For those that want the 4e Warlord in 5e, what is the Minimal Viable Power Set?

[PhoenixPhyre]

That is, if someone says "I ported the 4e Warlord to 5e", what high-level capabilities[1] would you want to see before you said "yup, that captures the spirit of the 4e class alright".

NOTE: I'm not talking about implementation here. Porting implementations rarely is useful in any particular sense, especially between 4e and 5e. I'm much more concerned with capabilities. What's the difference?


Consider one of the core(?) Warlord features, the ability to move an ally off-turn.

Capability: I have a feature that allows me to trigger an ally's move while it is not their turn.
4e version: Nimble Footwork (Encounter 1) STR vs AC: 2W + STR and shift 1, one ally within 2 squares of you can shift 1 as a free action.
Possible Implementation 1 (5e):
When you hit an enemy with a weapon attack, you can move up to 5 feet without provoking an Opportunity attack, and one willing creature of your choice within 10 feet can move up to 5 feet without provoking an Opportunity attack. Once you use this ability, you cannot use it again until you finish a long or short rest.
Possible Implementation 2 (5e): As a bonus action on your turn, you can create an opening. One willing creature you can see moves up to their speed and does not provoke Opportunity attacks while moving. You can use this feature a number of times equal to your proficiency bonus, regaining expended uses when you finish a long or short rest.

Two very different implementations of the same capability: #1 is a "straight" translation of 4e into 5e (shift == move without provoking, and 1 square = 5'), and #2 is a much looser translation. For the purposes of this discussion, I'm not focused on implementation, as that would depend strongly on the rest of the class or subclass design.


Initial thoughts:
* non-magical healing, possibly including but not limited to temporary hit points.
* Giving up (potential) personal output for improved ally output.
* "Team mobility boosts"
* ??

[1] I settled on this word because "feature" and "ability" (and a lot of the synonyms) are already heavily overused for more specific things. Capability is a superset of all of those "things you can do".

[Mastikator]

Personally I'd want a fully armed and operational martial capabilities as a baseline (heavy armor, shield, all weapons, d10 hp, extra attack, free bonus damage on higher levels, that sorta stuff).

Beyond that I want these three things:
An aura that gives offensive combat benefits to allies.
Use reaction to apply a rider effect to an ally when they attack an enemy.
Make him a half caster, with the bard's spell list.

[Dr.Samurai]

That is, if someone says "I ported the 4e Warlord to 5e", what high-level capabilities[1] would you want to see before you said "yup, that captures the spirit of the 4e class alright".

NOTE: I'm not talking about implementation here. Porting implementations rarely is useful in any particular sense, especially between 4e and 5e. I'm much more concerned with capabilities. What's the difference?


Consider one of the core(?) Warlord features, the ability to move an ally off-turn.

Capability: I have a feature that allows me to trigger an ally's move while it is not their turn.
4e version: Nimble Footwork (Encounter 1) STR vs AC: 2W + STR and shift 1, one ally within 2 squares of you can shift 1 as a free action.
Possible Implementation 1 (5e):
When you hit an enemy with a weapon attack, you can move up to 5 feet without provoking an Opportunity attack, and one willing creature of your choice within 10 feet can move up to 5 feet without provoking an Opportunity attack. Once you use this ability, you cannot use it again until you finish a long or short rest.
Possible Implementation 2 (5e): As a bonus action on your turn, you can create an opening. One willing creature you can see moves up to their speed and does not provoke Opportunity attacks while moving. You can use this feature a number of times equal to your proficiency bonus, regaining expended uses when you finish a long or short rest.

Two very different implementations of the same capability: #1 is a "straight" translation of 4e into 5e (shift == move without provoking, and 1 square = 5'), and #2 is a much looser translation. For the purposes of this discussion, I'm not focused on implementation, as that would depend strongly on the rest of the class or subclass design.


Initial thoughts:
* non-magical healing, possibly including but not limited to temporary hit points.
* Giving up (potential) personal output for improved ally output.
* "Team mobility boosts"
* ??

[1] I settled on this word because "feature" and "ability" (and a lot of the synonyms) are already heavily overused for more specific things. Capability is a superset of all of those "things you can do".
Wow, I've been on this same vibe, currently wondering how to make a viable Banneret Fighter.

I think what you have listed is definitely a good start. I think aura type effects like the 3.5 Marshal might be another good "capability" to look into.

Not necessarily linked to "warlords" per se but if this was a class with subclasses, a cavalier option with a mounted creature could work well, as you could in theory use the same features you'd use on your allies on your mount, making for a knight archetype that can actually fight with their mount (probably not what you're looking for but figured I'd throw it in anyways).

Maybe one of the features interacts with other class features? I don't know if that would be too wonky but improving signature class abilities of their allies like Rage, Sneak Attack, Action Surge, Flurry of Blows, etc. Probably the opposite direction you'd want to go in :smallredface:.

[PhoenixPhyre]

Wow, I've been on this same vibe, currently wondering how to make a viable Banneret Fighter.

I think what you have listed is definitely a good start. I think aura type effects like the 3.5 Marshal might be another good "capability" to look into.

Not necessarily linked to "warlords" per se but if this was a class with subclasses, a cavalier option with a mounted creature could work well, as you could in theory use the same features you'd use on your allies on your mount, making for a knight archetype that can actually fight with their mount (probably not what you're looking for but figured I'd throw it in anyways).

Maybe one of the features interacts with other class features? I don't know if that would be too wonky but improving signature class abilities of their allies like Rage, Sneak Attack, Action Surge, Flurry of Blows, etc. Probably the opposite direction you'd want to go in :smallredface:.

My current WIP (very very rough) design is as a Fighter (well, my altered version) subclass, because I'm not up (right now) for a full other base class.


3: Command: Strike (give up attack to allow 1+ others to attack, they get bonus of +1 weapon die, increasing to +2 weapon die at level 11)
3: Command: Hustle (basically my "implementation 2" in the spoiler above, but with slightly different usage limits and giving THP = level at 11+)

7: Command: Hold the Line (Anyone you choose who can hear/see you gets to use reaction to end fear/stagger/shaken[1], even if they otherwise couldn't use a reaction, plus have advantage on saves against those for one minute)

10: Staunch the Bleeding (may move this down): touch heal worth 3 HD (but doesn't expend the HD). More effective on targets who are under half HP (max healing instead of rolled).

