Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Gadget" data-source="post: 6099868" data-attributes="member: 23716">There are a good points made on both sides. As for me, I'm a 4e person in that I grew very tired of the more extreme process-sim road that 3E was on; I don't mind and appreciate the more abstract and 'disassociated' mechanics of 4e for the most part and I generally scoff at the 'hit-points-as-meat' crowd.  Yet even I have trouble with 'tactical' part of Warlord sometimes.  This is something for a commander of armies, or at least military units of a size a bit greater than the 4-5 or so characters in the usual adventuring party.  A great concept for the domain management module I've heard talk of though.  The inspirational part I can see, and I don't have a problem with non-magical hit-point recovery, as I see hit points as mostly not dire wounds anyway, though there may be some overlap with the paladin there.  Also, I'm going to have to agree that the Warlord is not as strong of a fantasy archetype as some the other 'sub-classes' such as paladin, monk, and barbarian.  High level AD&D at least made a nod in this direction with the fighters getting a keep and attracting followers, though there was little mechanical bite in the concept.  At best it is more of a prestige class ( to use 3E parlance) and I think most would have said that before 4e came out.However, with that being said, I would have to agree that with many detractors here that it looks like we may have to kiss the robust mechanics we were used to in 4e goodbye, and accept a pale substitute.  I remember in the early days of the dndn there was much speculation about whether the fighter would kill the warlord and take his stuff, and I was okay with that at a conceptual level.  But as the play test has gone on, they seem to have shown an unwillingness to put in the mechanical oomph to get the job done, and I'm not sure that 'manoeuvres' is robust enough to support this concept, though I would like to be proven wrong.   The real issue is:  are we going to be forced to have someone play the cleric again?  And this is more of a mechanical question about the system than an archetype one.  It seems the answer to this is going to be: yes.</blockquote>

Verification