proof.

Death's Gatekeeper mk2, (Stealth Edition) Make your party "unkillable", and you hidden, while doing solid damage. Stronger then the above, but also easier for a DM to shut down. Broken, until your DM get's enough of it.

Domination and Death Dominate everything then kill them quickly. Only works @ 30, but is broken multiple ways.

Battlemind Mc Prone-Daze Protecting your allies by keeping enemies away. Quite powerful.

The Retaliator Getting hit deals more damage to the enemy then you receive yourself, and you can take plenty of hits. Heavy item dependency, Broken.

Dead Kobold Transit Teleports 98 squares a turn, and can bring someone along for the ride. Not fully built, so i can't judge the power.

Psilent Guardian Protect your allies, while being invisible. Overpowered, possibly broken.

Rune of Vengance Do lot's of damage while boosting your teams. Strong to slightly overpowered.

Charedent BarrageA charging ardent. Fine in a normal team, overpowered if there are 2 together, and easily broken in teams of 5.

Super Knight A tough, sticky, high damage knight. Strong.

Super Duper Knight Basically the same as super knight with items, making it far more broken.

Mora, the unkillable avenger Solid damage, while being neigh indestuctable. Overpowered, but not broken.

Swordburst Maximus At-Will Close Burst 3 that slide and prones. Protects allies with off actions. Strong, possibly over powered with the right party.

2) Martial healing.  I don't think even you imagine a warlord shouting a gash on someone's chest closed.

So here we need to find a compromise   A way to inspiring people to fight on, without having the gash on their chest healed.  THP seems like the best solution so far.  Inspiration wears off.



Yet that same gash on the chest can be closed in 5 minutes with hit dice, or else over a full nights rest.

Your problem is with what hit points represent, not the Warlord. 
Yet that same gash on the chest can be closed in 5 minutes with hit dice, or else over a full nights rest.

Yes, the direct-hit-physical-wound model is inconsistent with both hit dice and the default rules for the long rest. Since I prefer to use that model, I will both abandon hit dice (recovery dice) and slow HP per night to something more reasonable. If anyone is using overnight-full-heals, then I doubt those are the same people describing the wound as a huge gash across the chest.

And thus, consistency is preserved through modularity.

The metagame is not the game.
2) Martial healing.  I don't think even you imagine a warlord shouting a gash on someone's chest closed.

So here we need to find a compromise   A way to inspiring people to fight on, without having the gash on their chest healed.  THP seems like the best solution so far.  Inspiration wears off.



Yet that same gash on the chest can be closed in 5 minutes with hit dice, or else over a full nights rest.

Your problem is with what hit points represent, not the Warlord. 

It's not my problem....  I'll play with whatever toys i get.  And some people do have issue with hit dice healing, or sleeping it off.  That's why there's a slow heal option.


And inspiration still wears off, so i'd vote THP or something similar anyways.

guides
List of no-action attacks.
Dynamic vs Static Bonuses
Phalanx tactics and builds
Crivens! A Pictsies Guide Good
Power
s to intentionally miss with
Mr. Cellophane: How to be unnoticed
Way's to fire around corners
Crits: what their really worth
Retroactive bonus vs Static bonus.
Runepriest handbook & discussion thread
Holy Symbols to hang around your neck
Ways to Gain or Downgrade Actions
List of bonuses to saving throws
The Ghost with the Most (revenant handbook)
my builds
F-111 Interdictor Long (200+ squares) distance ally teleporter. With some warlord stuff. Broken in a plot way, not a power way.

Thought Switch Higher level build that grants upto 14 attacks on turn 1. If your allies play along, it's broken.

Elven Critters Crit op with crit generation. 5 of these will end anything. Broken.

King Fisher Optimized net user.  Moderate.

Boominator Fun catch-22 booming blade build with either strong or completely broken damage depending on your reading.

Very Distracting Warlock Lot's of dazing and major penalties to hit. Overpowered.

Pocket Protector Pixie Stealth Knight. Maximizing the defender's aura by being in an ally's/enemy's square.

Yakuza NinjIntimiAdin: Perma-stealth Striker that offers a little protection for ally's, and can intimidate bloodied enemies. Very Strong.

Chargeburgler with cheese Ranged attacks at the end of a charge along with perma-stealth. Solid, could be overpowered if tweaked.

Void Defender Defends giving a penalty to hit anyone but him, then removing himself from play. Can get somewhat broken in epic.

Scry and Die Attacking from around corners, while staying hidden. Moderate to broken, depending on the situation.

Skimisher Fly in, attack, and fly away. Also prevents enemies from coming close. Moderate to Broken depending on the enemy, but shouldn't make the game un-fun, as the rest of your team is at risk, and you have enough weaknesses.

Indestructible Simply won't die, even if you sleep though combat.  One of THE most abusive character in 4e.

Sir Robin (Bravely Charge Away) He automatically slows and pushes an enemy (5 squares), while charging away. Hard to rate it's power level, since it's terrain dependent.

