Warlord class for 5e without being OP?

[ZorroGames]

Never played 3.x or 4e (and very little 2e) so probably missed this class.

I am interested in what is the draw or attraction to his character?

It should be drawing my attention like a magnet, a leader of warriors, but the stuff on assorted links for 3.x and 4e seemed well... OTT for 5e in someways. Not having seen one played I am not comfortable making a judgment.

So what do, people want in a 5e Warlord? What are the defining aspects of a Warlord? How would it compare to the other 5e classes?

While this purely speculative I am curious to learn more of what draws people to a Warlord class.

Gracias in advance.

[Protato]

Nonmagical healing as a class/subclass feature for one, and for two, I think some sort of at-will combat bonuses is what I'd want, like how Mastermind gets Master of Tactics. Their main focus is to be a martial that doesn't do damage on their own but instead helps other characters to do damage, move around, and otherwise acts as support.

[ZorroGames]

Nonmagical healing as a class/subclass feature for one, and for two, I think some sort of at-will combat bonuses is what I'd want, like how Mastermind gets Master of Tactics. Their main focus is to be a martial that doesn't do damage on their own but instead helps other characters to do damage, move around, and otherwise acts as support.

Edit: How is the first different from Healer?

How is the second different from Battle Master?

[Naanomi]

I could see it working, but suspect it would end up with the same ‘artificial’ feeling that beastmaster pets have. Also, depending on how much is baked into the base class, I struggle to think of 4+ good subclass archetypes to explore that don’t also overlap with what people seem to want all Warlords to do

[Eric Diaz]

Buffing/healing your allies without magic, mostly, and making a "martial" character in which Intelligence or Cahriswma are relevant, maybe as relevant as Strength.

5e already has some aspects of Warlord IMO.

Things like Inspiring Leader, Rally and Commanding Strike. Also, some aspects of the Bard, Mastermind Rogue (Master of Tactics) and Paladin.

Not that the warlord is a Fighter, but in 5e you can do a decent(ish) warlord as a Battlemaster fighter, or some MCing.

There is no utility for Intelligence in a Fighter, though, unless he also casts spells.

Other things you could do in 4e - "move an ally one square", etc, doesn't fit 5e so well.

I think this could all be "fixed" with a couple of feat and battlemaster maneuvers, but since this definetly ain't happening I'd like to see a full-fledged new class.

[Kuulvheysoon]

Well, the Glamour bard has that one ability that I find really Warlordy - That first one about granting temporary hit points and letting allies move with their reaction?

[Unoriginal]

Never played 3.x or 4e (and very little 2e) so probably missed this class.

I am interested in what is the draw or attraction to his character?

It should be drawing my attention like a magnet, a leader of warriors, but the stuff on assorted links for 3.x and 4e seemed well... OTT for 5e in someways. Not having seen one played I am not comfortable making a judgment.

So what do, people want in a 5e Warlord? What are the defining aspects of a Warlord? How would it compare to the other 5e classes?

While this purely speculative I am curious to learn more of what draws people to a Warlord class.

Gracias in advance.

Mike Mearls is working on making a Warlord subclass, just to say.

[Eric Diaz]

Mike Mearls is working on making a Warlord subclass, just to say.

Subclass of fighter, I assume? Do you have a link for that? Thanks!

[Arkhios]

ZorroGames. I would've sent you a private message if you'd be interested in a freebie of what I think makes a warlord (non-freebie version is in my signature). Unfortunately you have blocked private messages (I think?) :/

For what it's worth, I don't think it's OP. It's based on a mix between features borrowed from Battle Master and Bard (mostly Valor) balanced towards a "half-caster", except it doesn't have spellcasting (or pact magic). And, of course, on the "original" idea from 4th edition Warlord, which is where the class was first introduced. 3.5 had marshal, of course, but it's not quite the same.

[CantigThimble]

I think trying to make warlord as a fighter subclass is a mistake personally. Fighters have a very powerful chassis and trying to cram everything people want warlords to do into a fighter subclass either ends up overpowered or fails to meet its design goals. How do you give new unlimited-use abilities to the guy with 3 attacks, action surge, and bonus ASIs without breaking things?

The other option for this is Bard, but they're full spellcasters, and rogue, who also can't fit a lot of stuff into their subclass.

If they're going to make warlord an official thing they're going to either need to make a whole new class or really break the template for subclasses a bit. (i.e. a fighter who doesn't get a third attack or something, like how they revised the ranger to make extra attack a hunter feature and gave beastmasters their own 5th level feature)

Personally, I don't think it's really necessary to jump through those kinds of hoops since multiclassing and feats already give the tools to make a pretty solid warlord. (Mastermind 3/Battlemaster 5 with the Healer feat, the order you get the abilities in is up to you but it has pretty much every key feature of the warlord and becomes fully functional within the level range of the majority of campaigns)

If I were to make a warlord class it would end up being pretty much that Mastermind 3/Battlemaster 5/Healer feat build, but with all the features modified slightly and incorperated into a natural class progression.

