Welcome, most Warlordish build :)

[Citan]

Hi all!

Thanks to Giant2005 that made me remember the existence of the Spell-less Ranger variant (although I didn't think it was an "official" option ^^), for those that miss it, you can now get something really close of the 4e Warlord.

Sure, the Battlemaster archetype does this nicely already, getting up to nine manoeuvers and six superiority dice. But not enough to my taste still.

So, welcome back Commander: Ranger 2 / Battlemaster 18 + Martial Adept.
Superiority dice: you get 1 (feat) + 6 (BM) + 4 (Ranger) = 11 superiority dice, at least 7 of them being d12 (I'd personnally houserule that all superiority dice become d12 but well).
Manoeuvers: 2 (feat) + 9 (BM) + 2 (Ranger) = 13 known Manoeuvers (on 16 available).

You lose the 4rth attack so it's certainly less-efficient damage-wise, but people who just want best damage will rarely go Battlemaster anyways.

But, in my personal opinion, since you already got a MAD requirement (adding WIS to STR, DEX and CON) the best build may be even this:
Ranger 2 / Monk Open Hand 6 / BM 12.

Compared to the "pure Warlord", you trade 1 dice, dices being d12 and two manoeuvers to get:

perma 1 bonus attack (Martial Arts) if you don't use Polearm Master,
potential 2 attacks as bonus (Flurry of Blows) (even if you use heavy weapons),
free magic Unarmed Strike (lvl6),
extra mobility (Step of the Wind, Unarmored Movement),
extra evasion (Patient Defense, Deflect Missile),
free fighting tricks (push/prone) with Flurry (Open Hand),
stunning capability (Stunning Strike),
a bit of healing to complement Second Wind (Wholeness of Body)
maybe defense bonus (Unarmored Defense) if you go high Wisdom instead of Strength.


I daresay it's probably the best balance for a Warlord-like build: you still get more dices and Manoeuvers than a pure Battlemaster but more flexibility and balance overall. And the MAD is either not so heavy (just manage to get a 13 in WIS) or inexistant if you take a DEX-based build (since Fighter requires dex OR str to multiclass into/from).

You can even forego one Fighter level if you don't need 5th ASI/Feat to get Monk's 7th lvl Evasion.
For the "healing" aspect of Warlord, best bet is the Healer feat.

Or, if you really want some distant healing, drop Monk down to lvl 5 and Fighter to 11 to take Life Cleric 3 (although it's virtually useless considering the few spell slots and levels, so really just for fluff).
Unless you want to abuse the Goodberries cheese (Life Cleric 1 / Druid 1) which was, strangely enough, officially accepted by WoTC.

What do you say? :=)

[Ardantis]

I love that! Way more versatility than, say, a controlly grappler build. Plus I love open hand monks.

[Citan]

I love that! Way more versatility than, say, a controlly grappler build. Plus I love open hand monks.
Thanks! :)
Note that I went 2 / 12 / 6 to preserve ASI feats, but since this is a Fighter primary, after thought, even better could be 2 / 11 / 7.

Since as a Fighter you already got 3 ASI at 4/6/8, and got another at Monk at 4, you get 4 ASI/Feats on a build that is reasonably MAD, potentially not MAD at all if you go full DEX.
So, for those DEX builds at least (or STR builds with good starting rolls), I find giving up one ASI/feat for another ki point and more importantly Evasion+Stillness of Mind a very good tradeoff.

What do you think?

[obryn]

So ... you need to be 20th level to make this work?

okay.

[WickerNipple]

Hi all!
Sure, the Battlemaster archetype does this nicely already

How does it do it nicely at all? Any sort of warlord love in the battlemaster was a half-assed afterthought at best.

Looks like a fun character, but it doesn't strike me as particularly '4e warlord'.

A warlord's job was to heal, buff allies, sculpt the battlefield by moving other people's models, make allies attack, alter initiative values, etc etc.

You can do some of that, sure, and you're very limited by what 5e can provide in that respect, but just doing Bard/Battlemaster will check more boxes than this.

[Yagyujubei]

So ... you need to be 20th level to make this work?

okay.

obviously it works all the way up as you level >_> its not like you dont get superiority die until max level man...

you would likely take the 11 levels in fighter first thing, then choose whether you wanted more maneuvers first, or WotOP CC goodies first afterwards. although you could take fighter to 5 for the second attack, then grab your 3 monk levels to get WotOP, the finish fighter

[JNAProductions]

It kinda works? But it's not nearly the same as a Warlord.

