Imaro
Legend
You are absolutely right. You never said that directly. I cannot provide a quote for something you never directly said. However, that being said, the implication of this thread and the other two I cited, is pretty clear. If you are right, in this thread, for example, and there isn't any support for a Warlord class, then there is no real point in cluttering up the forums with warlord threads. After all, we're just whistling in the dark. Whether you meant that or not, doesn't really matter. The implication is very much there.
First off we already know there is demand for a warlord class... I was interested in seeing, roughly and inaccurately of course, just how much it was. As for the demand being small... I don't see why that would matter as to whether homebrew threads should exist or not or even whether the class should be discussed. I've never asserted some kind of end game, outside of curiosity and perhaps explaining why it's not a priority of WotC (as opposed to them being BBEG and creating a h4ter edition as some posters are so fond of stating). See again you've constructed my motivations for me, as opposed to going by what I've actually stated, and I've experienced you do this in numerous discussions between us.
And, you're kinda avoiding the point. We had two threads directly discussing warlords. Then we had three threads discussing the discussion of warlords, rather than discussing them directly. So, who's guilty of cluttering up the forum? Those that want to see a 5e warlord certainly didn't start those three threads.
Two threads discussing the warlord over what time period? Because I earlier in this very thread pointed out two recent threads that were created by the same poster iand were about the same version of a warlord the poster wanted to discuss (one from a while ago he or she bumped to the first page and a new one on the front page)... so unless you're talking about the same two... this statement and these numbers can't be true because I know there are others on the front page right now.
When more than half the threads discussing a topic are actually not about the topic, but rather discussing whether or not we should be discussing the topic in the first place, who's really the problem here when it comes to spamming threads? I mean, if you look at threads that actually discuss the warlord directly, you don't see all that many. You see kind of overview threads like the first two that I cited, then you see some home-brew threads. Then you get a non-insignificant number of threads like this one questioning whether we should be talking about it at all.
Strip out the threads questioning the validity of talking about warlords in the first place, and suddenly that "bunch of threads" cuts down to a small number.
Yeah... I think your numbers are way off... These are the warlord threads I was able to find created over the past two weeks that are "valid" warlord threads... Probably more but I don't have time or the inclination to do an extensive search.
http://www.enworld.org/forum/showth...warlord-needs-in-5e-and-how-to-make-it-happen
http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?531210-Made-it-Happen-5E-Warlord
http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?530760-What-kind-of-Warlord-design-are-you-hoping-for
http://www.enworld.org/forum/showth...-Warlord-what-can-he-do-and-when-can-he-do-it
http://www.enworld.org/forum/showth...of-Warlordish-options-Starting-with-the-Noble
http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?528416-Different-types-of-Warlords
Oh and here's the two that are actually the same warlord in two different posts...
http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?529665-Here-s-a-Warlord-Discuss
http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?516355-Tactician-WiP
Last edited: