4E Class Survivor - Round 2

[Dice4Hire]

I would not have voted off the warlord this soon, but I'm glad to see him gone. He is just not a fun class to play. I prefer to do things for myself.

 

[Imaro]

Eh, in the case of the Warlord, at least for me, it's not about new class bias... it's about sidekick bias. You can dress the Warlord up anyway you want descriptively... but in the end he's nothing but a glorified sidekick. Your schtick is, "I make other people do better, while doing mediocre myself."... and in my experience, in a game of heroic fantasy adventure... most people don't want to play Robin to the other player's Batmans in the group.

I think what sets the cleric apart (at least at low levels) is his ability to choose between ranged and melee powers, which the Warlord doesn't have. IMO, this versatility makes the cleric more fun to play, and can even lead to situations where the Cleric is the hero instead of support at times. YMMV of course.

Also to those claiming reasons for the poll (such as grognard hate or whatever)... really it's in bad form and comes off like sour grapes because your mad your favorite class didn't win. It also avoids the simplest answer... many people really don't like playing the class for whatever reason.

 

[doctorhook]

Imaro: you didn't quote me or address me, but it looks like you're responding to me nonetheless. Quoting is a handy way for people to know who you're talking to.

Eh, in the case of the Warlord, at least for me, it's not about new class bias... it's about sidekick bias. You can dress the Warlord up anyway you want descriptively... but in the end he's nothing but a glorified sidekick. Your schtick is, "I make other people do better, while doing mediocre myself."... and in my experience, in a game of heroic fantasy adventure... most people don't want to play Robin to the other player's Batmans in the group.

I think what sets the cleric apart (at least at low levels) is his ability to choose between ranged and melee powers, which the Warlord doesn't have. IMO, this versatility makes the cleric more fun to play, and can even lead to situations where the Cleric is the hero instead of support at times. YMMV of course.

If your Warlord is mediocre, then frankly, you're doing it wrong. I can only assume that either you just plain don't understand its schtick, or you've only seen mediocre Warlords in play, or both. If anything, the Warlord's schtick really is "to lead" -- would you describe have described Napoleon as a sidekick? How about Patton? More than this, a well built TacLord or BraveLord is any exceptionally competent character on the battlefield, especially because they multiply their allies' effectiveness.

Warlords are quintessential Leaders, and they make excellent heroes for anyone wanting to play a seargant character. Just because you don't like them doesn't mean they suck.

Also to those claiming reasons for the poll (such as grognard hate or whatever)... really it's in bad form and comes off like sour grapes because your mad your favorite class didn't win. It also avoids the simplest answer... many people really don't like playing the class for whatever reason.

You're seeing sour grapes where their are none. Obviously if a class is being voted out, many people don't like it. However, some of us are pointing out the obvious pattern in the voting, and are speculating as to the reason for such naked bias.

 

[Imaro]

Imaro: you didn't quote me or address me, but it looks like you're responding to me nonetheless. Quoting is a handy way for people to know who you're talking to.

Actually I wasn't addressing you specifically... I was making a general statement since a few people commented on what I thought about the Warlord.

If your Warlord is mediocre, then frankly, you're doing it wrong. I can only assume that either you just plain don't understand its schtick, or you've only seen mediocre Warlords in play, or both. If anything, the Warlord's schtick really is "to lead" -- would you describe have described Napoleon as a sidekick? How about Patton? More than this, a well built TacLord or BraveLord is any exceptionally competent character on the battlefield, especially because they multiply their allies' effectiveness.

Note: This is IMO...

What does he lead? What strategy can he implement through his powers, without the cooperation and ok of other players at the table? And if they decide not to go along with his plans... well then he really is kinda pointless and little more than a sub-par fighter. See that's the problem... Even though you can have a great build...It just seems like a class that relies too heavily on the graciousness and goodwill of others to be fun (which I think was a bad design decision). IMO, that's a sidekick not a leader.

His schtick... is bestow bonuses on people so they can do really cool stuff easier... oh yeah, and he heals. You call it a leader (though I'm still not seeing where he actually leads anything), I say sidekick.

Warlords are quintessential Leaders, and they make excellent heroes for anyone wanting to play a seargant character. Just because you don't like them doesn't mean they suck.

You're getting defensive here, I don't like them... I've given reasons for why but I'm not saying other people shouldn't like them or whatever... But the poll is about what classes you don't like. I honestly think it takes a certain player type to enjoy most of the leader types... along with particular party dynamics to make them really fun to play, but again this is another reason I don't like Warlords much (and may be why leaders are taking a pounding).

You're seeing sour grapes where their are none. Obviously if a class is being voted out, many people don't like it. However, some of us are pointing out the obvious pattern in the voting, and are speculating as to the reason for such naked bias.

Perhaps we should look at the commonality between the classes voted out. I didn't vote for Artificer last time... I voted for Warlord but I do find it interesting that two leaders have been voted out first. They're support characters and I can totally see how that isn't alot of peoples thing.

