Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Hurin70" data-source="post: 7899984" data-attributes="member: 6875491">While I understand your point, what you are making is what's called a counterfactual: a statement about what might have been had conditions been different. The problem with a counterfactual is that it is logically impossible to prove. It is speculation, because we can never know for sure.Also, the 3.5 edition class that the 4e class was based was indeed called the Marshal. But that didn't change ordinary people's impressions of the word Marshal very much, as the images for Marshal that Tony posted above make clear. Finally, I would note that of the images of Warlords Tony posted above, few (maybe none?) of them are of the 4e Warlord. I see several from the videogame For Honor, which might perhaps have been influenced by 4e; but videogames were using the word Warlord since 1980's Warlords for the Atari. Another of the Warlord images above is from Magic the Gathering, while still others are from completely different games, or unique works by artists, and several are inspired by Asian cultures, which of course have their own traditions of 'warlords' which long, long predate the 4e version. So I would say 4e used the word Warlord because it was already associated with those sorts of images/characters -- namely, the armored combatant who leads from the front.</blockquote>