Class Acts: Warlord

I, too, like the new multiclassing feats. There's kind of an exponential growth issue here, because with 8 classes, doing 3 feats like this for each class will run you... 84 feats. That would probably come down because not every combination is worth supporting, but then go back up because of multiple class builds, each which might want their own multiclass feats... But its a nice idea when it happens.

I was kind of surprised by the utility power that lets you vault with a polearm. I guess I shouldn't be- its a martial trick, and this is a martial class. Not everything has to be leader-ish. But its the sort of thing I hope the Fighter has as well, in at least some form.

The level 9 daily is brutal with a Fighter nearby. Pull the foe to a spot adjacent to you and adjacent to the Fighter, then prevent it from escaping by means of the Fighter's marking power, while abusing the crap out of it due to the daily power benefit. The best escape for your enemy at that point is probably to just move, get nailed by the Fighter and the Warlord, then use another move action now that their OAs are used up. Nothing else is going to save them.

With all the powers being written that offers an enemy a bonus if they attack you but also a penalty as a result of the attack, I'm going to have to come up with some method of deciding when a foe takes the bait. Like Diabolic Strategem. If an enemy takes the bait, you could absolutely demolish it. Against a solo, it could grant free basic attacks for the whole party. But logically a monster in that position wouldn't take the bait. Which makes it kind of lame. Maybe I'll roll a die rather than try to double think my way through the monster's perspective. Int checks ftw?

One of the feats requires you to be level 11. That should read, "Paragon." One of the others is missing a prerequisite of "Warlord."
 

log in or register to remove this ad


With all the powers being written that offers an enemy a bonus if they attack you but also a penalty as a result of the attack, I'm going to have to come up with some method of deciding when a foe takes the bait. Like Diabolic Strategem. If an enemy takes the bait, you could absolutely demolish it. Against a solo, it could grant free basic attacks for the whole party. But logically a monster in that position wouldn't take the bait. Which makes it kind of lame. Maybe I'll roll a die rather than try to double think my way through the monster's perspective. Int checks ftw?

I don't think that I would let a die roll influence whether or not a power would work; IMO, that would unfairly nerf these powers, most of which are Encounter or Daily powers. Per the rules, the enemy would know that it was marked and who marked it, but not what else could happen if they attack their marker. I think I would decide it narratively; non-intelligent monsters would attack regardless, while intelligent creatures may fall for it the first time, but shy away the second time if the warlord somehow used the same power again (maybe, if the warlord succeeded on a Bluff check as a free action, I would allow the enemy to be affected by it again).
 


Definitely! Although, I never really thought of a Warlord/Warlock combo. Shame that they went with an infernal lock (who works off Con, not Cha) since Cha overlaps for the two classes.

I definitely want to see more of this, although I wish this sorta thing was in Martial Power.

Yeah, I was all excited to share this with my friend playing a glaive-wielding tiefling inspiring warlord... but he has a 13 Con, making infernal not a good option. Bummer!
 

I don't think that I would let a die roll influence whether or not a power would work; IMO, that would unfairly nerf these powers, most of which are Encounter or Daily powers. Per the rules, the enemy would know that it was marked and who marked it, but not what else could happen if they attack their marker. I think I would decide it narratively; non-intelligent monsters would attack regardless, while intelligent creatures may fall for it the first time, but shy away the second time if the warlord somehow used the same power again (maybe, if the warlord succeeded on a Bluff check as a free action, I would allow the enemy to be affected by it again).
I think you're interpreting the rules wrong. Enemies know the results of powers used against them.

The fancy schmancy rules interpretation you're probably thinking of has to do with the Fighter, and the fact that Combat Challenge isn't a "power." Because of that, many argue that a creature marked by a Fighter isn't aware that shifting or attacking someone other than the Fighter will result in the Fighter getting a free basic melee attack. Under this interpretation, if Combat Challenge were in a power block, the enemy would know, but since it is not, the enemy is unaware.

These warlord powers are all in power blocks. The default rule is that your foes know all consequences of things that happen to them in power blocks. Unfortunately, some powers seem to be written by people who didn't realize this- certain Rogue powers, for example. But its the default rule, and no exception exists.

That's why I think I'll let a die roll handle it. The power works either way, but whether the monster falls for it will be randomized based on the monster's mental stats.
 


This thread has me thinking of a dragonborn one mixing warlord and wizard for that extra dragon feel. Either that or a draconic pact warlock.
 


Interesting. One of my character ideas was a Dwarlock/lord. I was planning Warlock on the base and multiing into warlord to get the knight commander prestige class. I liked the image of a Dwarf standing there shouting commands weilding an axe in one hand while blasting eldritch fire form the other.

Of course it worked better in my head than it does on paper. :(
 

Pets & Sidekicks

Remove ads

Top