15: Leave No One Behind (when you use a new base-class ability that's basically misty step, but not-quite at will, you can bring someone else along with you)

18: EITHER: can cast glibness and heroes' feast (but in-fiction not as spells for various reasons) once per day each OR some kind of area heal when you use Deathblow[2].

[1] the latter two are new conditions that are cut down versions of stun and slow, respectively
[2] a new "fighter" ability that lets them spend resources to auto-kill creatures at low HP (with a scaling threshold); targets with too high HP either get stunned or you refund the resource (that's to avoid the whole "great against trash, useless against bosses" problem with OKHO abilities, plus the whole metagame "how low are they?" problem.

Still very very rough at this point, and I'll probably move the heal down a bit and re-arrange things. Maybe as a third "command" at level 3, something like "Command: Walk it Off, heals 1 HD. improves by 1 HD at 7 and 11" or something like that and have a new level 10 feature.

[Amnestic]

To me,
Required:-
Non-magical healing
Moving allies
Sacrificing their own damage to increase their ally's damage (this could be in the form(s) of an additional attack, Advantage, a damage boost, and/or expanding crit range).

Desired/Considerations:-
Initiative boosts
Temp HP
"Lockdown" on enemies (disincentivising moving, knocking prone)
Moving enemies
Short duration defensive boosts (eg. +2 AC to allies who can hear you until start of your next turn)
Additional opportunities to end saves on allies
Condition resistances/immunities (Esp. charmed/frightened) for allies and possibly self
Resource regeneration for allies (eg. spell slots, class features like Action Surge)
Marking 'target zones' on the battlefield which grant allies buffs/debuffs while they remain inside them. Could/would encourage additional movement and shepherding of the party+enemies.

Some of the required stuff could be split off into subclasses (eg. "This is your Lockdown Warlord, this is your Defensive Boost Warlord") rather than being part of the core class, mind you.

[KorvinStarmast]

Personally I'd want a fully armed and operational martial capabilities as a baseline (heavy armor, shield, all weapons, d10 hp, extra attack, free bonus damage on higher levels, that sorta stuff).

Beyond that I want these three things:
An aura that gives offensive combat benefits to allies.
Use reaction to apply a rider effect to an ally when they attack an enemy.
Make him a half caster, with the bard's spell list. Looks like a Paladin, with "something something" battle master.

[LibraryOgre]

Bare minimum? Add a maneuver to the Battlemaster to allow for healing.

Commander's Strike and Maneuvering Attack give them ally attack and movement options. Rally gives temporary HP. So the main feature of the Warlord, IMO, that you don't see in the BM is healing.

Something like

Bolstering Cry: As a bonus action, spend one superiority die and allow an ally to spend one or more hit dice to heal. Add your superiority die to the total healing.

Now, the reason I think this is fairly reasonable (when compared to Rally, which is SD + Charisma modifier temporary HP) is that there's the dual cost... the BM spends a superiority die, and the target spends at least 1 HD. If you think it is too good, upgrade it to an action... but I think that is too weak.

[Psyren]

I like LibraryOgre's idea of tying any actual healing to the Hit Dice mechanic, as that would best justify martial healing within the fiction. That plus temporary hit points should allow a Warlord to fulfill that role without any incongruity.

I also like Dr. Samurai's idea of incorporating Marshal Auras. Mobility boosts and off-turn movement for allies (included in the OP) would be ideal as well.

A nice "killer app" for this... class? subclass?... would be to allow it to grant allies extra actions, bonus actions and/or reactions, even if the extra ones were limited in application. That would make it quite the force mulitiplier.

[Amnestic]

Second Wind doesn't expend a hit dice, there's no need for Warlords to do so either.

If you do want to make Warlord healing expend hit dice, you should ensure the Warlord ability has unlimited uses.

However, you should also be aware of how that will impact players considering short rests/long rests, and whether that's a pace you want to set. Also worth bearing in mind that a character only gets half their max hit dice back on a long rest, which would make the Warlord the only class that wouldn't get all their core feature uses back on a long rest - I'm excluding the rare "1d4+1 rests" and "one week" stuff, since they're not 'core' to the class like Warlord healing would be.

[Mindflayer_Inc]

That is, if someone says "I ported the 4e Warlord to 5e", what high-level capabilities[1] would you want to see before you said "yup, that captures the spirit of the 4e class alright".

NOTE: I'm not talking about implementation here. Porting implementations rarely is useful in any particular sense, especially between 4e and 5e. I'm much more concerned with capabilities. What's the difference?


Consider one of the core(?) Warlord features, the ability to move an ally off-turn.

Capability: I have a feature that allows me to trigger an ally's move while it is not their turn.
4e version: Nimble Footwork (Encounter 1) STR vs AC: 2W + STR and shift 1, one ally within 2 squares of you can shift 1 as a free action.
Possible Implementation 1 (5e):
When you hit an enemy with a weapon attack, you can move up to 5 feet without provoking an Opportunity attack, and one willing creature of your choice within 10 feet can move up to 5 feet without provoking an Opportunity attack. Once you use this ability, you cannot use it again until you finish a long or short rest.
Possible Implementation 2 (5e): As a bonus action on your turn, you can create an opening. One willing creature you can see moves up to their speed and does not provoke Opportunity attacks while moving. You can use this feature a number of times equal to your proficiency bonus, regaining expended uses when you finish a long or short rest.

Two very different implementations of the same capability: #1 is a "straight" translation of 4e into 5e (shift == move without provoking, and 1 square = 5'), and #2 is a much looser translation. For the purposes of this discussion, I'm not focused on implementation, as that would depend strongly on the rest of the class or subclass design.


Initial thoughts:
* non-magical healing, possibly including but not limited to temporary hit points.
* Giving up (potential) personal output for improved ally output.
* "Team mobility boosts"
* ??

[1] I settled on this word because "feature" and "ability" (and a lot of the synonyms) are already heavily overused for more specific things. Capability is a superset of all of those "things you can do".

First, the fighter needs to be reworked. A. Lot.

Secondly, the Purple Dragon Knight needs to be reworked. A. Lot.

3rs, a non-magical Bard would do the trick.

