D&D 5E 5e Warlord Demand Poll

[Hussar]

Hey, forget warlord, that's a nifty use for the Medicine Skill.

That's what it originally was. Here's the link to the original article: http://blogofholding.com/?p=7128

 

[Hussar]

Not in those exact words.

But, Lanliss is describing 'concerns' he's seen expressed, not his own.

And, of course (re-assembled from earlier quotes since I can no longer find the originals):


and
To be fair, he's not saying "No consensus, therefor no Warlord" he's saying, "No consensus, so you can't even meaningfully discuss whether there should be a Warlord."
Not an argument against the Warlord, just a straight-up bid to stifle debate.

Shhh, quiet. We're not supposed to point that out. That's strawman hyperbole, apparently, and completely untrue.

Funny how a number of people see the same thing, but, apparently, I'm completely wrong in my interpretation.

 

[Jester David]

Of course, no one here has posted on the preview of the noble class:
http://www.enworld.org/forum/showth...is-5E-s-Warlord-A-Preview-Of-A-TOUCH-OF-CLASS

Or commented on that here. Given there's still time for feedback and playtesting before Morrus' Kickstarter goes live, it seems like a good time to review that class and give feedback.
To say nothing of supporting the class and the book with your money rather than just clicking "yes" on a poll...

But, of course, no one here really cares because having a solid well playtested alternative to the warlord means they can't argue. And this thread and the ones like it are 90% about arguing rather than actually designing or working towards a warlord class.

 

[cbwjm]

Of course, no one here has posted on the preview of the noble class:
http://www.enworld.org/forum/showth...is-5E-s-Warlord-A-Preview-Of-A-TOUCH-OF-CLASS

Or commented on that here. Given there's still time for feedback and playtesting before Morrus' Kickstarter goes live, it seems like a good time to review that class and give feedback.
To say nothing of supporting the class and the book with your money rather than just clicking "yes" on a poll...

But, of course, no one here really cares because having a solid well playtested alternative to the warlord means they can't argue. And this thread and the ones like it are 90% about arguing rather than actually designing or working towards a warlord class.

I think that's because the 30% that want a warlord want an official WotC version. Everyone else is either happy with what currently exists, official or 3pp, or doesn't care about or want a warlord class.

 

[Eubani]

So can I take the Noble class to AL where I mostly get to play, next do I want to pay a second time for classes I have already paid for.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

But, of course, no one here really cares because having a solid well playtested alternative to the warlord means they can't argue. And this thread and the ones like it are 90% about arguing rather than actually designing or working towards a warlord class.

Most people don't care because it isn't official, and being official is the only thing that will ever settle a debate. There are different degrees of officiality, of course, but third-party material is exactly as official as anything I make up on the spot and write down on a napkin.

I don't mean that as a slight against anyone. I'm fairly certain that the class in question is better balanced than half of the classes in the actual rulebook. It's just that quality isn't a huge factor in this debate, for many people.

 

[Lanliss]

Of course, no one here has posted on the preview of the noble class:
http://www.enworld.org/forum/showth...is-5E-s-Warlord-A-Preview-Of-A-TOUCH-OF-CLASS

Or commented on that here. Given there's still time for feedback and playtesting before Morrus' Kickstarter goes live, it seems like a good time to review that class and give feedback.
To say nothing of supporting the class and the book with your money rather than just clicking "yes" on a poll...

But, of course, no one here really cares because having a solid well playtested alternative to the warlord means they can't argue. And this thread and the ones like it are 90% about arguing rather than actually designing or working towards a warlord class.

Well, I was going to respond kindly, but some people already beat me to that. I am actually very interested in the mechanical building of things for D&D, so I am happy sitting in this corner with my legos and clay, but thanks. I figured that wouldn't satisfy the primary forces in this and similar threads, since they all want an official warlord, not a Homebrew or 3pp. Mine won't either, since it is a Homebrew, but I am having fun with it.

