[Forked from 4e Class Survivor] Why no Leader love?

[Herobizkit]

Haha I just read the order in which the classes were voted off... are there REALLY that many Leader haters? Is there something intrinsic about the Leader type that turns people off? I haven't played 4e, but I know that I would likely play any of the Leader types (except maybe Warlord - unless they change the name to Marshall *lol*) in preference to the others.

 

[Storminator]

Haha I just read the order in which the classes were voted off... are there REALLY that many Leader haters? Is there something intrinsic about the Leader type that turns people off? I haven't played 4e, but I know that I would likely play any of the Leader types (except maybe Warlord - unless they change the name to Marshall *lol*) in preference to the others.

If you read the threads, there are plenty of folks that like leaders. I am loving playing my battle cleric. But it's not the shtick for everyone. Obviously there a lot of folks that don't like leaders, and there are a lot of folks that had problems with each class. Add those together and the leaders are voted off.

PS

 

[Rechan]

Personally, I love leaders. I've played two bards at this point. I am just waiting for the opportunity to play a cleric - I have a great idea for a character.

I think it's more that folks love Strikers more than anything.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

I love leaders too. Warlord is probably my favorite class. A friend of mine plays tabletop wargames and was frankly amazing at it. Maybe it takes a certain skill most players lack.

I'm amazed at the cleric hate too. Healing as a minor action is awesome. The cleric player no longer has to be bored to tears just because another PC got beat up.

 

[Garthanos]

I haven't played 4e, but I know that I would likely play any of the Leader types (except maybe Warlord - unless they change the name to Marshall *lol*) in preference to the others.

Warlords are perhaps one of the more innovative of the lot... and remember you can call the character a "High General of the Northern Army". The class determines well "mostly" just how you fight. I built Frodo Baggins recently as a Warlord/Rogue hybrid.

Some issues may be that classes don't yet live up to there potential. Clerics really have to go far out of there ways to get the flavor of there faith.... feeling way to generic. A warlord or Marshal if you will would be nice to have an option which involved minions or henchmen more directly.

 

[samursus]

I was also surprised that the all Leaders were "hated" off...

 

[Invisible Stalker]

My preference:

1. Controllers
2. Leaders
3. Defenders
4. Strikers

All the boring classes to me are strikers or defenders.

 

[caudor]

Leaders? LEADERS?? We don't need no stinking Leaders!

Nah, I actually like all the roles. Each is important to a well rounded party.

 

[Tallifer]

I do hope one of them who hate leaders will justify their case, because I too am nonplussed that anyone would not appreciate the integral part which leaders play in a company of adventurers.

I am impressed with the new leaders: artificers, warlords and shamans. They have interesting concepts and potential.

As far as actually playing one, a leader must enjoy teamwork, the glory and power of the party (much as an American is proud to be an American, et cetera) and the successful completion of a quest, more than he enjoys doing massive damage to a monster.

Hmm ... maybe I answered my own question. But I hope that is not the answer.

 

[Victim]

Yeah, I don't get it either. IME, Leaders make a huge difference in play.

And while they might not be everyone's cup of tea, I don't see how they all got dropped before stinkers like the warlock, druid, etc.