[Jurai]

You could call the subclasses 'Banner of' whatever, like a subclass focused on Temp HP healing could be Banner of Perseverance, or a Banner focused on moving allies and obstructing foes could be Banner of the Fortress.

[LibraryOgre]

Second Wind doesn't expend a hit dice, there's no need for Warlords to do so either.

If you do want to make Warlord healing expend hit dice, you should ensure the Warlord ability has unlimited uses.

However, you should also be aware of how that will impact players considering short rests/long rests, and whether that's a pace you want to set. Also worth bearing in mind that a character only gets half their max hit dice back on a long rest, which would make the Warlord the only class that wouldn't get all their core feature uses back on a long rest - I'm excluding the rare "1d4+1 rests" and "one week" stuff, since they're not 'core' to the class like Warlord healing would be.

I am absolutely not following you here.

What I'm proposing is a maneuver for Battlemasters; they get to heal people (or, more accurately, allow others to heal themselves, since it is the target's HD being spent). Allowing them to give other people Second Wind through a maneuver is interesting, and might be a good replacement for the HD healing; the advantage of the HD healing is the option to spend more of them.

[Dr.Samurai]

I think what Amnestic is saying is that the Maneuver, which works off of a short rest mechanic, is tied to your ally's Hit Die expenditure, and those are more limited.

[Amnestic]

I am absolutely not following you here.

What I'm proposing is a maneuver for Battlemasters; they get to heal people (or, more accurately, allow others to heal themselves, since it is the target's HD being spent). Allowing them to give other people Second Wind through a maneuver is interesting, and might be a good replacement for the HD healing; the advantage of the HD healing is the option to spend more of them.

Hopefully I can clarify!

I quoted Second Wind as an example of non-magical healing that doesn't utilise hit dice, in response to Psyren's claim that HD for non-magical healing is 'better justified in the fiction' (it's not, it's ambivalent to the fiction).

My other point was that any feature which connects to the ally expending a hit dice shouldn't also expend another resource (eg. maneuver uses) because then it's double dipping on resources expended. It'd be like if Cure Wounds cost a spell slot and a hit dice in order to heal. A hypothetical healing feature should use one resource, but not both. So if the hypothetical ability is expending hit dice, it shouldn't be otherwise limited in uses - it's already 'capped' by ally hit dice available.

The third, related, point, was how hit dice expenditure being used as healing can influence a party's short rest/long rest pace. If the party can heal swiftly via expending HD, are they less incentivised to short rest, thereby making short rest classes (fighter, monk, warlock) 'worse'? Quite possibly. That might not be a bad thing, but it's something to be aware of for the design of the ability. Related to that is the fact that unlike maneuver uses/spell slots, you don't regen all your hit dice at the end of the day, just half of them, which makes the feature less effective if the party has two or more back-to-back adventuring days.

[PhoenixPhyre]

Yeah. My plan is to scale healing with the target's HD, but not expend them. The resource expenditure is entirely on the warlord's side. The other way could work (at will for the warlord, expends target hit dice), but not expending both of them.

As for "magical" or not...yeah, I don't really buy into that distinction (anyone who doesn't cast spells is a muggle) as a valid one. A warlord shouldn't cast spells, but I'm totally fine with them (and everyone else) having some abilities that are magical. And yeah, shouting at someone until they stop bleeding out or even bandaging wounds meaningfully in 6 seconds is totally a non-mundane thing. Call it fantastic or magical, don't care. It's not something normally possible. And that's 100% ok by me.

[Psyren]

Second Wind doesn't expend a hit dice, there's no need for Warlords to do so either.


Hopefully I can clarify!

I quoted Second Wind as an example of non-magical healing that doesn't utilise hit dice, in response to Psyren's claim that HD for non-magical healing is 'better justified in the fiction' (it's not, it's ambivalent to the fiction).

Second Wind is self-only though, and represents "a well of physical and mental stamina." A Fighter having such a well they can draw on through their mental and physical conditioning makes sense. A Warlord being able to non-magically infuse a wizard with such a well, well, not so much.


If you do want to make Warlord healing expend hit dice, you should ensure the Warlord ability has unlimited uses.

Yeah I'd be fine with no use limit on something that involves the target spending their own limited hit dice/healing surges/etc. If there's a temp HP portion though, that would need a limit of some kind.

[Damon_Tor]

What would happen if you basically just made a 1/1 port from one system to the other? You'd need to work out how to convert things like attacks vs NADs into proper saving throws, but I don't expect that to be that much of a challenge.

Would it be OP? UP? Are there core assumptions of either system that just fail in a direct port?

[Psyren]

What would happen if you basically just made a 1/1 port from one system to the other? You'd need to work out how to convert things like attacks vs NADs into proper saving throws, but I don't expect that to be that much of a challenge.

Would it be OP? UP? Are there core assumptions of either system that just fail in a direct port?

Their healing in 4e is centered around granting temp HP and healing surges. The former is a base part of 5e while the latter is a variant rule (DMG 266), but is ultimately tied to the spending hit dice thing anyway.

[PhoenixPhyre]

What would happen if you basically just made a 1/1 port from one system to the other? You'd need to work out how to convert things like attacks vs NADs into proper saving throws, but I don't expect that to be that much of a challenge.

Would it be OP? UP? Are there core assumptions of either system that just fail in a direct port?

Lots of things go sideways. 4e has lots of tiny modifiers, and generally one attack per turn. Among many other issues.

[LibraryOgre]

My other point was that any feature which connects to the ally expending a hit dice shouldn't also expend another resource (eg. maneuver uses) because then it's double dipping on resources expended. It'd be like if Cure Wounds cost a spell slot and a hit dice in order to heal. A hypothetical healing feature should use one resource, but not both. So if the hypothetical ability is expending hit dice, it shouldn't be otherwise limited in uses - it's already 'capped' by ally hit dice available.

I'd say that BM maneuvers already do this... consider Commander's Strike. You have to make an attack action, sacrifice one of your attacks, and your bonus action, and a superiority die, so your ally can spend their reaction to make an attack. It's not the same as a HD for healing, but it's still a fair amount of expenditure for a single attack.