[Yagyujubei]

It kinda works? But it's not nearly the same as a Warlord.

yeah honestly alot of the best warlord stuff would be WAY too overpowered for 5e, so battlemaster does a pretty good job of making a 5e friendly version, and taking some WotOP monk levels helps broaden your options a bit, but I don't see the point in grabbing extra maneuvers, although having more dice is nice.

[Citan]

So ... you need to be 20th level to make this work?
okay.
I'm sorry. Was this comment supposed to bring anything to the discussion? :)

How does it do it nicely at all? Any sort of warlord love in the battlemaster was a half-assed afterthought at best.

Looks like a fun character, but it doesn't strike me as particularly '4e warlord'.

A warlord's job was to heal, buff allies, sculpt the battlefield by moving other people's models, make allies attack, alter initiative values, etc etc.

You can do some of that, sure, and you're very limited by what 5e can provide in that respect, but just doing Bard/Battlemaster will check more boxes than this.
Well well I know, I've been overselling it. Mea culpa.
But still, the basic Warlord job in 4E was positioning and providing extra attacks wasn't it?

I agree with you having a "true" 4E Warlord is plain impossible, unless getting half-assed in every aspect. Hence my choice to emphasize the "positioning" ability to the utmost.
At least this character can really plays the Commander role for more than 2 turns every fight like plain Battlemaster (which seemed rather dull to me seeing as apart for Manoeuvers, Fighter is just a hitter).

With that said, you could forego Monk to get decent Life Cleric level instead, or just take the Healer feat and stack potions, or take Inspiring Leader. :)

Or take CHA multiclass such as Battlemaster 11 / Bard 9 to get decent healing / buffing abilities, but the "Commander" aspect gets quickly depleted each fight while as a spellcaster you're feeling powerless compared to comrades. Half-ass drama... :/
In fact, much to my dismay, the closest to 4e Warlord in terms of fullfilling many roles is probably a pure Valor Bard: decent attack, Compulsion and Dissonant Whispers to make people move, etc. But you have so many other good things to do as a Bard... And you're less sustainable in difficult situations (like a streak of good fights with only one or two short rests inbetween).

That's why I seemed this build interesting, since focusing on allies's extra attacks and control. Note that on that aspect, since apart Commander's Strike every Manoeuver is usable on every weapon attack, AND you can also use Monk abilities, you're the most efficient physical controller on the battlefield, creating conditions for advantage and autocrits for allies. That is what seemed to me the core role of the Warlord.

It kinda works? But it's not nearly the same as a Warlord.
Ok. Considering both yours and WickerNipple justified critics I toned down the title of OP. :) No point in giving false hopes to all 4E Warlord die hard fans. ^^

[WickerNipple]

Ok. Considering both yours and WickerNipple justified critics I toned down the title of OP. :) No point in giving false hopes to all 4E Warlord die hard fans. ^^

Heh, actually that was at least 95% of the cause for my negative reaction. I opened this thread hoping for some unearthed arcana splat announcement. :)

Again, it looks like a fun character, but I don't see what Monk adds to the mix if the goal is to make it 'more warlordy'. Certainly gives you more versatility, but warlord was always about what you could do for others, full stop.

Bard is much better than Life cleric for flavor, as it adds not only healing spells, but also inspiration and song of rest which are easily refluffed warlord-like. Cha 13 vs Wis 13 for an off-stat is pretty irrelevant, and Bard gives ya another skill to boot.

[D.U.P.A.]

4e Warlords cannot work in 5e, because it is based on all 3 dump stats :smallbiggrin:

[WickerNipple]

Strength is a dump stat now?! :smallbiggrin:

[Yagyujubei]

Strength is a dump stat now?! :smallbiggrin:

absolutely, if you aren't using a STR weapon it's def a top contender for dumping to 8.

it's been like this forever though, DEX CON and WIS are always the more useful stats, because they're the most common saves.

STR is more dumpable in 5e than it was in other editions though imho

[WickerNipple]

Meh. It's always been a dump stat if you weren't using it to attack.

[D.U.P.A.]

