Classic warriors: Warlords or Fighters?

[Cam Banks]

Hmm... Laurana, after she took command of the armies of the lance?

Laurana was a warlord the whole time. Ditto Tanis. Of the Heroes of the Lance, those two are probably the best examples of warlords. Many of the Knights of Solamnia (especially the Rose Knights) are warlords, while the majority of Crown Knights are fighters. Sturm Brightblade, Caramon Majere, and Flint Fireforge are also fighters.

Note that Tanis is a warlord and not a ranger. Having a bow and wearing leather armor doesn't make him a ranger. Riverwind, on the other hand, is.

Can you tell I've been thinking about this already?

Cheers,
Cam

 

[Voss]

Tanis never really came off as inspiring though. The others occassionally refer to him as wise, but he's usually so wrapped up in his personal issues that he's inspiring as a bran muffin. He tosses out the occasional order, but so does Raistlin. Even when novel characters are designed for D&D, its often hard to arbitrarily assign classes to them (beyond the obvious)

 

[Giltonio_Santos]

Azoun IV is a great example of a character that was always a Fighter but would be better stated as a Warlord now. Kitiara from Dragonlance would fit as well, and maybe even Strahd; the way he is described in his mortal days is a better fit for a warlord style character than fighter, in my opinion.

Cheers,

 

[Cam Banks]

Tanis never really came off as inspiring though. The others occassionally refer to him as wise, but he's usually so wrapped up in his personal issues that he's inspiring as a bran muffin.

That's more to provide him with some sense of depth than anything else. The Heroes all looked to Tanis for leadership and he kept them together, and that was definitely his role in every book he's appeared in. You might not find somebody with inner conflict all that inspiring, but I think that's just his schtick as a leader.

Cheers,
Cam

 

[Voss]

Except, most of the time, he doesn't actually lead. At best, he's pulling a 'we will go that way, because, yeah, that sounds like a good idea'. Other times, he's just guilt tripping the party into following along. 'Let's go to Tarsis because I don't like being trapped in a mountain' isn't a command decision, and most of them go because they don't want to be stuck with the dirt farmers.

Combat leadership is even more vague, but thats the style of the books more than anything else. Except in situations like Xak Tsaroth, when a half-arsed (as opposed to their non-existant good plans) plan predictably goes badly, or 'sneaking' into the evil army headquarters on good dragons, which would have been a total disaster if Paladine hadn't personally come down from the heavens and put a stop to it.

However... he utterly fails at 'keeping them together'. Repeatedly. They weren't together all that long before they separated for 5 years (the twins in particular, simply aren't old enough), he can barely control minor party conflicts, and ultimately the party is torn apart. And then he snits at everyone for the first half of the last book, then leaves them in prison for the second half. I'm not seeing a lot of leadership there, just a pack of idiots that don't have the brains (or, in Raistlin's case, the motivation) to find someone better.

Inner conflict isn't a leadership ability. Its a flaw. It could be interesting, if done right, but other than repeatedly telling the reader that its 'some big conflict between human and elf blood', there really isn't one. He's just a weak-willed little nithling with a boot fetish. He's the ultimate average, really. Not stupid, but not that smart. Not a great warrior, but not a bad one. Not a horrible leader, but not a good one. He's just sort of there- not atheistic, but not devout, even in the face of actual divine manifestations, which is kind of funny for someone who supposedly went looking for signs of the gods.

I've really had deeper personal conflicts over eating a bran muffin.

 

[SKyOdin]

I say the Lord of Blades is a Warlord who acquired Fighter and Artificer powers through class training feats. King Boranel is certainly a Warlord. Eberron leans heavily towards Warlord in general.

 

[Cam Banks]

I've really had deeper personal conflicts over eating a bran muffin.

Clearly.

Cheers,
Cam

 

[keterys]

I'd lean towards Tanis being a ranger with a little warlord multiclassing. I suspect that would actually work for a lot of D&D fiction because nothing like a warlord has ever been in the rules. People gave orders, but they were pretty rare and honestly they rarely did anything. Granted, most action is off stage (think about how many spells Raistlin actually cast, for instance).

P.S. Cam, didn't know you had a novel coming out. I like the choice of main character too. Sweet!

 

[Cmarco]

Due to the relative low power of the class throughout the history of the game, there are relatively few iconic fighters in D&D. The ranks of the epic, godlike characters are almost entirely occupied by wizards, with only a few clerics.

With the new edition, fighters are finally getting the respect they deserve...but what about warlords? Might it make sense for some of them to now be warlords instead of fighters?

So what say you: Warlord or fighter?

Robilar
Warduke
Yolande
Erac's Cousin
Obmi
Bruenor Battlehammer
Catti-Brie
Lord of Blades

Any others?

Bruenor, the Lord of Blades, and Yolande are probably all warlord-types. Bruenor might be a fighter-warlord multiclass type.

Obmi strikes me as a fighter-rogue type, actually. He's a liar, a backstabber, and basically an assassin.

Robilar, Warduke, Erac's Cousin, and Cattie-Brie are likely all classified as straight-up fighters.

Beyond that...

From 300:
King Leonidas- Warlord

 

[keterys]

I haven't read the more recent stuff, but Catti-brie was more of a stay in the back shooting her bow with the occasional cool melee thing, wasn't she? But certainly no defender?

Anyhow, I'd figured ranger was easy for her.