The third, related, point, was how hit dice expenditure being used as healing can influence a party's short rest/long rest pace. If the party can heal swiftly via expending HD, are they less incentivised to short rest, thereby making short rest classes (fighter, monk, warlock) 'worse'? Quite possibly. That might not be a bad thing, but it's something to be aware of for the design of the ability. Related to that is the fact that unlike maneuver uses/spell slots, you don't regen all your hit dice at the end of the day, just half of them, which makes the feature less effective if the party has two or more back-to-back adventuring days.

While I can somewhat see this argument, with the fighter, at the very least, you have that they need to expend the superiority dice to use the ability. However, let's try a bit of a change.

Bolstering Cry: As a bonus action, spend one superiority die. An ally you can see, who can hear you, can use their reaction and make use of your Second Wind feature, plus your superiority die. This expends your use of Second Wind until your next short or long rest.

It moves it off the HD healing, but still costs the BM to use it. It's more healing than the Rally offers, but it does have a cost beyond what Rally does (SW use and reaction).

[Mastikator]

Bolstering Cry: As a bonus action, spend one superiority die. An ally you can see, who can hear you, can use their reaction and make use of your Second Wind feature, plus your superiority die. This expends your use of Second Wind until your next short or long rest.

It moves it off the HD healing, but still costs the BM to use it. It's more healing than the Rally offers, but it does have a cost beyond what Rally does (SW use and reaction).

But.... but... this totally sucks? You're expending a bonus action, your ally's reaction, a superiority dice and a second wind, just to heal them a 3rd level worth of cure wound? This martial/support (sub)class doesn't even exist and we're already nerfing it?

Here's my proposal: you use your bonus action, target an ally within 30 feet, roll a superiority dice, they heal the result in expended hit points and gain an equal amount of temporary hit points, and if they use their reaction they can expend one hit dice and add that to their healed hit points.

[tiornys]

My key capabilities of a 4E-style warlord:
Increase party alertness/initiative by existing (parties with Warlords win initiative more often than parties with other leaders)
Enhance party efficiency by existing, preferably as a few power spikes per combat rather than a constant bonus (the explosiveness of enhanced action points is a big part of the Warlord's appeal to me)
Further enhance party efficiency through actions taken, including your points of healing, extra actions/output by sacrificing actions/output, and mobility boosts. Ideally there would be some level of frequent/constant boosts and the ability to occasionally provide power spikes (the battle-turning/saving influence level of many Warlord daily powers is another big part of the Warlord's appeal)

[Amnestic]

I'd say that BM maneuvers already do this... consider Commander's Strike. You have to make an attack action, sacrifice one of your attacks, and your bonus action, and a superiority die, so your ally can spend their reaction to make an attack. It's not the same as a HD for healing, but it's still a fair amount of expenditure for a single attack.


I agree that CS costs too much in action economy, and is probably a result of being printed in 2014 rather than today. I'd change it to "attack or bonus action" (your choice)+SD for cost. Delete the reaction cost entirely.

[Gurgeh]

Second Wind is self-only though, and represents "a well of physical and mental stamina." A Fighter having such a well they can draw on through their mental and physical conditioning makes sense. A Warlord being able to non-magically infuse a wizard with such a well, well, not so much.
The Banneret already does this with Rallying Cry - so while it may not make sense to you, the designers clearly think it's conceptually okay for a fighter to heal non-Fighters through the power of inspiration and positive thinking.


I agree that CS costs too much in action economy, and is probably a result of being printed in 2014 rather than today. I'd change it to "attack or bonus action" (your choice)+SD for cost. Delete the reaction cost entirely.
iirc the most recent battlemaster playtest for 5.5 removed the bonus action cost from CS, so the designers are at least in the same ballpark as you.

[Damon_Tor]

Lots of things go sideways. 4e has lots of tiny modifiers, and generally one attack per turn. Among many other issues.

IIRC, 4e has a built-in magic item assumption while 5e does not, but all you have to do is ignore that: it's systemic, but not a part of character building. You'd probably just use 5e's feats and ignore 4e's, so there's another source of tiny additive bonuses not to worry about. You'd probably have to allow him to pick a paragon path, because that's a big part of the 10-20 level features, but I don't feel like those would add too much added complexity.

[PhoenixPhyre]

IIRC, 4e has a built-in magic item assumption while 5e does not, but all you have to do is ignore that: it's systemic, but not a part of character building. You'd probably just use 5e's feats and ignore 4e's, so there's another source of tiny additive bonuses not to worry about. You'd probably have to allow him to pick a paragon path, because that's a big part of the 10-20 level features, but I don't feel like those would add too much added complexity.

The math scaling is completely different. Of the warlord powers, the bulk involve giving +1 or +2 (or -1 or -2) to things in ways that stack. And the attacks are very different--scaling via one big attack, where only Exploits do any reasonable damage vs 5e's scaling via many "melee basic attacks". Plus a huge chunk of the Warlord specifically revolves around the Action Point system, which doesn't really have any kind of universal analogue--the fighter's Action Surge is the closest but is fighter only. Basically, you have to rework the entire class anyway just to do a close matching, and you end up with something utterly janky that plays very differently.

Another thing is that 4e used opportunity attacks whenever you moved within reach and there was no Disengage action, with default flanking, so the value of a Shift X (move X squares without provoking) power was much greater than a simple move 5*X feet power would be, even without provoking. Since 5e doesn't have meaningful flanking[1] and you can move freely within reach, such powers are fairly meaningless here for X = 1 or 2 (the bulk of warlord's movement powers).

[1] no, the optional rule doesn't do it. In fact, it's probably the worst optional rule in the books. And that's saying something.

[Psyren]

The Banneret already does this with Rallying Cry - so while it may not make sense to you, the designers clearly think it's conceptually okay for a fighter to heal non-Fighters through the power of inspiration and positive thinking.

Point - but they were probably okay with it since it's tied to your own use of Second Wind, i.e. they can heal people only when they're healing themselves, including the once per short rest. The amount of healing being paltry likely helped too.

If they were going for an actual martial healer class as opposed to a gimmick niche use case of a non-healer's subclass, I think they'd have gone with the hit dice or healing surges approach. (Note however that I'd be okay with them granting extra hit dice or some other extension of that limit as part of this.)

[Yakk]

I consider "has healing" to be relatively unimportant. What I want from a Warlord is a martial support character.

It should support tactically, offensively and defensively.

I would want it to feel like 5e, not like a 4e port.

