D&D 5E 5e Warlord Demand Poll

Imaro · Mar 17, 2017

Hussar said:
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.

Hussar said:
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.

Hussar said:
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.

JonnyP71 · Mar 17, 2017

I guess one of the reasons for the adverse reaction to Warlord threads are the leading titles, and poll which fail to cover 'dissenter's' attitudes they tend to be:

- what are you hoping for? - a poll without an option for 'no Warlord'
- make it happen! - but lots of homebrewers already have! Oh, so you'll only be happy when WotC do an 'official' version which is very close to the 4E one.

The Warlord fans mostly ignored Zardnaar's attempt to add some constructiveness to proceedings, seemingly content to just keep on with their own agenda - that being 'WotC give us what we want, we MUST have it, we won't shut up until you do!'

5E brought quite a few old school players back to D&D, many of whom took a wide berth around 4E as it differed so much from the D&D they knew and were comfortable with. I'm one of them. 5E has been a massive success - partly due to this returning section of the gaming community, and partly due to media influences helping a societal shift towards gaming becoming an acceptable hobby.

My games don't use any UA stuff, so the actual existence of new classes has little impact on my tables, for me it's the direction that WotC are heading.... a 'proper' Warlord harks back to the 'dark' days of 4E, but the Mystic - psionics were in 1E and 2E, and were integral to the marvellous Dark Sun setting. So while we won't be using a Mystic, their inclusion gives me optimism.

Sacrosanct · Mar 17, 2017

Imaro said:
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.

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.

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

Imaro, with all due respect, you need to stop. Just stop responding to him, or this thread will go on forever and ever and nothing will change. Just in this thread alone, he's made several claims that are patently false and really easy to disprove, and accused people of doing some really horrible aggressive attacking behavior that they never did (bullying, trying to oppress, trying to silence him, etc). Gee, if only there was an example of an equivalent analogy of the same behavior from a certain someone dominating the news media these past several months to compare it to...

When someone repeats the same thing over and over ("Here are some made up 'alternative facts', and anyone who disagrees with me is attacking me and trying to oppress me"), you can't argue with that. Save your time. Let this thread just drop off and die.

Aldarc · Mar 17, 2017

Sacrosanct said:
Imaro, with all due respect, you need to stop. Just stop responding to him, or this thread will go on forever and ever and nothing will change. Just in this thread alone, he's made several claims that are patently false and really easy to disprove, and accused people of doing some really horrible aggressive attacking behavior that they never did (bullying, trying to oppress, trying to silence him, etc). Gee, if only there was an example of an equivalent analogy of the same behavior from a certain someone dominating the news media these past several months to compare it to...

When someone repeats the same thing over and over ("Here are some made up 'alternative facts', and anyone who disagrees with me is attacking me and trying to oppress me"), you can't argue with that. Save your time. Let this thread just drop off and die.

"I, Pot, do thee, Kettle, wed..."

Sacrosanct · Mar 17, 2017

Aldarc said:
"I, Pot, do thee, Kettle, wed..."

Really? Can you point to me repeatedly making claims that are patently false, and statements where I've said people who don't agree with me are attacking or trying to silence or otherwise oppress me? I'll wait, if it helps. Ironically, you're helping prove my point. Really easy to accuse other people of doing something with no evidence to back it up. And for someone who does that, there is no point in even trying to have a discussion with because they won't ever argue with what you actually said, but have already built a strawman that feeds into their victim complex, and will only ever argue against that.

Morrus · Mar 17, 2017

It seems like a lot of people are being pretty obnoxious here. If you can't refrain from dripping sarcasm, its probably best you don't hit that "submit" button.

Also, [MENTION=15700]Sacrosanct[/MENTION], please keep the political analogies out of it.

Eubani · Mar 18, 2017

More Mystic threads no complaints.....

Hussar · Mar 18, 2017

[MENTION=48965]Imaro[/MENTION] - the fact is that the complaining about too many warlord threads started one day after two actual discussion threads. By the time [MENTION=15700]Sacrosanct[/MENTION] started his campaign to have warlord discussion banished to the ghetto, there were two warlord threads and two meta discussion threads.

Yup we have quite a few more now. True. It's a pretty popular topic and several of the threads are presenting homebrew versions for review. Seems pretty productive to me.

Now if we actually had an official version to discuss, we'd be able to do without the handful of meta threads. I'm still not really sure what motive you think I'm ascribing. I've already given you the benefit of the doubt in saying that this thread does not directly say that warlords discussion should be cut off.

But can you honestly not see the implications of this and other threads? Really? You look at this thread and find it completely unbelievable that anyone could interpret it as an attempt to

down conversation? That the other thread directly calling for warlord threads to be banished into sub board ghettos can't be seen as a attempt to close down conversation?

Sacrosanct · Mar 18, 2017

Hussar said:
[MENTION=48965]Imaro[/MENTION] - the fact is that the complaining about too many warlord threads started one day after two actual discussion threads. By the time [MENTION=15700]Sacrosanct[/MENTION] started his campaign to have warlord discussion banished to the ghetto, there were two warlord threads and two meta discussion threads.

This is an example I was talking about, when I said that you keep saying things and accusing others of untrue things. "My campaign to banish the warlord"? The only thread I created on the topic (and the last thread I created period), was this one from 2 weeks ago. I'm arguing in favor of including the Warlord class in that thread.

So I'm going to ask you nicely. Please stop accusing me of doing things I've not only not done, but are actually the opposite of my actual position.

Hussar · Mar 18, 2017

Sacrosanct said:
This is an example I was talking about, when I said that you keep saying things and accusing others of untrue things. "My campaign to banish the warlord"? The only thread I created on the topic (and the last thread I created period), was this one from 2 weeks ago. I'm arguing in favor of including the Warlord class in that thread.

So I'm going to ask you nicely. Please stop accusing me of doing things I've not only not done, but are actually the opposite of my actual position.

Dude, I'm totally sorry. I got your user name mixed up with [MENTION=92511]steeldragons[/MENTION]. Totally my bad.