Yeah, in 4e Warlord has a primary attribute Str, followed by Int or Cha, the other one still having some effect. In 5e if these stats are not your spellcasting or carrying a big weapon are usually dumped. This is why Warlord is quite an interesting class for 4e since 5e came out as it showed how much the classes were bound to stats in 4e, while in 5e you can do varying experiments.

[Citan]

Heh, actually that was at least 95% of the cause for my negative reaction. I opened this thread hoping for some unearthed arcana splat announcement. :)

Again, it looks like a fun character, but I don't see what Monk adds to the mix if the goal is to make it 'more warlordy'. Certainly gives you more versatility, but warlord was always about what you could do for others, full stop.

Bard is much better than Life cleric for flavor, as it adds not only healing spells, but also inspiration and song of rest which are easily refluffed warlord-like. Cha 13 vs Wis 13 for an off-stat is pretty irrelevant, and Bard gives ya another skill to boot.

Partially agree with you about Bard potency.

Apart from the fact that I wanted to propose a non-MAD build for a change (I'm a totally MAD lover usually^^), Life Cleric is a more natural choice in this case.

True, Bards gets you more versatility in spells (for the price of only a few spells known), but with a MAD build a good part of Bard greatness fades away, unless you forego debuffs (because you won't have CHA high enough to get a good chance of success). In which case why go Bard?
Bardic Inspiration per short rest is very good indeed but need lvl5 (which hampers Monk greatly), the rest is just wasted potential unless you're the skillmonkey/partyface (Song of Rest is only redeeming ability but isn't worth 2lvl dip by itself).

So going Bard for good since getting at least 16 in CHA to really shine, while keeping WIS 13+, DEX 16+ (main stat) and CON (for HP and concentration). And getting lvl5 for Bardic Inspiration to have a meaning. Sure, it's doable, but it's MAD wherever you look at it from and readily eats at Monk.
Bard stays very good fluff-wise though no doubts on that.

In comparison, Life Cleric nets you excellent support cantrips, best healing you could ever have for a 3lvl dip and a few good buffs still. The bonus on healing means you could even keep WIS at a medium level (like 14) to boost DEX and CON as high as possible.
Or, since you have no MAD at all, pumping DEX and WIS to high level (easily 20/18 or maybe 20/20 if rolling stats) meaning that your Monk's Unarmored Defense is on par with heavy armor.

TL;DR: Nop, sorry, Life Cleric is by far the best choice to dip in if you keep the rest of the build: best healing ever, best support cantrips, large choice of spell known, no MAD at all. If you dropped Monk entirely, if you be a different story though, here Bard + Inspiring Leader would become the best choice.

With that said, I also disagree on your assertion of Monk not bringing much.

Since, unfortunaterly, Commander's Strike is only once per Attack, your strength lies in putting conditions on enemies. So if you add the following elements...
1. Every other manoeuvers (push/prone/disarm/mark/etc) are usable on EACH and ANY weapon attack.
2. Fighter has triple Extra attack and Action Surge.
3. Monk brings base 4th attack as a bonus action (so no loss from Fighter 20) OR 4th and 5th attack with Flurry.
4. On your Unarmed Strikes, you can freely attempt to push/prone.
5. On ANY weapon attack, you can try to stun creature.
6. Your "Warlord" gets pretty good movement, defense and evasion, combining Monk abilities with Fighter proficiencies (or Monk Unarmored with DEX/WIS build), Fighting style and Manoeuver.
7. Every time you use a Manoeuver you add dice as damage.
...
...
This means you're equally good, every short rest, at the following:
- Novaing one or two enemies for very good damage and guaranteed stun/prone/whatever thanks to Action Surge + Flurry of Blows + Stunning Strike if needed (meaning 8 attacks so eight chances).
- Rushing into a full group of enemies and damaging them (good for Ranger ally with Colossus), disarming them or proning them (good for Melee allies) in one round (with high Dex putting you in good position to act before everyone).

Or if you're really really afraid, disarming/goading targets at range. Although in this case, there is indeed no point in getting Monk levels. ^^

TL;DR: Monk is an indeniable part of the greatness of the build, bringing extra way of putting conditions on enemies (Open Hand, Stunning Strike), extra attacks (= extra chances to debuff + weapon damage + superiority damage) and the excellent evasion and defense required for the player to go in the core of the enemy crowd while keeping a good chance at survival.
All of this with short-rest sustainability and DEX high enough to go first of allies and enemies alike.