EDIT: I actually think we are either going to see a striker (probably one of the least squishy ones) win because they get the glory in play by dishing out the damage... or the Fighter who not only defends supremely well... but can also approach striker damage numbers. When you're talking about a game about killing things and taking their stuff (as so many people assert D&D is)... these classes are the stars.

 

[Oni]

Yay, shaman pulls though and lives to fight another day.

Now go get that damn dirty invoker.

 

[doctorhook]

Note: This is IMO...

What does he lead? What strategy can he implement through his powers, without the cooperation and ok of other players at the table? And if they decide not to go along with his plans... well then he really is kinda pointless and little more than a sub-par fighter. See that's the problem... Even though you can have a great build...It just seems like a class that relies too heavily on the graciousness and goodwill of others to be fun (which I think was a bad design decision). IMO, that's a sidekick not a leader.

His schtick... is bestow bonuses on people so they can do really cool stuff easier... oh yeah, and he heals. You call it a leader (though I'm still not seeing where he actually leads anything), I say sidekick.

Warlords have powers than can move or shift all of their allies around the battlefield, move all of his enemies around the battlefield, or grant a healing surge to all of his allies, in addition to some seriously fat attack bonuses. Even without his allies explicitly agreeing to follow his "orders", those effects imply a "command" of the battlefield. (One could argue that, in-game, the Warlord's allies are implicitly following at least some of his "orders"/tactical directions whenever they claim any kind of bonus from one of his powers. Narrative shouldn't be ignored.)

You're getting defensive here, I don't like them... I've given reasons for why but I'm not saying other people shouldn't like them or whatever... But the poll is about what classes you don't like. I honestly think it takes a certain player type to enjoy most of the leader types... along with particular party dynamics to make them really fun to play, but again this is another reason I don't like Warlords much (and may be why leaders are taking a pounding).

You're seeing hostility where there is none. I'm simply offering counterpoint to your arguments against Warlords. It is possible that you both dislike them because you don't understand them, and I'm just trying to help you see what I see in them.

FWIW, I completely agree that it takes a certain kind of person to enjoy Leader classes.

Perhaps we should look at the commonality between the classes voted out. I didn't vote for Artificer last time... I voted for Warlord but I do find it interesting that two leaders have been voted out first. They're support characters and I can totally see how that isn't alot of peoples thing.

Looking for commonality is exactly what we've been doing. Folks are voting against Leaders, but not all Leaders; Clerics and Bards (both "traditional" classes) aren't getting even close to the level of attention Artificers, Warlords, and Shamans are. Even among non-Leaders, votes are pooling around the newer classes and the classes that changed most in 4E. This suggests a commonality.

EDIT: I actually think we are either going to see a striker (probably one of the least squishy ones) win because they get the glory in play by dishing out the damage... or the Fighter who not only defends supremely well... but can also approach striker damage numbers. When you're talking about a game about killing things and taking their stuff (as so many people assert D&D is)... these classes are the stars.

I agree, it probably will be a Striker who wins.

 

[Cadfan]

Looking for commonality is exactly what we've been doing. Folks are voting against Leaders, but not all Leaders; Clerics and Bards (both "traditional" classes) aren't getting even close to the level of attention Artificers, Warlords, and Shamans are. Even among non-Leaders, votes are pooling around the newer classes and the classes that changed most in 4E. This suggests a commonality.

Yeah... I'm kind of curious whether we'd get different results if we could restrict voting to people who are actively playing 4e. The warlord in particular is one that I think a lot of 3e fans dislike, but I'm not sure that's as true of 4e fans.

I've also noticed that the warlord is a bit polarizing- there are some people who really, really love him, and some people who feel resentful that its a melee character that isn't as strong as a fighter, and who loses out in order to help others. This poll encourages people to target their least favorite, but it doesn't measure positive feelings. Different voting structures might produce interesting results- perhaps a dual voting system in which you placed one negative vote on the class you most want to vote off the island, and one positive vote on the class you want to protect? Under that structure a class with a lot of fans and a lot of haters would even out, while a class with only a few haters but fewer fans would be knocked out quickly.

Not that I'm saying that's how this should be done. Its all just for fun anyways, its just interesting to wonder how things would turn out under other systems. I'm a political science nerd, and voting structures and how they influence outcomes is fascinating to me.

 

[Nightson]

I'm voting off the shaman because I dislike the class, but I <3 the warlord, the warlock and the swordmage very much.

 

[Cadfan]

Oh, and to the extent that people know who's winning or losing prior to voting, that has an effect. If I can figure out prior to going into a vote that this round its going to be either the Shaman or the Warlord who goes down, then even if my most hated class is the Bard, I can skip voting for the Bard (it'd be a wasted vote) and instead vote on the "real" showdown, the Shaman vs the Warlord. This suppresses the ability of the poll to reflect true preferences, and encourages the poll to reflect opinions on perceived frontrunners.

 

[Wik]

And Wik, you love hitting yourself with the nerf bat LOL

Yeah. That's been my gaming career, pretty much. Let me tell you about the time I played a short-sighted gnomish heavy crossbow specialist in 2e.

Or the 2e wizard with only utility spells (grease, unseen servant) with an octopus for a familiar.

Love the nerf bat. But still... the shaman is awesome.