Class Compendium: The Warlord (Marshal)

[sunrisekid]

It is "essentialized" as it is the new format [...]

This sounds mis-leading. "Essentializing" has more to do with presenting the alternate game mechanics that we've come to recognize in, e.g., the martial basic attack format. The excessive fluff text is not "essentializing" in a meaningful way.

WotC may have "warned" in advance that their reprint of the warlord would be hardly changed, I wouldn't know. But I still hold that it is mis-leading for WotC to state they've essentialized the warlord and then print it only with technical corrections and fluff text.

Someone could bring up the Hunter and Warpriest as design counter-examples, to which I have no good reply, only that I've never liked at-will martial attacks with whiz-bang effects (which goes back to the common "video-game" critique).

"I attack with my sword." Indeed I do.

 

[Aegeri]

This sounds mis-leading. "Essentializing" has more to do with presenting the alternate game mechanics that we've come to recognize in, e.g., the martial basic attack format. The excessive fluff text is not "essentializing" in a meaningful way.

Like it or not, yes it is. It is a part of what essentials did to classes. Gutting martial classes was just a decision for those classes in those books - not a new design paradigm to write them out. Believe me you are in for one HELL of a nasty surprise when they publish the CC Fighter and Ranger (I'll give you a hint: They're both still going to be AEDU). Some people took this to the point - not wizards in any way shape or form - that AEDU classes would no longer exist. Of course if they make NEW AEDU classes is up for considerable debate - but the fact is that there was always going to be these updates. These updates were always going to be upgrading to the "Essentials" format.

That meant exactly what I just told you: The new verbose - which is quite cumbersome now I've considered it - format for presenting a class with only a couple of options at each level (to make them easy to build for new players). You may have confused yourself on the issue, but Wizards have always been 100% clear as to what they were doing with these classes and the class compendium.

 

[kaomera]

This sounds mis-leading. "Essentializing" has more to do with presenting the alternate game mechanics that we've come to recognize in, e.g., the martial basic attack format. The excessive fluff text is not "essentializing" in a meaningful way.

I think it's misleading because "essentializing" doesn't even really mean anything.

 

[sunrisekid]

Like it or not, yes it is. It is a part of what essentials did to classes. Gutting martial classes was just a decision for those classes in those books - not a new design paradigm to write them out.

I certainly don't rule out my own confusion on these matters ;-)

Let me get this straight, the gutting of martial classes (which I like but whatever) was NOT the point of their redesign? Huh. If so then I stand corrected :-(

A book of "easy" class build options is precisely the sort of material I'm interested in. The two Heroes book will satisfy my gaming needs for a few years but I was hoping to see the AEDU template erode somewhat for martial-themed classes (of which I would include the Hunter on thematic grounds).

I will refrain from "threatening" not to buy future products but if there were to be more books with simplied mechanics, like the Essential martial classes, I would certainly be interested in acquiring them.

(Don't get me wrong, I love most of 4E but the martial at-wills have always irked me; I've been interested in finding ways to get a classic sword-n-sorcery feel with 4E, while keeping the epicness, and it feels that the Heroes books are step in that direction.)

 

[the-golem]

We replace daily nova capacity with a potpourri of encounter-level immediate actions. An ally hits? You add damage. An ally attacks? You add attack bonus. An ally moves? You move them farther. An ally makes a save? You help them save harder. An ally is attacked? You give them a defensive boost. The Warlord becomes the class that gets to act on everyone else's turn. Imagine splitting something like Bastion of Defense into three encounter powers (either of which you can choose at first level), each of which contains a (slightly watered down) version of that power's main effects (more damage, +1 to nearby ally's defenses, some temp hp). Our warlord is handing out candy each turn.

Excellent!

On their own turn, our warlords are simple: move into position near an ally (within range of your immediate "commands" and your aura) and attack.

No no no no no. It has to be in balance, see. As you said, "The Warlord becomes the class that gets to act on everyone else's turn." To balance it though, on the warlords turn, he just makes other people go.

"You there, pick me up and place me near the mage!"

"You in the blue, attack that ugly looking thing with the fangs."

I'm just joshin' ya.

 

[the-golem]

I think it's misleading because "essentializing" doesn't even really mean anything.

Monsieur Webster disagrees. See: Essentialize - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary
I actually was curious, so I looked it up. It's been a word for at least 100 years, though (according to M-W), so I guess I'll go with it.

Anyway, going with that. the HotFL/FK classes are "essentialized" because they are, arguably, boiled down to the raw essentials.

The changes made to Warlord basically amounts to errata. The layout is purely presentational, IMHO, and doesn't really have a bearing on the Warlord's "essentialness."

 

[S'mon]

I find the layout vastly more readable and comprehensible than the PHB version. There's a newbie Warlord player in the 4e game I'm playing who's really struggling; I've been trying to help her but I struggle myself - there's a good reason I'm playing an Essentials Thief, one of the simpler classes. I had to play both my Thief and an absent player's Wizard last Monday, and that was pretty nightmarish. Luckily the DM let my Daily Flaming Sphere recharge, so after that I could just trundle it around the battlefield and try not to incinerate my allies.

I'll be bringing this new Warlord layout along on Monday & I think I'll be able to advise her much better, eg I had no idea about the class feature where her allies heal hp whenever we spend an AP!

 

[Tony Vargas]

I've never liked at-will martial attacks with whiz-bang effects (which goes back to the common "video-game" critique).

Essentials reduces the Fighter, in the person of the Slayer, to a mindless basic-attack-monkey that makes a character from Gauntlet look deep and evolved by comparison, and you accuse 4e of being video-gamey?

Let me get this straight, the gutting of martial classes (which I like but whatever) was NOT the point of their redesign? Huh. If so then I stand corrected :-(

I can only assume it was. The changes to the Divine and Arcane classes were minimal by comparison.

A book of "easy" class build options is precisely the sort of material I'm interested in. The two Heroes book will satisfy my gaming needs for a few years but I was hoping to see the AEDU template erode somewhat for martial-themed classes (of which I would include the Hunter on thematic grounds).

Wanting easy options is one thing, wanting to see more interesting options taken away from those who might want to play a martial class is something else entirely. Something petty and spiteful.

my preference is for an older style of play and Essentials is a great move in that direction.

What, you couldn't play any of the 34 years worth of D&D products that preceded 4e? They supported that style of play to a T. The martial source has something like parity with casters for barely more than 2 years, and you're bregudging it even that much time in the sun?

 

[Nemesis Destiny]

Wanting easy options is one thing, wanting to see more interesting options taken away from those who might want to play a martial class is something else entirely. Something petty and spiteful.

Taken away? So after the release of Essentials, Mike Mearls and his Essentials ninjas came to your house and burned all your copies of the PHB1, Martial Power 1, Martial Power 2, and deleted all that data from the compendium, including all the Dragon content supporting martial classes?

Nothing was taken away from anyone. I don't even think that the post you were responding to was even intended that way. It sounded more like he just wanted more Essential style options, which takes NOTHING away from you.

Every single thread that mentions Essentials these days, you've come along and made your position very well known on the matter (in ways ranging from disdainful to downright rude). We get it. You don't like what Essentials had to offer Martial characters. You've made your point. Loud and clear. Maybe it's time to get over it and move on?

 

[webrunner]

Essentials, to me, was the following:

1. Update and re-print the rules (usage: "As of Essentials..")
2. Present classes in a new level-based format with subclasses ("Essentials formatting")
3. New class design based on 3.5 asthetics (level-based features, basic-attack based, no martial dailies) ("Essential class")

Marshall is 1 and 2, but not three.