Death's Gatekeeper A fun twist on a healic, making your party "unkillable". Overpowered to Broken, but shouldn't actually make the game un-fun, just TPK proof.

Death's Gatekeeper mk2, (Stealth Edition) Make your party "unkillable", and you hidden, while doing solid damage. Stronger then the above, but also easier for a DM to shut down. Broken, until your DM get's enough of it.

Domination and Death Dominate everything then kill them quickly. Only works @ 30, but is broken multiple ways.

Battlemind Mc Prone-Daze Protecting your allies by keeping enemies away. Quite powerful.

The Retaliator Getting hit deals more damage to the enemy then you receive yourself, and you can take plenty of hits. Heavy item dependency, Broken.

Dead Kobold Transit Teleports 98 squares a turn, and can bring someone along for the ride. Not fully built, so i can't judge the power.

Psilent Guardian Protect your allies, while being invisible. Overpowered, possibly broken.

Rune of Vengance Do lot's of damage while boosting your teams. Strong to slightly overpowered.

Charedent BarrageA charging ardent. Fine in a normal team, overpowered if there are 2 together, and easily broken in teams of 5.

Super Knight A tough, sticky, high damage knight. Strong.

Super Duper Knight Basically the same as super knight with items, making it far more broken.

Mora, the unkillable avenger Solid damage, while being neigh indestuctable. Overpowered, but not broken.

Swordburst Maximus At-Will Close Burst 3 that slide and prones. Protects allies with off actions. Strong, possibly over powered with the right party.

Yet that same gash on the chest can be closed in 5 minutes with hit dice, or else over a full nights rest.

Yes, the direct-hit-physical-wound model is inconsistent with both hit dice and the default rules for the long rest. Since I prefer to use that model, I will both abandon hit dice (recovery dice) and slow HP per night to something more reasonable. If anyone is using overnight-full-heals, then I doubt those are the same people describing the wound as a huge gash across the chest.

And thus, consistency is preserved through modularity.




And through modularity you can tell the groups you DM for "Cleric or GTFO" and don't let players take healing powers. Don't try to argue it can't exist in the game because you have a wrongheaded interpretation of a mechanic.
2) Martial healing.  I don't think even you imagine a warlord shouting a gash on someone's chest closed.

So here we need to find a compromise   A way to inspiring people to fight on, without having the gash on their chest healed.  THP seems like the best solution so far.  Inspiration wears off.



Yet that same gash on the chest can be closed in 5 minutes with hit dice, or else over a full nights rest.

Your problem is with what hit points represent, not the Warlord. 

It's not my problem....  I'll play with whatever toys i get.  And some people do have issue with hit dice healing, or sleeping it off.  That's why there's a slow heal option.


And inspiration still wears off, so i'd vote THP or something similar anyways.



That's just the thing. It's an option. Not the default. Trying to say that Warlords shouldn't exist and/or shouldn't be able to heal, because an optional module says hit points represent meat damage is stupid. 
Don't try to argue it can't exist in the game because you have a wrongheaded interpretation of a mechanic.

While I would never resort to such language, the essence of your statement is correct. If they include a Warlord with healing powers (where healing is not just a small option that is easy to ignore), then my DM-modular-veto-pen will nix that class from my games as my first act. If they include a Warlord with THP instead of healing, then I don't need to make that decision in the name of consistency. If they present both options, then I only have to ban the one I don't like.

That's the power of modularity.

The metagame is not the game.
The handling of the Warlord in Next is obviously a controversial topic. On the one hand, you have 4e fans who feel generally slighted and ignored, and who have a great deal of affection for the Warlord class in particular for various reasons (think its fun to play, feel it fills a niche not handled well by other classes, etc.).

The Warlord does model an heroic archetype that D&D has tried, and failed, to do in the past.  In AD&D, the fighter tried to fill the archetype of the heroic leader, but all it got was an expensive castle and a handful of 0-level followers to do it with.  In 3e, the fighter's flavor text /called/ a natural party leader, but it got absolutely no mechanics to back that up.  In 4e, the Warlord models the archetype admirably, not just in the technical sense of delivering the right functions, but of doing so in an engaging, dramatic way.  

If 5e can't model the same archetype, that's a problem with 5e, not with the archetype.

On the other, you have people who object to it for various reasons, typically: they think it should be folded into the fighter,

Nonsense, the fighter has always suffered from far too broad and generic a concept.  The Fighter that doesn't include heroic leaders must still cover every weapon-using archetype from Archer to Knight.  The 5e Fighter is groping for identity and effectivenes, asking it to also cover the Warlord is madness.

nonmagical healing bothers their sense of verisimilitude in some way,

"Verisimilitude" has been used as edition war BS so aggressively that any legitimate meaning it may have had has been lost.  If you don't like the Warlord concept, don't play a warlord - and certainly don't bother participating in discussion of what it should be like.  Leave that to folks who might actually give the class a chance.

they think it is too inherently tied to the battle grid,

It's possible to build a warlord who works with movement and positioning a great deal (Skirmish Presence, Battlefront Leader, WPT, etc).  It's also possible to build one that never re-positions allies or enemies (Inspiring and Bravura builds can easily end up like that).   The concept is not tied to "the grid," though it should certainly have plenty of juicy options in any tactical combat module.


or they believe it causes too much action bloat or slows down combat.