I'd be ok with it only being a front-line Warlord, especially as an initial pass. Instead of the rainbow of Warlords in 4e, which included multiple ranged variants, focus on the core warlord, which is mainly melee ranged.

...

Positioning in 4e is more important than 5e. I might want Warlord mechanics that make positioning more important. Like, abilities that trigger when an ally flanks?

Something like Commander's Strike is rather important. As this is a front-line Warlord, I might replace Extra Attack with it - when you take the attack action you get to issue a Commander's Strike as part of it.

...

Defensively, rather than open up the bag of bees that is martial healing, I'd probably go with temporary HP and making enemies miss.

Disruptive Strike is one of the best 4e abilities, and while it isn't a warlord one, making it a warlord ability is a great way to give the warlord some support.

...

Starting at level 5, most of the following (but some of it can be level 6-10 abilities).

1. Take the attack action and allow an ally to make an attack as a reaction. Allies attack is made at advantage, and deals +1d12 bonus damage.
2. Has a 2nd reaction.
3. Can spend a reaction to let an ally make an opportunity attack without spending a reaction.
4. Can spend a reaction to do a disruptive strike (creature hits, you attack first, if your reaction attack hits, creature has to reroll with disadvantage)
5. Bonus action grant temporary HP. Target must be bloodied, they spend a HD to heal, and gain temporary HP equal to your Warlord Level plus the amount healed. A given creature can benefit from this at most once between short rests.
6. Medium armor/Shield
7. Out of combat-utility. Guidance-like? Or flash of inspiration-like?
8. Some kind of initiative bonus.
9. Some kind of first-turn bonus.

At level 11, I might give the Warlord a choice between making an extra attack, or ordering two different allies to make an attack as a reaction.

...

Subclasses:
Scholar of War - uses Knowledge skills in combat.
Bravado - bonuses to allies to attack who the Warlord attacks, or who attack the Warlord.
Princess - maybe the "I don't actually attack" version can be a subclass?

[Just to Browse]

Increases initiative for everybody
Gives HP (temp or healing)
Lets allies take actions out of turn
Gives allies short-term buffs
Support for a lazylord build where you never attack
Applies some light status effects to enemies

[Dr.Samurai]

My current WIP (very very rough) design is as a Fighter (well, my altered version) subclass, because I'm not up (right now) for a full other base class.


3: Command: Strike (give up attack to allow 1+ others to attack, they get bonus of +1 weapon die, increasing to +2 weapon die at level 11)
3: Command: Hustle (basically my "implementation 2" in the spoiler above, but with slightly different usage limits and giving THP = level at 11+)

7: Command: Hold the Line (Anyone you choose who can hear/see you gets to use reaction to end fear/stagger/shaken[1], even if they otherwise couldn't use a reaction, plus have advantage on saves against those for one minute)

10: Staunch the Bleeding (may move this down): touch heal worth 3 HD (but doesn't expend the HD). More effective on targets who are under half HP (max healing instead of rolled).

15: Leave No One Behind (when you use a new base-class ability that's basically misty step, but not-quite at will, you can bring someone else along with you)

18: EITHER: can cast glibness and heroes' feast (but in-fiction not as spells for various reasons) once per day each OR some kind of area heal when you use Deathblow[2].

[1] the latter two are new conditions that are cut down versions of stun and slow, respectively
[2] a new "fighter" ability that lets them spend resources to auto-kill creatures at low HP (with a scaling threshold); targets with too high HP either get stunned or you refund the resource (that's to avoid the whole "great against trash, useless against bosses" problem with OKHO abilities, plus the whole metagame "how low are they?" problem.

Still very very rough at this point, and I'll probably move the heal down a bit and re-arrange things. Maybe as a third "command" at level 3, something like "Command: Walk it Off, heals 1 HD. improves by 1 HD at 7 and 11" or something like that and have a new level 10 feature.

Honestly, as a subclass I think you're hitting all the beats here. Granting attacks, assistance with saves/conditions, healing, granting movement.

I'm not sure exactly what the implementation is but it seems like Command: Strike would allow you to give up all attacks and grant them to your allies, so that takes care of anyone wanting to play a lazylord, and is a great way to get around Restrained and other pesky conditions that might interfere with your own attacks.

What kind of action is Staunch the Bleeding? And can you use it on yourself? I tend to agree that it seems a little out of place at level 10, but then I feel like you're sort of cramming it in any lower with your other features. Not sure what to do there.

I'm not particularly concerned about this but it may come up that you don't have any features to use if you don't have an ally to target, at least not until tiers 3/4. This won't often come up, but I know there's a philosophy out there that says your features should always be available to you no matter what.

[Theodoxus]

I never played a Warlord in 4th... Cleric always appealed more to me for a Leader.

But, from the responses to the thread (outside of the Maneuvers discussion), it looks like a 5th Edition Warlord would be a Paladin subclass that meshed with the Order Domain and Lore Bard. If you could swap out the Paladin list for the Bard list, all the better (though I realize that is something wholly unsupported in the rules - as a homebrew critter, it'd be interesting to see how it worked).

I don't understand the concern about 'magical vs unmagical' healing though. Literally the only difference is one works in an AMF and the other doesn't. Actions, resources, components, etc., does it really make any difference if you're casting the spell Cure Wounds, or using an ability called Wound Cures? Does it really make any difference if your healing is coming from an intermediary like a god (cleric), deva (warlock), or from yourself (paladin LOH, fighter SW, monk perfect self)?

Seems like 'non-magical healing' is a problem of Guy at the Gym thinking and not anything game specific.

If the Maneuvers idea takes off, maybe, like the Arcane Archer, the Warlord would have their own set of Maneuvers? One thing I thought of while reading the various iterations, would be to grant Healing equivalent of 1 HD + SD with no HD expenditure, and then if the recipient wanted/needed more healing, they could then sacrifice more HD. So, if they needed 2HD+SD worth of healing, they're only burning 1 HD total. This would curtail the issue of burning two resources every time while allowing more HD to be used if needed.

[Damon_Tor]

I have no issue with warlord "healing" being hit dice expenditure with added bonuses. I always think of your hit dice as hitpoints you can't access because of pain tolerance and willpower and such, so I have no issue with a charismatic leader being able to encourage others to dig deep and push through.

I had forgotten about action surges, and yeah having so much of the warlord revolve around them takes a direct port off the table.

