New here?
D&D 5E Warlord Name Poll
New here?
JamesonCourage
Adventurer
Hey, thanks for the invite, man. I'm out of the loop, though. I didn't even know there were warlord threads, much less that there was currently tension on it, or a sub forum. Heck, I barely visit the site these days, much less post. Out of your options, I like commander. If it's based on what I think of when I think of a Warlord (which is 4e, because that's what used that name).
If we're going to a broad idea of a warlord (again, I've apparently completely missed all the debates on this), I'm sticking with commander. I think it has less baggage. Commanders do give commands, they do lead, they do inspire. It has some baggage, but it's a much better fit than warlord, which I would have never connected to skirmish commander before 4e.
If we're going to a broad idea of a warlord (again, I've apparently completely missed all the debates on this), I'm sticking with commander. I think it has less baggage. Commanders do give commands, they do lead, they do inspire. It has some baggage, but it's a much better fit than warlord, which I would have never connected to skirmish commander before 4e.
the Jester
Legend
I just have to speak up here- Consul most certainly does imply authority. Short of the appointment of a Dictator, the Consuls were the highest magistrates in the Roman Republic. They were the heads of state, heads of the military and bore the fasces, which was a symbol of their authority. Outside of Rome, they had axes in the fasces, which showed that they had the authority of life and death over Roman citizens outside of the boundaries of Rome itself.
Andor
First Post
While it's true that the term Warlord has negative connotations, the same holds true for the term Adventurer. (My thesaurus suggest Vagabond and Buccaneer as equivalent. Go back a century and it would be considered a polite term for a bandit or highwayman.) In fact almost any D&D class name has negative connotations, so I wouldn't be fussed too much by any name short of, you know, baby-eater.
Personally I don't think much of Warlord as a class name, Marshal or Captain are better. Tactician might be worth contemplating.
Although since some people dislike anything that implies another PC might have authority over their special snowflake, we might go for something more descriptive like:
Bossy Britches
Military Advisor (not suggested in Jungle campaigns)
Murder-hobo Wrangler
...[/snark]
Personally I don't think much of Warlord as a class name, Marshal or Captain are better. Tactician might be worth contemplating.
Although since some people dislike anything that implies another PC might have authority over their special snowflake, we might go for something more descriptive like:
Bossy Britches
Military Advisor (not suggested in Jungle campaigns)
Murder-hobo Wrangler
...[/snark]
TheCosmicKid
Hero
It's just dumb to have two base classes that alphabetize under WARL-.
Tia Nadiezja
First Post
I voted for Consul, but I like Strategist.
El Mahdi
Muad'Dib of the Anauroch
True. I should have said "has usages that don't imply authority." Such uses existed in pre-Republic Rome (Senators) and in medieval times as an office that meant "Representative" or "Counsellor" more than "Governor."
EzekielRaiden
Follower of the Way
Like how it's dumb that we have three races that alphabetize under "half-", one of which is not actually half of something else? Or how we have two classes that alphabetize under "bar-" despite *both* names having possible offensive connotations?
I voted Sardaukar just for the lulz. I don't see a real need to change the name, but if it's a sticking point, I'm fine with Captain/Commander, Marshal, or Banneret pretty much in that order. The PDK shows up that it's fine to have a (sub)class whose name is context-specific, so I see no reason not to include a comment, sidebar, or subheading on the subject. It's not like space is at a premium for classes that will never be in the PHB.
Similar Threads
