Play test and balance help on warlord class.

[notXanathar]

This is a homebrew class I designed based on the 4e warlord for 5e. I'd really appreciate it if anyone would care to comment on the balance, especially if they playtested it. It is a minimum viable product, but I already have some concerns, so I want to polish the first few levels before I proceed.
This is the homebrewery link: https://homebrewery.naturalcrit.com/share/rJZhRWSO4E
Also, could someone explain the acronym PEACH.

[nickl_2000]

This is a homebrew class I designed based on the 4e warlord for 5e. I'd really appreciate it if anyone would care to comment on the balance, especially if they playtested it. It is a minimum viable product, but I already have some concerns, so I want to polish the first few levels before I proceed.
This is the homebrewery link: https://homebrewery.naturalcrit.com/share/rJZhRWSO4E
Also, could someone explain the acronym PEACH.

PEACH - Please Evaluate and Critique Honestly (aka Please Examine and Critique Honestly)

[Composer99]

Leadership Ability is fine.

Rallying Cry is fine. It's a powerful use of action economy once you have Extra Attack, but your allies are paying for it with their Hit Dice, so no worries IMO.

Commanding Strike is kind of boring on account of being what amounts to an at-will version of the battlemaster's Commander's Strike, but it's otherwise fine. The extra damage from your leadership ability should make up for the action economy cost your allies pay for attacking.

The 3rd level subclass feature that already exists, Standard of the Flying Serpent, is kind of finicky, since it depends on knowing the end state of movement. Yes, your party's movement should be predictable, but I don't know that it's great design depending on something that is yet unknown. It's otherwise fine.

All that's to say that the class as a whole is fine, except, perhaps, for the one subclass feature that exists. Also, you could proofread a little for weird capitalisations and some spelling.

[notXanathar]

Thanks. I've changed up the subclass to something that should be less difficult to run.

[Composer99]

I would consider adjusting the text of the new Charge! feature so that it affects an ally who starts its turn within 10 feet of the warlord, instead of starting its movement.

[notXanathar]

Thanks. That makes much more sense, although it would be very much an edge case.

[JNAProductions]

Commanding Strike is fine, if you're in a party of Fighters.

It's less fine in a party that includes a Rogue, or to a lesser extent, a Paladin.

At level, say, 5, you're probably doing 1d8+4 damage (Defense/Protection) or 1d8+6 (Dueling), for an average of 8.5 or 10.5.
Your Rogue buddy does 4d6+4, for 18 average, BEFORE adding your bonus.

That's a pretty significant damage boost, and it just keeps getting better and better.

[notXanathar]

Ok. However, the rogue can only sneak once per turn, which, unless I understand it incorrectly would mean they couldn't sneak off turn, if they'd done so on turn. Additionally, Mike Mearls stated, in his happy fun hour that they balance more for the average character, rather than the optimum, so that players who do so feel clever, rather than making anyone who doesn't optimize feel stupid. You raise a valid point, in that it could allow a rogue a massive power boost, but I don't feel that it's a problem. If you could show how this might feel bad for other players, I will re-examine it, but at the moment I think it's fine.