[Blood of Gaea]

Subclass of fighter, I assume? Do you have a link for that? Thanks!
Sure (https://www.twitch.tv/videos/243879889), it's been shown on Twitch.

[Naanomi]

Besides Bard and Fighter, the other natural ‘support’ option would be Paladin... Oath of Command or something

[Arkhios]

Besides Bard and Fighter, the other natural ‘support’ option would be Paladin... Oath of Command or something

Please, no. Warlord is definitely not a Paladin. Paladin's base features are of divine origin, regardless of how they gain their abilities. Warlord is anything but divine.

If warlord absolutely must have spellcasting, let it be arcane.... preferably bard, if they refuse to make it into its own class...

[ZorroGames]

ZorroGames. I would've sent you a private message if you'd be interested in a freebie of what I think makes a warlord (non-freebie version is in my signature). Unfortunately you have blocked private messages (I think?) :/

For what it's worth, I don't think it's OP. It's based on a mix between features borrowed from Battle Master and Bard (mostly Valor) balanced towards a "half-caster", except it doesn't have spellcasting (or pact magic). And, of course, on the "original" idea from 4th edition Warlord, which is where the class was first introduced. 3.5 had marshal, of course, but it's not quite the same.

Off to check settings. Time to remove people from ignore list while I am at it.

[Naanomi]

Please, no. Warlord is definitely not a Paladin. Paladin's base features are of divine origin, regardless of how they gain their abilities. Warlord is anything but divine.

If warlord absolutely must have spellcasting, let it be arcane.... preferably bard, if they refuse to make it into its own class...
Paladins get their powers from their conviction and Oaths, not from the Gods. In any case, I just meant mechanically fitting, not fluffwise (I agree that if they are done they should be fully martial, with perhaps subclass exceptions)

[ZorroGames]

ZorroGames. I would've sent you a private message if you'd be interested in a freebie of what I think makes a warlord (non-freebie version is in my signature). Unfortunately you have blocked private messages (I think?) :/

For what it's worth, I don't think it's OP. It's based on a mix between features borrowed from Battle Master and Bard (mostly Valor) balanced towards a "half-caster", except it doesn't have spellcasting (or pact magic). And, of course, on the "original" idea from 4th edition Warlord, which is where the class was first introduced. 3.5 had marshal, of course, but it's not quite the same.

Spent the $ and downloaded your file on dmsguild. Worth the small amount of money to get an idea about a Warlord might be like

[Eric Diaz]

I think trying to make warlord as a fighter subclass is a mistake personally. Fighters have a very powerful chassis and trying to cram everything people want warlords to do into a fighter subclass either ends up overpowered or fails to meet its design goals. How do you give new unlimited-use abilities to the guy with 3 attacks, action surge, and bonus ASIs without breaking things?

Both ways would work IMO...

"How do you give new unlimited-use abilities to the guy with 3 attacks?" Well, you tie them to attacks, or superiority die (not unlimited, but you could use something like that), etc.

But TBH I would like to see a warlord class. Make it "half fighter" like barb/pally/ranger (2 attacks), get him some good uses for bonus actions/other people's reactions, some stuff he can use by himself, some abilities that rely on Int/Cha, etc.

[Eric Diaz]

Sure (https://www.twitch.tv/videos/243879889), it's been shown on Twitch.

Nice! Cheers!

Ooooh, I like some of his goals. Int should be important, features tied to attacks... might be good.

[sambojin]

If the Mystic ends up anything like the current UA, it'll make for a fine Warlord. The current version contains plenty of party control, healing, buffing, etc. Probably too much really.

But much like someone deciding to make a Thunder Mage or something, it's up to you to *not* use everything that is available to you, lest you be just another wizard (or mystic, in this case).

Starts out a bit weak feeling, but by lvl5 you'll be happily giving extra movement and actions to your party on a pretty regular basis. Scales weirdly, but well.

Here's a link to Warlord'y stuff in the Mystic class (last post) :
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?551109-What-s-a-Warlord&highlight=Warlord&p=22850525#post22850525

[Daithi]

Mike Mearls just spent the last four weeks designing the Warlord for 5e. It's not a class that particularly appeals to me, so I haven't watched all the videos. However, if someone is drawn to the Warlord then maybe they'll watch the videos and post a summary here.

Mike Mearls 5e Warlord subclass part 1 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E-p_eoKxIH8&t=1389s)
Mike Mearls 5e Warlord subclass part 2 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dK1--2XO_Y0&t=1s)
Mike Mearls 5e Warlord subclass part 3 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ywqZv5sejsY)
Mike Mearls 5e Warlord subclass part 4 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MpmbrXdBt1U)


I can't post 3 sentences without a grammar or spelling error.

