Design & Development: Warlord Article UP!

[hong]

When rules provoke the response of "don't think too hard" I'm thinking that's rarely a good thing.

On the contrary, the capacity not to think is a very useful thing indeed.

 

[Campbell]

You haven't been over to the Rules Forum a lot, have you?

This is not 3E. This is not 3.5. The designers are aware that there is massive discussion on the Internet about game rules. Such discussions have been going on for nearly a decade now. So, the designers should be aware that they have to be precise.

There is another way Grasshopper. Campbell say "Rules for roleplayiing games can be written with the assumption that the game is played by humans with the ability exercise judgment to ensure a fun play experience". Is it possible that the game is being written to be played and not for the express reason of enabling rules forum discussion ?

 

[Fallen Seraph]

Not when warlord deems it necessary- when player deems it so. Narrative control to players. A good thing in my book. :\

Exactly rules/mechanics are not the physics of the world, nor the exact knowledge of the characters. It is the ability to influence and affect the narrative course of an adventure/story.

 

[Pseudopsyche]

And this "extremely difficult" chance/luck situation occurs whenever the Warlord deems it necessary. hehe. Gotta love those "Laws of Probability" breaking Warlords.

You don't even see how off in right field your explanations sound, do you? They sound rational to you, right? Or are you just pulling my chain with this stuff? I gotta admit, it's very imaginative.

Honestly, I think that is what the designers have in mind. The fact that the player chooses when the warlord's tactics succeed is no more or less outrageous than players choosing when to use action points, especially in 3E when a typical usage of an action point is to modify a die roll. The player of a 3E cleric with the luck domain choses when the character gets lucky and gets to reroll; it's no different from the player of a 4E warlord choosing when the character's tactics pay off.

 

[hong]

And this "extremely difficult" chance/luck situation occurs whenever the Warlord deems it necessary. hehe. Gotta love those "Laws of Probability" breaking Warlords.

You don't even see how off in right field your explanations sound, do you? They sound rational to you, right? Or are you just pulling my chain with this stuff? I gotta admit, it's very imaginative.

You'll notice, for example, that I'm not the one having problems.

 

[Charwoman Gene]

good marital controlling power

You keep using controller.
Warlord is a LEADER.
Please get your facts straight.

"If you're wondering how he blocks the shift,
And other Tactics facts.
Just repeat to yourself, It's just a game,
I really should just relax."

 

[KarinsDad]

It isn't that it is that the Warlord deems it necessary, it is that yup, for the whole fight he has been doing his best to set up good attacks, etc. Just that when the PLAYER decides to use the Per-Day, in-game the Warlord happens to find a opening to use that strategy.

If only the power did not last the entire encounter, then this explanation would work for me (it wouldn't explain the rest of how the power works, but it would be a sufficient explanation as to why Daily martial powers are Daily powers). But with Pin the Foe as an encounter long power, this explanation means that the player decides when to really screw up the laws of game world physics.

Thanks for trying though. And I don't mean that facetiously.

 

[mach1.9pants]

It isn't that it is that the Warlord deems it necessary, it is that yup, for the whole fight he has been doing his best to set up good attacks, etc. Just that when the PLAYER decides to use the Per-Day, in-game the Warlord happens to find a opening to use that strategy.

The Warlord has no clue he has an abilities by these names, all he knows is he can set up good strategic advantages for his allies when the opportunity arises.

This is simply broken down into specific abilities for the sake of the player and mechanics of battle.

This- I can see how this is not enough for some people (I am a recovering simulationist) - but it is good enough for me.
And I love the narrative control thing, it is how we play now, and 4E will be better for this. I hope

 

[Fallen Seraph]

If only the power did not last the entire encounter, then this explanation would work for me (it wouldn't explain the rest of how the power works, but it would be a sufficient explanation as to why Daily martial powers are Daily powers). But with Pin the Foe as an encounter long power, this explanation means that the player decides when to really screw up the laws of game world physics.

Thanks for trying though. And I don't mean that facetiously.

Well it lasts till the other PCs cannot maintain their position on the target, ie: they stopped pinning the target. So I think this is simply a continuation, of it.

All you really need to say, is the Warlord hampered the targets ability to dodge multiple attacks when shifting and thats it, whenever it gets pinned it can't shift since it cannot dodge the multiple attacks when it tries to move.

 

[Mortellan]

Hmm, I wonder, should PCs led by a Warlord be called a Warband? And do the other PCs have to have the same alignment or faction as their Warlord?