Baseless.  The warlord juggles the action economy of 4e a bit, but does nothing to 'bloat' it.  The worst thing that happens in that regard is that the DM might on occassion be confused about whose turn it is when the warlord give an ally an attack.

The ability to play a "tactical genius" or "master strategist", and actually have significant mechanical support for that designation. The great thing about D&D is that it lets you take on roles and competencies that you don't actually possess in real life.

Definitely.  Brilliant tacticians do not do the same brilliant thing every round.  To model this sort of thing, the character needs to be able to create dramatic 'turning points' in a battle.  The only way 5e has to do that is spells.  Probably one of the reasons it's so hard for the developers to get the Warlord (and Fighter) 'right' - they've handicapped themselves by not allowing the possibilty of limitted-use martial abilities.  If they'd stop blaming the warlord for their failure, they might find a solution.

The ability to neatly slot into and effectively contribute to a small party.


Really should be a requirement for every class in the Standard game.  Of course, there's a concept that make it possible to develope classes in a way that consistently does that:  Roles.  But, they are already a casualty of the edition war.  Ironic, since they've been with the game forever.


So, for me at least, any D&D Next implementation of the Warlord class absolutely must deliver on these points.

The Warlord also needs to be able to be a very capable combatant in his own right - or (and this is the hard part) not.  No version of D&D has ever had a class structure that let you have 'builds' or 'sub-classes' with substantively different combat abilities.  Yet the Warlord really could benefit from the ability to ditch some HD, armor & weapons, to be less of the front-liner and more of the back-seat strategist or (I hate to say it) "cheerleader."  Rather like how the Cleric really should be able to have a "pacifist" build, or the Rogue should really be able to handle a 1:1 swashbuckler or duelist concept.      


However, what I'd also like to see is an effort made to satisfy some of the objections to the class:

Unneccessary and counter-productive.  Most of those objections are edition war baggage.  The rest are the result of people simply not wanting the class to exist.  People who hate the warlord are never going to play warlords, so why should the class take their preferences into account?  All they're doing is trying to make the class bad, since they can't make it go away.  

Create some distinction between Warlord healing and Cleric healing

A warlord who can't keep a party on their feet can easily have problems finding a place in a lot of D&D parties, as I outlined above. However, that doesn't necessarily mean that warlord "healing" has to be identical to Cleric magic.
This is a kind of lunatic mandate of 5e:  to make classes that accomplish the same things in different ways accomplish mechanically different things, instead.  Ideally the mandate should be dropped.  It's like insisting that a Cleric's Heal skill use d20 and a Warlord's use d%.  

If it can't be dropped, the system will need additional granularity to accommodate it.  In this case, the problem is not the warlord or the cleric, but hit points, themselves.  There is only one way of tracking how close a PC is to dropping, so there is only one mechanical way to drag him back from the brink.  In 5e, as in all eds, thats hp loss and hp restoration.  Damage and healing.

To draw a distinction between magical wound-healing, and non-magical inspiration, you'd have to draw a distinction between physical wounds, and non-physical factors, like morale, endurance, etc.  You'd also have to draw a distinction between attacks that inflict one or the other or both (most would presumably do both).  You'd also have track each separately for everyone.  

So, protecting the cleric's mechanical distinctiveness would require a massive increase in complexity.  Or, you could just let hps go on being hps, let anything that seeks to drop creatures inflict hps, and anything that helps them recover restore them.  



Avoid action bloat, lots of fiddly bonuses, and a reliance on the grid. A warlord who slows down play or forces groups to play with a grid hurts everyone's fun--luckily,

Luckily there's no such thing.  Just keep the action economy tight - let the warlord exchange actions, not generate too many extra ones - and don't over-emphasize positioning.  Give the warlord relatively few ally- and enemy- re-positioning tricks.  Instead, let him allow allies to move or disengage at the cost of using his own movement or in response to using an action to move (follow me!).  The 4e Warlord already has that capacity.  It doesn't bloat the action economy in any way, and Warlord builds can easily avoid grid-referent powers.

(Not, BTW, that "the grid" hurts anyone's fun, it's an overblown complaint trumped up in the edition war, and there's literally nothing to it.  Having a grid makes movement and position easier to visualize and quicker to resolve.  That's a good thing.)


5e really needs something like Wrecan's SARN-FU to support "Theatre of the Mind."

"You want The Tooth?  You can't handle The Tooth!"  - Dahlver-Nar.

"If magic is unrestrained in the campaign, D&D quickly degenerates into a weird wizard show where players get bored quickly"  - E. Gary Gygax

 

 

Oops, looks like this request tried to create an infinite loop. We do not allow such things here. We are a professional website!