[Dr.Samurai]

@Theodoxus: I think though that the idea is in creating a support character that isn't relying on spells to do it. That has been a big appeal of the 4E warlord, and it looks like PhoenixPhyre is trying to stick with that in the notes on what he provided, as there would be Glibness/Heroes' Feast effects but functionally they would not be magic spells.

With regards to non-magical healing, some people find it an issue. I don't. If HP are abstract, we should be able to make it work.

[PhoenixPhyre]

@Theodoxus: I think though that the idea is in creating a support character that isn't relying on spells to do it. That has been a big appeal of the 4E warlord, and it looks like PhoenixPhyre is trying to stick with that in the notes on what he provided, as there would be Glibness/Heroes' Feast effects but functionally they would not be magic spells.

With regards to non-magical healing, some people find it an issue. I don't. If HP are abstract, we should be able to make it work.

Yeah, I'm definitely leaning away from any kind of spell-based thing. Just because there are already tons of spell-based "leaders".

I'm conceptualizing this as an Armsman[1] subclass, not its own base class.

And as far as glibness/heroes feast, I'm actually going toward a different model where when they use a different (high level) feature, they do a pulse of aoe healing that "overheals" into temporary healing.


NOTES:
* Armsmen have STA (stamina) equal to level + CON per short rest. They use this for most of their fancy abilities, including second wind and action surge. Most things cost between 1 and 5-8 STA.
* Armsmen have AET (aether, "magic") equal to half-level per long rest. Many fewer things use AET for Armsmen.
* Flash Step is a level 13 base class feature that lets you teleport instead of moving for 2 STA.
* Deathblow is a 14th level base class feature that lets them spend 4 STA to auto-kill an enemy on hit as long as they have less than 25 HP (scaling higher and losing the STA cost at 20). If they have more, you can choose to either force a save vs stun or refund the STA.


\subsection{Warlord}
Warlords are the battle commanders; they give up some of their personal prowess to bolster the capabilities of their allies.

\subsubsection{Commands: Strike and Hustle}
At 3rd level, you've learned to recognize and create opportunities for your allies to act. You learn the following three commands.

\subparagraph{Command: Strike}
When you take the Attack action, you can forgo one or more attacks, expending 1 STA per attack. For each attack forgone, one willing creature that can see and hear you can use their reaction to make a weapon attack against a creature within their weapon's range. If this attack hits, they deal additional damage equal to your weapon's damage die (or 1d4 if you are not wielding a weapon). The additional damage increases by one weapon die at 11th level.

\subparagraph{Command: Hustle}
As a bonus action on your turn, you can create an opening by expending 1 STA. One willing creature you can see moves up to their speed and does not provoke Opportunity attacks while moving.

Starting at level 11, creatures who benefit from this also gain temporary hit points equal to your level.

\subparagraph{Command: Stay With Me}
You've learned to provide effective emergency medicine. As bonus action, expend 2 STA and 1 AET and touch a creature. That creature regains hit points as if they had spent 1 hit die (but do not expend the hit die). If the creature was bloodied, they regain maximum hit points instead.

You can expend additional STA to increase the effect--for every 2 extra STA you expend, the creature regains additional hit points as if they'd spent an additional hit die.

\subsubsection{Command: Hold the Line}
Starting at 7th level, you have become an inspiration to your allies. As a bonus action on your turn, you can spend 3 STA to issue a command to Hold the Line. Any creature of your choice that can see or hear you can immediately use their reaction to end the staggered, shaken, or frightened condition on themselves even if they would not otherwise be able to use a reaction.

In addition, creatures of your choice that can see or hear you have advantage on any saving throws against being staggered, shaken, or frightened for one minute.

\subsubsection{Commanding Presence}
Starting at 10th level, you've learned to inspire your allies to bursts of heroics. When you use your Action Surge, instead of taking an additional action, you can choose one of the following. All creatures of your choice that can see and hear you within 30 feet gain the chosen benefit until the end of your next turn.
\begin{itemize}
\item \textbf{Bravura:} Affected creatures can take one additional reaction or bonus action (their choice) during the duration of the effect.
\item \textbf{Insightful:} Affected creatures gain a bonus to their next saving throw equal to your Charisma modifier.
\item \textbf{Inspirational:} Affected creatures gain temporary hit points equal to your level.
\item \textbf{Resourceful:} Once during the duration, affected creatures that deal damage with an attack deal additional damage equal to half your level + your Charisma modifier. If they attack and miss, they gain temporary hit points equal to the additional damage that would have been dealt.
\item \textbf{Skirmishing:} Once during the duration, affected creatures can move a distance up to 5x your Charisma modifier as a reaction without provoking Opportunity Attacks.
\item \textbf{Tactical:} Affected creatures gain advantage on one attack roll or ability check made during the duration of the effect.
\end{itemize}

\subsubsection{Leave No One Behind}
Starting at 15th level, you've learned to bring others with you when you Flash Step. When you use your Flash Step ability, you can expend 2 AET to bring one ally who is no more than Medium size with you. The ally must have been within 5 feet of you when you started your movement.

\subsubsection{Healing Strike}
At level 18, you've learned to channel the dying energies of foes into healing for your allies. When you use your Deathblow ability and do not refund the STA cost, you can choose up to 3 creatures within 30 feet of you. They gain hit points equal to your proficiency bonus times your Charisma modifier. Any hit points that would have been healed above their maximum hit points are converted into temporary hit points instead.


[1] https://admiralbenbo.org/homebrew/nih/classes/armsman.html

[KorvinStarmast]

Bare minimum? Add a maneuver to the Battlemaster to allow for healing. A tweak to the Purple Dragon Knight/Banneret might be the way to go. Since "prof bonus times per LR" seems to be a thing lately, then let's take the THP idea apply it Prof bonus time per day.

Defensive Support:

"As a bonus action, encourage {up to proficiency bonus} allies; they gain 1d6+PB HP."
Or do it as a reaction? Higher level Fighters are better at this than lower level ones, right?



For PhoenixPhyre: I'd suggest taking the Purple Dragon Knight as a starting point and monkey with that template to get where you are headed.
It's always needed an improvement.
This is as good a time as any to do that.
Begin with the above THP boost and then add another basic ability this warlord thing has would be a default reaction:

"As a reaction, shove/trip/grapple a creature that is trying to move past you"

This is a bit like Opportunity attack or a bit like Sentinel, the feat, but is instead a way to increase the "stickiness" of the Warlord. Number of enemies affected is 1/2 PB. (Or 1/2 PB rounded up?)