[Arkhios]

Paladins get their powers from their conviction and Oaths, not from the Gods.

I know that. Still, it doesn't change the fact that Divine Smite, Divine Health, Divine Sense, and Channel Divinity are ...well... Divine. Divine doesn't neccessarily imply Gods' influence. Being a Warlord just isn't about conviction or oaths. It's about warfare and knowing how to beat your opponent in various ways, and to lead your allies to be better at it.


Spent the $ and downloaded your file on dmsguild. Worth the small amount of money to get an idea about a Warlord might be like

Well, that's nice to hear. :)

[Kane0]

Mike Mearls just spent the last four weeks designing the Warlord for 5e. It's not a class that particularly appeals to me, so I haven't watched all the videos. However, if someone is drawn to the Warlord then maybe they'll watch the videos and post a summary here.

Mike Mearls 5e Warlord subclass part 1 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E-p_eoKxIH8&t=1389s)
Mike Mearls 5e Warlord subclass part 2 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dK1--2XO_Y0&t=1s)
Mike Mearls 5e Warlord subclass part 3 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ywqZv5sejsY)
Mike Mearls 5e Warlord subclass part 4 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MpmbrXdBt1U)


Anyone got the written version? I wont have the chance to sit and listen to four Mearls hours for a while

[Unoriginal]

What I can say is that Mearls isn't going to make the Warlord any kind of caster.

[Anonymouswizard]

Mike Mearls is working on making a Warlord subclass, just to say.

I'm a bit suspicious of all of Mearls's homebrew. I don't think it's unbalanced, I just think he tends to have a few too many moving parts.

OTOH if I was making a Warlord I'd make them a class and give them separate pools of movement, bonus attacks, and Inspiration that they can dish out to the party I'd also only make some subclasses have extra attack and regulate nonmagical healing to subclass abilities. Actually I might do that for the hack I'm trying to build.

[ZorroGames]

It sounds to me like a Warlord is a fighter who leads others.

So maybe a fighter who uses IN, WI, and/or CH more than ST or DE?

Is that still a D&D fighter or more a “spell-less Wizard/Cleric/Warlock” character?

Up until now I have felt we have at least enough if not too many classes in 5e. This seems a quandary. Where does the Warlord fit?

If much of your effects are on friendlies you could have a lower spell DC (and abilities) than the usual character (optimized or not.)

So the forum dreaded ST 12, DE 12, CO 12, In 13, WI 13, CH 13, (shift around those numbers as fits your concept) style build would be capable?

Edit: numbers changed to be AL legal with point buy.

If they are not a Fighter than ST and DE are less valuable than some sort of leadership stat. Pick IN, WI, and CH in some combination that fits your model.

If they are not Divine based but leading from the front then ST or DE plus IN and CH.

More modern style leadership (observing behind the front line and guiding/aiding by “not-spells”) then drop ST and DE to 10-12 and boost two or three of IN/WI/CH to provide that leadership style in the model you think reflects that best.

Fascinating subject.

[EvilAnagram]

It sounds to me like a Warlord is a fighter who leads others.

So maybe a fighter who uses IN, WI, and/or CH more than ST or DE?

Is that still a D&D fighter or more a “spell-less Wizard/Cleric/Warlock” character?

Up until now I have felt we have at least enough if not too many classes in 5e. This seems a quandary. Where does the Warlord fit?

If much of your effects are on friendlies you could have a lower spell DC (and abilities) than the usual character (optimized or not.)

So the forum dreaded ST 12, DE 12, CO 12, In 13, WI 13, CH 13, (shift around those numbers as fits your concept) style build would be capable?

Edit: numbers changed to be AL legal with point buy.

If they are not a Fighter than ST and DE are less valuable than some sort of leadership stat. Pick IN, WI, and CH in some combination that fits your model.

If they are not Divine based but leading from the front then ST or DE plus IN and CH.

More modern style leadership (observing behind the front line and guiding/aiding by “not-spells”) then drop ST and DE to 10-12 and boost two or three of IN/WI/CH to provide that leadership style in the model you think reflects that best.

Fascinating subject.

A lot of the core maneuvers of the Battle Master were taken from the Warlord. Giving up an attack so someone else can make one, for example, is classic Warlord. However, a Warlord would be able to do something like attack an enemy, then provide 15' of op-attack free movement to all allies within range, who would then be able to make a single basic attack against the target with combat advantage.

The Battle Master was clearly intended to be a Warlord-esque archetype, but the fact is that a Warlord can completely change the battlefield and make himself the tactical fulcrum of the group. The Battle Master can't.