Commander’s Strike

[Snotboy]

I've noted this interpretation of Commander's Strike go by a few times, and I have to ask--does it really make sense for someone to attack just because they got an order to? Or more accurately, do they really have to be told to attack? "Hit 'em, Al!" "*grumble* Great idea Sam! What else does he think I'm trying to do?"

I suppose one interpretation could be that a Warlord, from his perspective, sees an opening that the ally doesn't from his adjacent angle, like a boxer's manager at the side of the ring. That's not a strong interpretation in my opinion, though. Maybe there is no opening for him to point out.

My idea is that the Warlord uses his presence and weapon to feint or cause a distraction in order to create an opening for the ally to take advantage of, much like a pro wrestler's manager at the side of the ring.

 

[Surgoshan]

In a play by post game I'm involved in, the warlord has been very good about providing in-game explanations for his powers. Like he attacks a goblin and simultaneously shoves the ranger back with his shield (wolf pack tactics, get the archer out of melee range).

 

[Boarstorm]

thats odd, when I sent the question to customer service, I got back the response that the melee range was the melee range of the targeted ally, which you must be able to see and hear each other.

We need a tie-breaker.

 

[Dice4Hire]

I think the melee range is clear. If they mean range, it would say so. So the warlord can affect an ally in his threatneed area (like the fighter right next to him) who gets an attack.

 

[Boarstorm]

I think the melee range is clear. If they mean range, it would say so. So the warlord can affect an ally in his threatneed area (like the fighter right next to him) who gets an attack.

Nope. The target is one enemy, not one ally.

If you're sticking to personal melee range instead of ally's melee range, you both have to be adjacent to the target.

 

[Danceofmasks]

I second that .. using powers has a procedure.

Weapon melee: Qualify for this first
Target one creature: Select a target for your melee weapon
Apply attack(s) or effects

 

[ForbidenMaster]

The range is melee and the target is one enemy. It seems pretty clear to me that its just that one ally makes a basic melee attack against the target of your power, and the target must be within melee range. If your ally is 30 feet away and can still make a basic melee attack against the target, he can.

 

[doctorhook]

The range is melee and the target is one enemy. It seems pretty clear to me that its just that one ally makes a basic melee attack against the target of your power, and the target must be within melee range. If your ally is 30 feet away and can still make a basic melee attack against the target, he can.

I'm with this dude. LoS is cooler than melee reach.

It doesn't makes sense to me why one would have a "somebody else make an attack" power and only be able to use it if you're standing right behind or beside the "somebody else".

Line of sight ftw.

 

[Surgoshan]

It doesn't makes sense to me why one would have a "somebody else make an attack" power and only be able to use it if you're standing right behind or beside the "somebody else".

The warlord is all about empowering others. So he runs into battle, gets flanking, and gives the rogue the sneak attack he couldn't get on his own turn. Or a big bad guy is threatening the mage and the fighter's nearby. Unfortunately, the bad guy will go before the fighter will and so will hit the mage. So you give the fighter an attack so he can mark the bad guy, thus protecting the mage.

The warlord's powers are all about putting other people into position to use their own abilities to the best advantage. And he does so while wielding a melee weapon, and thus is in the thick of battle, affecting the battle around him. If you want a ranged leader, you're a cleric. Later, you may be a bard. You're not a warlord.

 

[Snotboy]

The warlord is all about empowering others. So he runs into battle, gets flanking, and gives the rogue the sneak attack he couldn't get on his own turn. Or a big bad guy is threatening the mage and the fighter's nearby. Unfortunately, the bad guy will go before the fighter will and so will hit the mage. So you give the fighter an attack so he can mark the bad guy, thus protecting the mage.

The warlord's powers are all about putting other people into position to use their own abilities to the best advantage. And he does so while wielding a melee weapon, and thus is in the thick of battle, affecting the battle around him. If you want a ranged leader, you're a cleric. Later, you may be a bard. You're not a warlord.

I'm with this guy too. I hit a monster with Warlord's Favor, giving my ally a +to hit against this monster until the end of my next turn. He hits the monster on his turn, benefitting from the bonus. On my next turn, before the buff ends, I use Commander's Strike to have him attack again, with the +to hit still available to him, along with a extra bonus to damage to boot.

Warlords take some thinking to play right, that's for sure.