This is very much a support action: it means that your allies can't get swarmed as easily. (Yes, this is related to the Cavalier ability I know). And honestly, the PHB Fighter ought to have this as a default.

Offensive Support:

As a bonus action, identify a weak spot on the enemy and alert an ally. They get advantage on their next attack. (Usable PB times per LR?)

Rally / Support / Circle the Wagons

As a reaction (or as a bonus action?) Call out "Rally to me" and all allies can move to within 10' of you and form a defensive line/perimeter without triggering opportunity attacks. PB per long rest ..

These are the kinds of features that I think your Warlord might have above and beyond the usual Fighter stuff.
==================
{1} Also: all Fighters out to have PB number of Fighting styles. This needs to be unique to the Fighter class, and reflects how they are martial generalists who are good at the Fighting thing. When you add the extra Fighting Styles from Tasha's, this still leaves quite a few choices.

(That means find a new feature for Champion at 10, which can be done.

My two cents for the day.

[Dork_Forge]

Wasn't around for 4th but like the Warlord concept.

Conceptual thoughts:

- Ally movement
- Ally healing
- Ally temp hp
- Ally AC boosting
- Ally bonus damage/to hit

Implementation thoughts:

I think it should just be a Fighter subclass, an entire class would ultimately lead to something underwhelming or a bit game-distorting. You either give them at-will support abilities, which don't really exist already in the class chassis or you only give them limited-use abilities and they awkwardly co-habit too much Fighter space.

On LibraryOgres suggestion for healing: I think Superiority Die + Hit Die as a ranged bonus action is too much. Healing Word is already a bit of an issue for being too good economy wise, this is like that but more effective (for a dual resource cost that is too nebulous to matter across all tables). I mean at level 3, assuming an 'average' PC of d8 and +1 Con, you'd be looking at an average of 10 hit points, that's a lot for what it's actually costing and the level it's coming online.

I think the Banneret/PDK was an okay shoot in the right direction, they were just so overly-cautious with it that it killed the viability immediately. So I'd just amend the PDK to as follows (or something like it):

3rd level
Rallying Cry - It now gives you two uses of Second Wind per SR. The healing to allies is 1d10 + PPB and the number of allies healed is PPB. Where PPB is a number equivalent to Proficiency bonus by tied explicitly to Fighter class progression.

Inspiring Tactics - A short list of buffs (move ally, to hit boost, damage boost etc.) which uses a scaling die like a SD, but is mechanically distinct so they don't stack. Short rest recharge. Bonus action to use. Potentially incorporate Cha mod here.

7th level

Royal Envoy - this is a good feature already and remains the same.

Guiding Presence - Help action as a ranged bonus action, potentially allow use of Inspiring tactics on same bonus. Alternatively give advantage (next attack/save/check) to the allies buffed with Rallying/Inspiring Tactics.

10th level
Inspiring Surge - This is also okay in concept, just increase number of allies.

15th level
Bulwark - Allow you to use Indomitable as a bonus action to allow an ally to save on a mental save they already failed/end a mental condition.

18th level
Inspiring Surge - Allies now get advantage/bonus damage on the attack granted.

[Theodoxus]

Inspiring Tactics - A short list of buffs (move ally, to hit boost, damage boost etc.) which uses a scaling die like a SD, but is mechanically distinct so they don't stack. Short rest recharge. Bonus action to use. Potentially incorporate Cha mod here.

The rest of your rebuild seems fine, but I'm curious about the bolded part. Since this is a Fighter subclass, the only way to get Superiority Dice is via a feat, so I wouldn't be overly concerned about stacking. Really, the only issue I see with having the Warlord/PDK rebuild using SD is the lack of other things to use it on.

It's one reason I suggested making a small list of unique maneuvers to the subclass. Changing Inspiring Tactics to a list of Warlord specific maneuvers achieves both goals, while still allowing for the martial adept feat to provide another die and a couple more Battlemaster maneuvers on top.

[Dork_Forge]

The rest of your rebuild seems fine, but I'm curious about the bolded part. Since this is a Fighter subclass, the only way to get Superiority Dice is via a feat, so I wouldn't be overly concerned about stacking. Really, the only issue I see with having the Warlord/PDK rebuild using SD is the lack of other things to use it on.

It's one reason I suggested making a small list of unique maneuvers to the subclass. Changing Inspiring Tactics to a list of Warlord specific maneuvers achieves both goals, while still allowing for the martial adept feat to provide another die and a couple more Battlemaster maneuvers on top.

You can actually get SD two ways, Martial Adept (feat) and the Superior Technique fighting style (so potentially two feats). My main reason for wanting to keep them separate are:

- It allows the Warlord to pick up SD for themselves without feeling compelled to use them on their subclass feature (and compartmentalises the support maneuvers so they have a different 'pool' to draw on to encourage variety).

- I want the Warlord to be distinct from the Battle Master, there is already a decently long list of maneuvers, throwing a bunch more on top doesn't seem particularly productive to me and would dilute the end goal, which is to get a 5e Warlord.

I also just don't like the idea of sharing a subclass mechanic (SD/maneuvers) across subclasses, it breaks with the established design (for Fighters in particular) and makes them less distinct.

It's not the end of the world or anything, just my preference for handling it.

[Psyren]

I think the Banneret/PDK was an okay shoot in the right direction, they were just so overly-cautious with it that it killed the viability immediately. So I'd just amend the PDK to as follows (or something like it):

3rd level
Rallying Cry - It now gives you two uses of Second Wind per SR. The healing to allies is 1d10 + PPB and the number of allies healed is PPB. Where PPB is a number equivalent to Proficiency bonus by tied explicitly to Fighter class progression.

Inspiring Tactics - A short list of buffs (move ally, to hit boost, damage boost etc.) which uses a scaling die like a SD, but is mechanically distinct so they don't stack. Short rest recharge. Bonus action to use. Potentially incorporate Cha mod here.

7th level

Royal Envoy - this is a good feature already and remains the same.