Basically, you recon enemies then either strike down a lone enemy at range, or rush into the group, stun/disarm/prone everyone just before your melee allies come in and carnage them all (with a fair chance at that too, since being Unarmored+high DEX= great Stealth ability to get advantage through surprise).

Let's check it with an actual example

Let's take stats that are pretty much atteignable with point-buy roll and good race such as Wood Elf.
STR 12 / DEX 20 / CON 16 / INT 10 / WIS 16 / CHA 10.
Base best armor is Unarmored: 10+5+3 = 18.
As for Fighting Style, unless you want extra mobility and +1AC with Mariner, best bet is taking Dueling for +2 damage on attacks.
So for saving throws...
AC=18
STR=+1+6 (proficiency)
DEX=+5 (and Deflect Missiles, Evasion).
WIS=+3 (race can give you immunity/advantage against certain effects too).
CON=+3+6 (proficiency)
CHA=+0
So, except for Charisma, you defense range from correct to very good.
You also get improved movement: in range (Monk) and protection (Manoeuver).
On offense, you get 4 attacks every turn, sometimes 5, with 11d10 to spend on per short rest. Damage-wise you're not very good admittedly if you use no dice, only (1d6+5)*4, but your main role is to give advantage and critical chances to your allies so that's acceptable imo.


If you really want to honor the healing part of 4e Warlord without denaturing the synergies of the build too much, only two options.

You drop Evasion (a bit sad), Magic Fist (not so though), 3 ki points (tough) and Stunning Strike (very tough) to get great cantrips (good), large range of very potent healing spells and buffs (very good) although with only 6 spell slots.

Meaning actually good cantrips to use, and a few spell slots as Panic Button or mini-buff for though fights.


This is specifically to abuse two things: Shillelagh and Goodberry.
Getting Shillelagh means you can bump WIS first then DEX without any serious tradeoff.
Goodberry can (officially) profit from Life Cleric ability so you'll get 1+4 (or 1+5 if WIS 20) healing per berry. Making this the most rentable healing spell considering you have very few spell slots (and your allies can keep them in pockets so can mitigate the need for direct healing).
You also geet all niceties of Druid and Cleric, cantrips and lvl1 spell-wise (basically Bard on steroids).
You can even go another lvl in Druid to get decent WS use for RP or utility (useless in fight unless you go Druid straight away though).

For the most Warlodish variant of my builds (positioning+healing), the last one is the best balanced and efficent, although you do lose some Monk niceties: largest spell choice, very potent healing (even more potentially than Cleric with Goodberry/Lifecleric combo), Shillelagh meaning you can max WIS first.

[WickerNipple]

Yeah I get all the things monk does. As I said - it offers your character a lot more versatility.

Your goal seemed to be to make the most Warlord-y character possible in 5th, and I really don't see how any of that stuff contributes to that specific goal.

My comments about bard were for dropping monk entirely. Obviously you wouldn't add bard to a monk build.

[Citan]

Yeah I get all the things monk does. As I said - it offers your character a lot more versatility.

Your goal seemed to be to make the most Warlord-y character possible in 5th, and I really don't see how any of that stuff contributes to that specific goal.

My comments about bard were for dropping monk entirely. Obviously you wouldn't add bard to a monk build.
And as I said, I agree that if you drop Monk entirely Bard becomes a good choice.
But it's just a matter of opinion on what the core mission of Warlord was in 4e.

For me, the mission of Warlord was to protect allies and enhance their offense chance through positioning/debuff.
- Offense: Monk Flurry of Blows provide 2 free chances to prone an enemy: > advantage for ally.
- Offense: Monk Martial Arts compensate the loss of Fighter capstone by providing another way of getting a 4rth attack every turn (so one more occasion to stun with Ki or disarm/feint/goad with Manoeuvers).
- Offense: Monk's Unarmored Movement gives you a better chance of either getting to a faraway dangerous enemy OR hit&run several dispersed enemies.
- Protection: goading enemies protect your allies by drawing enemies to you, while Monk's Unarmored Defense combined with on-demand Parry gives you a pretty good chance to always avoid damage entirely (or even Riposte -Fighter- and Stun -Monk- enemy in the same reaction).
- Healing. Take the Healer feat or Inspiring Leader if you really want to (pretty good even without high Charisma). Or, worst case, dip Cleric and Druid to get a reserve of Goodberries, Guidance/Resistance them as needed and either Bless allies or Shield of Faith yourself (since you aggro) for biggest fights. Although, since you prevent enemies from attacking allies in the first place, you shouldn't have so many needs to heal them should you?