Also, I would like you to know I am multitasking, Arguing and building at the same time. ;p

 

[Hussar]

Of course, no one here has posted on the preview of the noble class:
http://www.enworld.org/forum/showth...is-5E-s-Warlord-A-Preview-Of-A-TOUCH-OF-CLASS

Or commented on that here. Given there's still time for feedback and playtesting before Morrus' Kickstarter goes live, it seems like a good time to review that class and give feedback.
To say nothing of supporting the class and the book with your money rather than just clicking "yes" on a poll...

But, of course, no one here really cares because having a solid well playtested alternative to the warlord means they can't argue. And this thread and the ones like it are 90% about arguing rather than actually designing or working towards a warlord class.

Considering it's been around for two years, [MENTION=37579]Jester David[/MENTION], if we were going to be satisfied with that, I'd think that we'd not be having this conversation.

Also, I've only got the first page of the class to look at. What do you want me to review and critique when I can't actually see the class?

So, really, what's your point? If a homebrew, 3pp class was going to do the trick, there's already half a dozen on DM's guild. Adding another one (or in this case, not actually adding anything) isn't really doing anything.

 

[Tony Vargas]

So can I take the Noble class to AL where I mostly get to play,

No. For that matter, when you do get an official Warlord, it might well be available in AL only for the run of one AP or something.

And don't pay any attention to Jester Canuck - much earlier in the debate, he staked out the perfect anti-Warlord position, in which any possible evidence must be interpreted as proof that no Warlord should ever be published, it goes like this:

There is no Warlord in the PH, this is proof no Warlord is needed.
The BM is a warlord in the PH, this is proof that no Warlord is needed.
(At the time) there are no 3pp Warlords out there, so this is proof that there's no demand for the Warlord.
Then, the Noble became available to ENSiders and DMsG opened up and accumulated several, so it became: 3pp Warlords aren't platinum sellers, therefor there's not enough demand for the Warlord.
Lest a 3pp Warlord ever sell well, there's also: There are 3pp Warlords, therefor the demand has been satisfied, and there's no need for a Warlord.

Yep, one of those theories.

next do I want to pay a second time for classes I have already paid for.

Yes! No, really, hear me out: 5e's slow pace of release means that it's costing even a completeist collector less than any edition since 1e. Heck, if you're a player interested in crunch you'd only have bought 2 books in 3 years. So we can certainly afford to pick up the odd 3pp offering, even while, in essence, hoping it becomes redundant as an official offering comes down the line, even if there's little expectation of getting to play a Noble Class outside of SWSE.

Besides, Moonsong deserves our support!

I think that's because the 30% that want a warlord want an official WotC version. Everyone else is either happy with what currently exists, official or 3pp, or doesn't care about or want a warlord class.

Well, among the self-selected respondents of this far from definitive little poll, the plurality just don't care. (Which makes sense, really, there have been a /lot/ of classes in D&D history, so a plurality, if not majority, of D&Ders probably don't much care about any given one of them outside the Big 4, especially those that had very short runs.) Those who are satisfied (which, rather than 'don't care' is probably the logical category for the anti-warlord camp to vote up), though, are satisfied with the current official offerings, not the 3pp (~ 25% to <3%). Un-official, for all that D&Ders love to homebrew, probably doesn't much matter to most, it seems - I guess we like our own homebrews.

I think the startlingly low numbers 'satisfied' with 3pp offerings, and, especially, the even lower number of 4e hold-outs participating in a 5e forum like this, is the really interesting result.
They underscore the relative lack of nerdrage we're seeing against the current ed this time around.

A very hopeful & positive sign, IMHO.

 

[Sacrosanct]

I think that's because the 30% that want a warlord want an official WotC version. Everyone else is either happy with what currently exists, official or 3pp, or doesn't care about or want a warlord class.

Well, even more narrow that that. If I have my official ninja (shadow monk), then warlord fans have their official warlord (the PDK). So they want more than an official WotC version, they want an official WoTC version that is it's own unique class.

The reason I don't think we'll see one any time soon is because if they do that, then they are admitting that material they already published (the PDK in the SCAG) is worthless and should be ignored. It's rare when a company releases a book and shortly later says "that old book is useless now, use this instead." Unless you're Apple with iPhones, I don't see it very often