Archer Warlord+Battlefront Leader+Armored Warlord? Cheese?

[DracoSuave]

Actually the archer/skirmisher build uses wisdom or intelligence. As the archer feature is currently written, you get screwed if you wanted to make wisdom your secondary score since you'll end up with around 13-14 AC total (depending on your dex mod). I don't have a problem with letting people choose battlefront commander and then pick up scale proficiency. Combat leader isn't all that great for a wisdom-warlord anyway.

Skirmishing Presence does not require that you take Archer Warlord. The suggested build for that Warlord type says 'Take Intellegence.' The paragon feat that improves Skirmishing Presence requires Intellegence; Wisdom-Skirmishing Warlords are there to dabble in Insightful powers, but they don't need to take Archer Warlord to do that; they might be better off just taking Weapon Proficiency in a superior bow.

For intelligence-warlords it is probably not a good idea to turn in combat leader (it becomes very good once you get to paragon and pick up the upgrade). For wisdom-archer-warlords it is basically required (and a feat tax).

It's not -really- a feat tax; feat taxes are when you take something to catch up. This combination puts an archer at where a normal warlord would be after spending a proficiency feat on scale. Spending a feat is not a tax compared to spending a feat.

The words 'feat tax' get used way too much.

I expect this all to be the subject of errata in May, actually. With any luck they'll also change the paragon feat feat to allow wisdom bonus to initiative or at least offer an equivalent feat for the canny leader alternative (the one that gives bonuses to perception and insight).

They errata things that are decidedly subpar, and they errata things that are decidedly powerful. They don't errata things that are decidedly on the power curve where it should be.

 

[JohnSnow]

I don't read anything in the Archer Warlord section about it being able to replace any class trait at all, except for your proficiencies.

I confess I've come around to your way of thinking. I was confused by "Archer Warlord" being called a class feature, in combination with the text I quoted, and the lack of any "Leader" option in the suggested build. Obviously, as you point out, it's just assumed you're taking the default "Combat Leader." However, when it's side-by-side with two other options that replace precisely that class feature (Canny Leader and Battlefront Leader), I think they could have been clearer. Of course, now that I think about it, if they'd intended it to replace Combat Leader, they would have included the "This feature replaces your Combat Leader class feature" line (as you pointed out). And they didn't.

Of course, the final answer is in the Character Builder, which now has the Martial Power 2 stuff in it. I hadn't fiddled with a Warlord again until this morning. And while the Canny Leader option has been rather glaringly omitted, "Archer Warlord" is very decisively a separate option that replaces neither "Combat Leader" nor the "Commanding Presence" options.

So mea culpa. You are correct sir.

 

[Infiniti2000]

Sorry for resurrecting a recently deceased thread, but I might as well ask my question here. Has anyone tried an archer warlord? If so, how'd it work out and what character options (including abilities) did you choose (given dragonborn as a race)? My plan is to make a dragonborn warlord, but that is partly to coincide with the dragonborn sorcerer, so we have good reasons to a cohesive and similar background. All non-setting specific sources (like Eberron) are open to us.

 

[DracoSuave]

Sorry for resurrecting a recently deceased thread, but I might as well ask my question here. Has anyone tried an archer warlord? If so, how'd it work out and what character options (including abilities) did you choose (given dragonborn as a race)? My plan is to make a dragonborn warlord, but that is partly to coincide with the dragonborn sorcerer, so we have good reasons to a cohesive and similar background. All non-setting specific sources (like Eberron) are open to us.

The Archer Warlord class feature itself is decidedly... eh. It doesn't really give you anything if you never make ranged basic attacks. The primary source of those would be yourself, and you don't give them to yourself.

However, in the right group it could pay off dividends, say, a two leader set up.

That said, the Skirmishing Warlord build is a good build without Archer Warlord. Just take proficiency in a superior bow instead (you -were- going to do that weren't you?), and you'll be ahead of the game.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

I think the point of Archer Warlord is if you were going to go with light armor anyway and wanted a slightly improved ranged capability then you can use it. In other words if Chain and light shield are not things you're going to use, then there's no loss in making STR work for your RBAs. Really RBAs are so seldom something you use anyway that its a pretty insignificant benefit. However if it saves you the trouble of spending a feat on proficiency with a ranged weapon, then its OK.

Like DS I think basically its a feature that won't be used much. I really think they should have given you a proficiency with a SUPERIOR ranged weapon. Then the trade-off might actually be worth thinking about. You could start with Archer Warlord and if you really did want chain later on, well you are out less than a feat (as long as shields aren't interesting).

 

[DracoSuave]

I think the point of Archer Warlord is if you were going to go with light armor anyway and wanted a slightly improved ranged capability then you can use it. In other words if Chain and light shield are not things you're going to use, then there's no loss in making STR work for your RBAs. Really RBAs are so seldom something you use anyway that its a pretty insignificant benefit. However if it saves you the trouble of spending a feat on proficiency with a ranged weapon, then its OK.

Like DS I think basically its a feature that won't be used much. I really think they should have given you a proficiency with a SUPERIOR ranged weapon. Then the trade-off might actually be worth thinking about. You could start with Archer Warlord and if you really did want chain later on, well you are out less than a feat (as long as shields aren't interesting).

I do agree.

Archer Warlord is... very situational. Most of the time, even if you're bow-wielding warlord, you don't really need it. You don't even need Intellegence to be a good Skirmisher... Wisdom works fine too.

 

[Mand]

I actually tried this in the CB and it wouldn't let me. Battlefront Leader claimed it required chain proficiency, which went red after I took Archer Warlord.

Now, I know the CB is not always correct, but it pretty clearly is what is RAI in this case.

 

[keterys]

It was errata-ed to work that way, yes, so that folks like hybrids couldn't use it to get around having only cloth or leather proficiency or whatever.

 

[Gradine]

I know it's a few months late, but in response to the OP, don't forget your most powerful tool in character creation:

That's right... Imagiinnaaatiiooon!

Really want your character to wear Scale? And is your Int high enough that you might as well be wearing Scale? One way to provide fluff for that is say you're wearing Scale. Problem solved. If anyone tries to argue with you, then you just turn them into a pincushion and then throw your entire party at them. 'Cause that's how you roll.

EDIT: This is actually what I do with most of my a high dex/int characters because I hate the very idea of wearing Hide armor and dislike how they made it the best light armor. I usually handwave and say it's actually studded leather or something.

 

[Christian]

Sorry for resurrecting a recently deceased thread, but I might as well ask my question here. Has anyone tried an archer warlord? If so, how'd it work out and what character options (including abilities) did you choose (given dragonborn as a race)? My plan is to make a dragonborn warlord, but that is partly to coincide with the dragonborn sorcerer, so we have good reasons to a cohesive and similar background. All non-setting specific sources (like Eberron) are open to us.

I've been having a great time with my Air Genasi archer warlord. He's not pure archer--his at-wills are Paint the Bullseye and Brash Assault--but he's made enough basic attacks with his longbow for me to appreciate getting to use his Strength bonus for them. Party build does make a difference for this sort of character--the cunning rogue and whirling frenzy barbarian really get to take advantage of the basic attacks he hands out, and they, the swordmage, and the paladin land enough melee attacks to notice the bonus damage as well. But Brash Assault is certainly a significant component of that--he's regularly moving up into melee & drawing his sword when the rogue misses a sneak attack, then backing off again & sheathing it when that enemy drops, which usually happens very quickly.