That's why I don't undertand why you don't understand (unless we really have different views on what the Warlord was). Your BM and Monk abilities synergize extremely well, exploiting base combat mechanics to their best to buff and protect allies by depraving enemies of their means of attacks.
You can even look at the classic WoTC forum Guide of Warlord (http://community.wizards.com/content/forum-topic/2550946)...
They describe Warlord as such:

While you are a Leader to the core and are thus responsible for managing the party's resource expenditure, you believe the best way to save resources is to hit hard and not get hit back. To that end, you are probably the most aggressive of the Leader classes, providing abilities that help kill monsters more quickly and efficiently.
They put Enabling on top, then Buffing/debuffing, survivability, and healing in last position. That's EXACTLY what you do, without needing magic.

Also, from the official 4e Handbook, they describe the second "archetype" of leader as...


Tactical Warlord
Your leadership takes the form of quick commands, cunning strategies, and tactical superiority. Your powers guide your allies to extra (Manoeuvers) and more powerful (Stunning/Manoeuvers) attacks, as well as helping them move quickly (Manoeuvers) in combat situations. You also assist your allies by moving your enemies around (Manoeuvers/Flurry) or knocking them prone (Manoeuvers/Flurry).
Basically, Monk enhances Fighter by providing better chance at stunning that BBEG (Flurry of Blows + Stunning) or providing free prones chances (meaning effectively sparing manoeuvers) with flurry, while getting you the base defense and extra movement (Unarmored Movement, Step of the Wind) necessary to ensure you can do your job well, every time, (nearly) every fight.

If you still don't see how Monk synergizes with Fighter, and how it is precisely doing the job of a Warlord in a more sustainable and efficient way than Bard (especially with a dip in Cleric and Druid for the sake of comparing spellcasting healing/buff efficiency) I really don't know what I could say more. :)

[WickerNipple]

I totally get why monk synergizes with fighter. This is not about the competitiveness of this build.

But 4e Warlord just doesn't really do all that stuff yourself. You barely attack, your damage is on par with other 4e leaders... it's not a beatstick character. Were there to be a 5e warlord it would be a 1 attack class with an option 2 attack variant like bard. Instead you make everyone around you 5x more awesome, and that's your whole job.

Yes, it's totally great this character has all these bonus attacks and can apply status debuffs all over the place, but a 4e warlord would be (mostly) making everyone else do that for them. It's largely a different concept.

I'm not suggesting the bard variant is a better/stronger character. I'm suggesting it would play more like a 4e warlord. Biggest example: with a slightly different choice of Maneuvers, this character would be fine as a solo. A 4e Warlord is useless without a party.

[MeeposFire]

absolutely, if you aren't using a STR weapon it's def a top contender for dumping to 8.

it's been like this forever though, DEX CON and WIS are always the more useful stats, because they're the most common saves.

STR is more dumpable in 5e than it was in other editions though imho

I would say str was more dumpable in 4e where even classes that are supposed to use str (such as the warlord) could get away with using other ability scores. Heck my warlord used to have int as his high stat with str at 10 so I picked powers that lacked the warlord making an attack unless it used a basic attack (which I could make well since I used the intelligent blade master feat to use int for basic attacks).. In 4e since str and con shared defenses dumping str had few repercussions outside of power choices (class dependent) and athletics checks.

[WickerNipple]

An example from regular play, this is what my Warlord actually did, every combat:

Gave more +Init to everyone than Alert does now.
Let me reshuffle party initiative order so people went in the best order.
Let me shift practically the entire the entire party around on my turn.
And then do it again.
Auto free bonus to hit for the whole party first turn, and generated bonuses for the next 3ish turns.
Gave me multiple powers to do party wide buffs to hit and damage.
Let me generate crits for other people.
Let me give them huge bonuses when they do something special.
Let me hand off my attacks to do them, with bonuses.
Let me trade my turn to recharge their mega-attacks.
Let me heal as well (or better) than anyone else in the game, and give huge ridiculous buffs to those I heal.
Let me throw some nasty Stuns when no one else was doing it.

Basically every single thing you do all game long is to make everyone else awesome and control the flow of battle. You get a reach weapon or a whip and hide behind someone else, or a big shield and cower.

Sure, some of those things required that I hit someone first, but that was irrelevant. Typically I'd smack someone for 20pts and then the barb would get to auto crit for 80 on my turn and set off his whole crit fishing nonsense and then get to go again on his turn. Or I'd hit someone for 20pts and tell the Sorcerer they got a free turn to wreck the whole board. Or I'd hit someone for 20pts and tell everyone they now got free minor action attacks.

A 4e Warlord doesn't give a crap what their damage output is or how many attacks they can do. They care about dual wielding the other PCs. It's not a concept that translates well to 5e - but getting more cool toys for yourself instead of handing them to others is the opposite of what a warlord did. It's a support class, and an enabler.


I would say str was more dumpable in 4e

Str was vastly more dumpable in 4e, due to saves. When Fortitude was your choice of Str or Con there was literally no reason to take Strength for classes that didn't use it. Now there's at least they chance they might have to take a Str save.

[Malifice]

Best Warlord for mine is:

Devotion Paladin 12/ Valor Bard 5/ BM Fighter 3

Inspiring leader feat. Shield master feat. Protection and duelist fighting style. Expertise in Athletics and Persuasion.

Auras (Protection, Courage, Devotion). Song of Rest + Inspiring leader. Healing + Buff Spells. Manouvers (Commanders Strike, Rally, Distracting strike). Bardic and Combat inspiration.

Offense = Divine smite, Action surge, Improved divine smite, channel divinity, Extra attack. Hits hard offensively in its own right too.

Allies are getting buffed either:

1) Via your three awesome auras.
2) Via your superiority die (short rest recharge)
3) Via your spells (long rest recharge)
4) Via your bardic/ combat inspiration (short rest recharge)
5) Via your protection fighting style
6) Via your Inspiring leader feat and Song of rest class feature

[WickerNipple]

Yup, that works. I was thinking mostly LoreBard with enough BM to get two attacks, but I like the paladin frame better.

Late bloomer, though.

[Citan]

An example from regular play, this is what my Warlord actually did, every combat:

Gave more +Init to everyone than Alert does now.
Let me reshuffle party initiative order so people went in the best order.
Let me shift practically the entire the entire party around on my turn.
And then do it again.
Auto free bonus to hit for the whole party first turn, and generated bonuses for the next 3ish turns.
Gave me multiple powers to do party wide buffs to hit and damage.
Let me generate crits for other people.
Let me give them huge bonuses when they do something special.
Let me hand off my attacks to do them, with bonuses.
Let me trade my turn to recharge their mega-attacks.
Let me heal as well (or better) than anyone else in the game, and give huge ridiculous buffs to those I heal.
Let me throw some nasty Stuns when no one else was doing it.
Things in Red are plainly NOT doable in 5e AFAIK. It's sad, but deal with it.
Things in Blue are doable although in a toned down way.
+Initiative:
WIS build can only help one person with Guidance. Bard is indeed much better here. With that said, the chance of giving better bonus than Alert becomes good only at Bard 10+
Meaning also, for a Warlordish build, your best bet is Lore 10 / BM 8 / Ranger 2, which also means keeping spells low to get minimum amount of Superiority Dice.
Thing is, if you DO that, you basically used nearly all your inspiration dices on it, no more for battle. Also, while it's always good to have good Initiative, it's not mandatory for everyone. True strength of Bard lie in Lore's Cutting Words though since you can affect enemy Initiative. But here also, you consume a few of your precious dies.

+Life:
The multifive class build has very few low levels slots, but gets Life Goodberries: 10*(1+5) HP for one spell slot, and lasts 24h. You can spend all slots, take a long rest, and be fresh for the day with 180 consumable healing: equivalent to 14-18 range of lvl1 Cure Wounds and more than one Mass Cure Wounds. Sure, it's not "in-battle" healing so ridicule action-wise compared to a spellcaster, but in pure healing potency it's much more than decent.
In terms of pure healing, the best of the best shall ever be Life Cleric for Supreme Healing, followed by Lore Bard 19 / Life Cleric 1 (trading Supreme Healing for more versatility in healing spells like Paladin's Auras).