Guiding Presence - Help action as a ranged bonus action, potentially allow use of Inspiring tactics on same bonus. Alternatively give advantage (next attack/save/check) to the allies buffed with Rallying/Inspiring Tactics.

10th level
Inspiring Surge - This is also okay in concept, just increase number of allies.

15th level
Bulwark - Allow you to use Indomitable as a bonus action to allow an ally to save on a mental save they already failed/end a mental condition.

18th level
Inspiring Surge - Allies now get advantage/bonus damage on the attack granted.

I do agree with this approach (and in fact, SCAG 128 even refers to PDKs/Bannerets as "warlords" directly), but I have some tweaks - particularly keeping in mind the new Fighter dropping this year.

Rallying Cry: the next Fighter is actually already getting multiple Second Winds per Short Rest (up to 4) though they still only recover 1 when they SR. So you would want Banneret's Rallying Cry to grant "one additional SW per SR" or similar language, rather than "two" so that it stacks with the increase.

I would also suggest letting Bannerets recover more than one per rest. +2 uses per rest seems sufficient, but perhaps recovering al of them on a short rest wouldn't be unbalanced either. I don't think that would give them more healing than, say, a Mercy Monk, or a Celestial Warlock - both of which would even be core.

As far as the amount healed to allies, I don't see a problem with making it be equal to what the Fighter themselves gets (1d10 + Fighter level). It wouldn't be that much stronger than the current PDK, and it would reward you for staying in Fighter.

Inspiring Tactics / Guiding Presence: Okay, what I'd do here is move the Help as a bonus action lower, but limited uses per SR, and tie the other warlordy things (like free movement, or buff to ally's next saving throw) to that. The 7th level feature could be to combine the Second Wind and Help into a single bonus action. Essentially, Banneret is the Fighter that has a bunch of stuff they should be doing round-by-round with their bonus action, so they'll be sword and boarding it like a knight or secular paladin rather than

Royal Envoy: Agree that no change is needed here, though I'd probably change the name (e.g. Noble Demeanor.)

Inspiring Surge: Agree with increasing the number/advantage and I'd actually buff this one further - let affected allies choose to cast an attack cantrip with a casting time of 1 Action as a reaction if they want to as well. It's an Action Surge, this is the alpha strike / salvo moment! (I'd be worried about Eldritch Blast though.)

Bulwark: I would add in the new Fighter's bonus to the second saving throw here.

[Dork_Forge]

I do agree with this approach (and in fact, SCAG 128 even refers to PDKs/Bannerets as "warlords" directly), but I have some tweaks - particularly keeping in mind the new Fighter dropping this year.

Eh I came up with this soley for the 5e Fighter, from what I can remember of the UA your tweaks seem reasonable for it.



As far as the amount healed to allies, I don't see a problem with making it be equal to what the Fighter themselves gets (1d10 + Fighter level). It wouldn't be that much stronger than the current PDK, and it would reward you for staying in Fighter.

For me this is a matter of taste, not balance. I think the amount should be competent and have some form of built-in scaling to reward continuing to be a Fighter (as my proposed PPB does), but it doesn't feel right for a main class feature to be equally effective to the masses as for the Fighter themselves.


Inspiring Tactics / Guiding Presence: Okay, what I'd do here is move the Help as a bonus action lower, but limited uses per SR, and tie the other warlordy things (like free movement, or buff to ally's next saving throw) to that. The 7th level feature could be to combine the Second Wind and Help into a single bonus action. Essentially, Banneret is the Fighter that has a bunch of stuff they should be doing round-by-round with their bonus action, so they'll be sword and boarding it like a knight or secular paladin rather than

I considered the level placement, I chose 7th level for the Help thing to try and not step on the Mastermind's toes. Similar to how the shadow Sorcerer gets the teleport later than the shadow Monk.


Royal Envoy: Agree that no change is needed here, though I'd probably change the name (e.g. Noble Demeanor.)

That's a good alternative.


Inspiring Surge: Agree with increasing the number/advantage and I'd actually buff this one further - let affected allies choose to cast an attack cantrip with a casting time of 1 Action as a reaction if they want to as well. It's an Action Surge, this is the alpha strike / salvo moment! (I'd be worried about Eldritch Blast though.)

I don't like the idea of including attack cantrips for both taste and balance. The Warlord, who is entirely mundane in my version, feels like it should encourage martial prowess and all classes get weapon profs. As for balance there's Eldritch Blast, but there's also bladetrips which don't need any improvement.


Bulwark: I would add in the new Fighter's bonus to the second saving throw here.

I'm a little confused here, the way I intended my version was an autosuccess/condition ending.

[Psyren]

For me this is a matter of taste, not balance. I think the amount should be competent and have some form of built-in scaling to reward continuing to be a Fighter (as my proposed PPB does), but it doesn't feel right for a main class feature to be equally effective to the masses as for the Fighter themselves.

Fair enough; I could see halving the healing or just half fighter level for everyone else.



I considered the level placement, I chose 7th level for the Help thing to try and not step on the Mastermind's toes. Similar to how the shadow Sorcerer gets the teleport later than the shadow Monk.

I mean, tbh Mastermind (and Inquisitive for that matter) need an overhaul themselves anyway.



I don't like the idea of including attack cantrips for both taste and balance. The Warlord, who is entirely mundane in my version, feels like it should encourage martial prowess and all classes get weapon profs. As for balance there's Eldritch Blast, but there's also bladetrips which don't need any improvement.

I get that, but I didn't like expanding the ability to the whole party but having it suck/do nothing for half of them.
Maybe instead of it being party-wide, it just affects 2 allies to start before becoming 3 at high levels, when even if you're out of other martials, someone can throw in a scaled-up summon or minion to benefit.


I'm a little confused here, the way I intended my version was an autosuccess/condition ending.

Oh I see.

[Arkhios]

I'm not saying that my iteration of a Warlord is perfect or anything (and to be frank, it needs some updating anyway), but I'm quite happy with the result.

Powerwise, I aimed for an even mix between battle master and a skald (College of Valor), obviating spells or otherwise magical aspects of bard. My goal was to balance the warlord's "supernatural" or extraordinary abilities against a half-caster equivalent of a bard, leaning towards abilities more akin to maneuvers rather than spells. I've had a long time plan to further separate the mechanics from maneuvers to make them more unique, so that is something of a flaw in the build.