Class Compendium: The Warlord (Marshal)

[UngeheuerLich]

Me too, i guess.

But I guess, some people that would have made the transition from 3.5 to 4e, who have not or just now with essentials, may have been turned off with such a release, as martial divine power are not simulationist enough...

 

[Dice4Hire]

We'll never know if I would have gone from 3.5 straight to essentials as I went from 3.5 to 4E.

But I kinda doubt it. I'm the kind of guy who loves tons of options and Essentials still does not have enough.

But an interesting point.

 

[Nemesis Destiny]

It's easy enough to go ahead and SAY that you would have just jumped on the E-train, but I think for a lot of us, at that time, it probably looked a llittle too much like 3.x for comfort. Sure, we know now that the Dailly-less structure works adequately as far as power balance goes, but back then, I think you would have had a difficult time convincing the people who were sick of the imbalance of 3.x melee classes to even give it a chance. Heck, this is still a problem.

I remember the typical response on some of the forums at that time to balance complaints was, "ban the Big 5 and use BoNS," and that's pretty much what 4e did. If the measure had been more conservative like what we got in HotF*, I think many would not have been convinced that it went far enough, and the rest would still have resented the turning down of the power dial of the Arcane and Divine power sources to manageable levels, and have ignored the new edition anyway.

 

[tuxgeo]

The Marshal was a 3e class. It was... sad. The kind of failed experiment that you don't want to have to re-live. The Warlord is too good to be saddled with the Marshal's legacy of suck.

They should have saved Marshal as the name for an Essentials-style, basic-attack-ghetto Warlord. It would have served as a warning label.

I can't agree with that.
I believe in redemption and rehabilitation, so I'm glad to see the Marshal brought back into currency as the subclass name for the well-done PHB1 Warlord.

 

[Klaus]

So based on reading this article, can anyone tell me why this warranted a new class, rather than just some (minor) errata for the existing warlord? I mean, what does a marshal do that a warlord doesn't?

I think the new organization of builds gives a unique name for each build. Fighters have the Knight, Slayer and Weaponmaster (PH1) and the Warlord has the Marshal (PH1). I guess they might give new names to the Bravura, Archer and Win-Win Warlods, if those are ever re-released...

 

[webrunner]

I think the new organization of builds gives a unique name for each build. Fighters have the Knight, Slayer and Weaponmaster (PH1) and the Warlord has the Marshal (PH1). I guess they might give new names to the Bravura, Archer and Win-Win Warlods, if those are ever re-released...

Actually it's a question.. are those "subclasses" ore builds of Marshal (comparable to mage Schools)

Same with the new builds of fighter, etc.

 

[Nikosandros]

Actually it's a question.. are those "subclasses" ore builds of Marshal (comparable to mage Schools)

Same with the new builds of fighter, etc.

Since Marshal covers both builds in PHB1, I think that the other builds in MP1 ans MP2 would be still considered Marshals.

 

[Nemesis Destiny]

Since Marshal covers both builds in PHB1, I think that the other builds in MP1 ans MP2 would be still considered Marshals.

Indeed. I think before you get one with a different name, it would have to be built really different, i.e. an Essential-style version, or possibly a design with a different role, E-style or "classic" AEDU.

 

[Walking Dad]

I want 'Implement Master' as subclass name for the PHB wizard...

 

[Nemesis Destiny]

I want 'Implement Master' as subclass name for the PHB wizard...

Or perhaps Academy Wizard, then they can have their own schools, too: Gryffindor, Hufflepuff, Ravenclaw, or Slytherin!

Can't help it - it's the first thing I think of when wizards are so positively tied to their implement. Expelliarmus!