All the other things, in green? Not only can the BM/Monk/Ranger do it, but it do it as well as many other classes, and some things only he can do (like providing extra attack to someone).
Haste? Sure, but you're now stuck with it as a Spellcaster (oh, and, by the way, best buffer is not bard on that aspect but Sorcerer -or a mix of both- because Twinned/Quickened spell).
Commander's Strike is more versatile (choosing target every turn) and more powerful when it counts (because Action Surge).
Compelled Duel? Again, you're stuck with it. Goading attack lasts only one turn but more flexible.
Command? exactly what Manoeuvers does. Except it's one creature only for your Action. So less efficient.
Hold Person/Hold Monster? Concentration suck. My build? Stun then grapple if you'd like.

Wide buff to hits? Advantage.
Wide buffs to damage and autocrits? Prone.
Handing attacks with bonus? Commandeer's Strike.
Stuns when no one else can do it? Well you're right here.


1) Basically every single thing you do all game long is to make everyone else awesome and control the flow of battle. You get a reach weapon or a whip and hide behind someone else, or a big shield and cower.

2) Sure, some of those things required that I hit someone first, but that was irrelevant. Typically I'd smack someone for 20pts and then the barb would get to auto crit for 80 on my turn and set off his whole crit fishing nonsense and then get to go again on his turn. Or I'd hit someone for 20pts and tell the Sorcerer they got a free turn to wreck the whole board. Or I'd hit someone for 20pts and tell everyone they now got free minor action attacks.

3) A 4e Warlord doesn't give a crap what their damage output is or how many attacks they can do. They care about dual wielding the other PCs. It's not a concept that translates well to 5e - but getting more cool toys for yourself instead of handing them to others is the opposite of what a warlord did. It's a support class, and an enabler.

1) That's exactly what my build does. Just, instead of cowering behind a big shield, you use your own body to deflect and evade.

2) First example=prone with Flurry of Blows. Second example= Commander's strike. Third example= Stunning Strike/Disarm/whatever. Fourth one is either too OP for 5e (like one-turn Mass Haste) or irrelevant, since most physical builds get their own bonus attack anyways.


3) If you actually read my posts and think about what you read, you would have realized that it's exactly what I said.
As for "getting more cool toys for yourself instead of handing them to others is the opposite of what a warlord did. It's a support class, and an enabler..." Apart from being insulting to me (translating to "you just build something to have fun by yourself"), it also proves you just didn't even try to understand how to use the build or you actually don't understand the basic combat rules of 5e.
Apart from healing (which you can get pretty decent at with Healer, Inspiring Leader and dips) and Initiative (where indeed this build pales in comparison to Bard) this build provides one of the best (if not the best) way to control and enable. Not even taking combat Feats into account. With the added benefits of...
- No MAD at all.
- Much more sustainability/efficiency ratio in the long run than any other build (with typical day getting 6 to 8 medium/hard encounters before a long rest).
- No tiptoeing at all with any other classes, meaning it fits in any group (although it's obviously multiple better with physical allies).

But, well...
I'll stop here anyways because it's a useless one-sided exchange. While I bring arguments and demonstration to the table, you just whine about not getting your same exact feeling as 4e Warlord (which I understand, because it's true, you'll never get the exact same) without even trying to really think about practical combat and bring factual arguments to the table. Funniest thing though is that you actually enforces my demonstration that this build (or its spellcaster variant) is indeed (one of?) the closest one to original Warlord.

Best Warlord for mine is:
Devotion Paladin 12/ Valor Bard 5/ BM Fighter 3
Inspiring leader feat. Shield master feat. Protection and duelist fighting style. Expertise in Athletics and Persuasion.

Auras (Protection, Courage, Devotion). Song of Rest + Inspiring leader. Healing + Buff Spells. Manouvers (Commanders Strike, Rally, Distracting strike). Bardic and Combat inspiration.

Offense = Divine smite, Action surge, Improved divine smite, channel divinity, Extra attack. Hits hard offensively in its own right too.

Allies are getting buffed either:

1) Via your three awesome auras.
2) Via your superiority die (short rest recharge)
3) Via your spells (long rest recharge)
4) Via your bardic/ combat inspiration (short rest recharge)
5) Via your protection fighting style
6) Via your Inspiring leader feat and Song of rest class feature
This build is very good indeed (I'd just take Lore Bard instead because I personally prefer Cutting Words and Ancients or Oathbreaker Paladin for the awesomeness of their Auras). :)).

Although the best clearly comes from Paladin itself and Feats (which can be taken by everyone).
For the rest, you have only 5 bardic and 4 maneouvers dice. It's not so far from full BM dice-wise, but you have to choose your manoeuvers carefully and you only get d6/d8.

It's also good MAD-wise but begins to shine later than other builds (not so much a big deal though, Paladin being OP and all).
You're much more versatile all in all than OP build: you can heal, deal damage, buff, debuff, etc. It's a strength but also a weakness, since you have to carefully decide when to use long-rest resources and how to use the few rolling dices you get.

For someone tactician enough though, it's indeed the great build, more fun to play and potentially more powerful (especially if you stay close to your melee allies).
Somewhat close to the build I made for one of my own characters: Paladin Devotion 6 / Lore Bard 6 / Favored Soul Sorcerer / Warlock 2. Great difference here is (beyond the build being extra late bloomer) is free offensive spells and MM points for sorcerer, while keeping Lore Bard for Bardic and Magic Secrets. Warlock here only for fluff, Hex, Armor of Agathys and Eldricht Blast. :)

The "problem" here in fact is Paladin. It's so packed with features as a single-class that it's an obvious choice for many many multiclass builds (I struggle not including him in any CHA-biaised build ^^).

[Vogonjeltz]

How does it do it nicely at all? Any sort of warlord love in the battlemaster was a half-assed afterthought at best.

Looks like a fun character, but it doesn't strike me as particularly '4e warlord'.

A warlord's job was to heal, buff allies, sculpt the battlefield by moving other people's models, make allies attack, alter initiative values, etc etc.

You can do some of that, sure, and you're very limited by what 5e can provide in that respect, but just doing Bard/Battlemaster will check more boxes than this.

Wait, wait. The warlords job was to make other players lose control over their characters actions? (I'm specifically referring to where you say it moved others models).

That doesn't sound like fun for the other players at all, just fun from the narcissistic megalomaniacal perspective of the Warlord. Ew.

[Giant2005]

I'm not sure the Battlemaster's and Ranger's Superiority Dice would stack.
I think they would probably end up following similar rules to Channel Divinity in that you get the increased options but not the increased frequency.

[Citan]

I'm not sure the Battlemaster's and Ranger's Superiority Dice would stack.
I think they would probably end up following similar rules to Channel Divinity in that you get the increased options but not the increased frequency.
I 100% agree. By RAW it would be 7d12 and 4d8. Still, for a character that basically spent his entire life honing Manoeuvers (even taking a Martial Adept feat, although pretty dispensable when you already know 11 Manoeuvers and have 12 die ^^), I feel pretty reasonable to houserule that every die is a 12. It's also better for the GM. :)

By the way, I put the Feat just for the sake of going 100% BM. In reality, for such a build, if offers clearly not enough compared to other feats (Healer, Inspiring Leader, Polearm Master, Sentinel etc). I should mention that, but no time to refine OP for now (already spent too much time on this thread for today^^).

[Yagyujubei]

Wait, wait. The warlords job was to make other players lose control over their characters actions? (I'm specifically referring to where you say it moved others models).

That doesn't sound like fun for the other players at all, just fun from the narcissistic megalomaniacal perspective of the Warlord. Ew.

except for the fact that they still get their full turn to do whatever they want >_> have you played a warlod in 4e before? it's insane.

melee: oh noes battle started and were too far away, they got the drop on us!!!
Ranged: and were too close! were gonna get slaughtered!

warlord: good one, Spur to action! reorient the axis.

party: sweet now we all go first and are positioned correctly, thanks battleflow jesus!

[MeeposFire]

Wait, wait. The warlords job was to make other players lose control over their characters actions? (I'm specifically referring to where you say it moved others models).

That doesn't sound like fun for the other players at all, just fun from the narcissistic megalomaniacal perspective of the Warlord. Ew.

Players could still do their own actions on their turn the warlord could give extra movement and attacks outside of their turn. So when a warlord would use commanders strike he would tell the other player "attack that guy" and the other player would roll the attack and damage. Considering it was an extra attack for that player that round most people consider it a boon.