Design & Development: Warlord Article UP!

[StarFyre]

yuck

this gives more examples of what I see as 'artificial tactics'.

When I say artificial, I mean tactics that aren't really true tactics, but abilities (that don't really have any reason to do what they do) that force a situation that shouldn't be.

FOr example, if the Warlords' powers were truly 'magical' then the 'rules' of magic (no rules really by definition, rules are done as per the individual world, game, book , etc), could indicate when the warlord attacks, magical energy comes from his brain and forces stuff to move around. fine. he becomes a type of swordsage character WITH magical powers.

THe wayit's written, it doesnt sound like magical, yet he can force people to move it sounds like? OR stop a creature from doing something?

We currently use 'of turn' movements as a house rule. the way we do it is if you delay your action to see whathappens, then every init. segment after that, i allow players to move around, shuffle, etc to give a more flowing/real life type of battle.

The warlord abilities appear to force this.

Like Joel's opinion; i have told my players, stuff like this (even in 2e or 3e where it existed) will work on humanoids and ogre sized stuff, but don't expect to hit demogorgon, or an ancient great wyrm that is 400 ft long or the dreamer (spelljammer 30 mile long monster) and stun it.

Example of real tactics that we had in the last dragonbattle I DMed...

THe dragon was massive...it was in the lair...players tried researching ahead of time in the towns how to deal with it. they got nets of dark sun giant hair (we play planescape, so almost anything can be bought in sigil..only city i allow more thna a scroll or potion to be purchased) and boulders that were reduced attached with stoneshape and some very good drawing work to explain what they doing.

They entered the lair (some stuff happned here but won't bother with it).

the dragon woke up..it saw them. Now the key to a dragon..Don't let it get into the air....

the dragon roared at them, and during dialogue, a player charged..the dragon charged it and used breathe as it moved forward. players dodged to the side. outside though, players were upthe slope of the mountain..with the nets and boulders. the dragon just charged right thru the players in the cave (at it's size, sorry..u AIN'T stopping it regardless unless u got a wall of force or a cannon)...the dragon charged out, knocking 2 players down and trampling one...(i give large creatures extra abilities that make sense for them). however, outside, players dropped the net. the dragon moved partially but it got it's wing and hind leg. the dragon ended up failing save on a bad rol of mine and fell to a lower ledge area..causing damage. the dragon started to try and rip thru it. arrows and spells came at it.

fighters, and wizards started targeting explosive spells and grenade like stuff INTOthe mountain to bring part of it down on the dragon.
However, the dragon used a breathe to melt thru the netting... the players engaged it. the dragon grabbed one of them and tore his body in half (we use a special critical hit chart and some 'attack types' can cause auto criticals) and tossed it at other party members....

at this point, the dragon took to the air and rained some specific dragon spells down onthe party but it stayed out of range of most stuff....

(Players did end up winning but won't getinto all of it).

THAT is how, IMHO, you run a cinematic, tactical, beautiful combat...almost all our fights are done to this detail level.

I do like many aspects of 4E, but alot of it also turns me away. I'vegot so much house rules on the go right now, in planning stages, some done, etc to bring what we don't like up to par.

I can see the warlord's powers being changed to make more 'sense' for what he is and to allow for such truly cinematic battles..not forced tactics that give the impression of cinematics.

Sanjay

 

[Lord Sessadore]

I am somewhat concerned we are seeing martial powers not getting the respect they deserve. In particular, that the class abilities of the Warlord, the martial controller, are being questioned in importance as something that any party should manage if it is at all possible. If a coordinated group can prevent shifting with tactics, why do they need a warlord to do so? Sometimes it seems as if only explicitly magical powers get any respect as abilities that can be modeled by the system and kept exclusive and powerful. If the only way you can imagine a PC is able to coordinate a party's attacks and movements to have powerful effects on the overall flow of D&D's tactical combat system is to have magical powers, then I think you're going to have to declare powers such as Pin the Foe magical. Frankly, I think it's a bit disappointing, since it seems to indicate that the scope for non-magical abilities in many people's minds is very limited. I just suspect that if the Warlord character were a Battle Caster with *spells* that allowed all of these tricks, rather than exploits that result from non-magical tactical ability, we wouldn't be having much of this discussion. This is going to come up again and again, I think, as the designers come up with broad ways for martial characters to compete on the same field as spellcasters.

Every martial character's powers are vulnerable to the question of "why can't everyone do this"? If the only way to get respect is to have magical powers, then we should just go the Earthdawn route and have all of the classes have explicit magical powers. Then the Warlord can have magical battle affecting powers that manage exciting game effects and not have to constantly defend these effects from the charges that they seem too magical. The Warlord's powers are quite straightforward, he has the ability to coordinate attacks, movement and the actions of his allies to allow for additional attacks and movement and actions during combat. In the limits of D&Ds turn based combat system, the designers are modeling this with the powers we've seen.

THANK YOU.

To expand upon that, if every martial character's powers are vulnerable to the question of "why can't everyone do this?", then why even differentiate martial classes? Heck, why even differentiate classes at all??

Why is the ranger better with a bow than most everyone else? Why does only the fighter get to stop people from moving when he hits with OA's? Why does only the rogue get sneak attack? The same answer to those questions answers why only warlords can position their allies in the ways we see in their powers: because that is what they focus their training on. Just as rangers focus training with a bow, and rogues focus on being sneaky and striking when least expected.

If advanced tactical maneuvering and combat techniques are simple enough that one can simply "pick it up" through pure observation, why can't we all be Jackie Chan or Tony Jaa or Napoleon?

To broaden the point, why can't every wizard do what a warlord does? Why isn't every cleric as sneaky as a rogue then? If you want to justify it by saying that your characters are heroes and exceptionally above average, then why can't every fighter sling spells or pray with the same potency as clerics? They've certainly been around them long enough, had the time to observe enough magic usage that, if advanced combat techniques are truly that easy to master, they should know how to be a spell slinger by now, right?

I think the design philosophy behind the warlord powers (and every martial character's powers, and the powers system in general) is excellent. It takes time, practice, dedication, and a knack to pull off the things that these heroes do. It's not just something you can watch 1000 times and then be able to do yourself. And as soon as you bring "well, then, I practice it" into the picture, you're talking multiclass training - spending time developing the talents of another class, instead of advancing in your original field of expertise.

I guess the gist of what I'm trying to get at here is this: just because something is non-magical doesn't mean that it is easy, or even that any given person can accomplish the feat if they practice enough. They are extraordinary, and difficult.

 

[Dark080matter]

I am somewhat concerned we are seeing martial powers not getting the respect they deserve. In particular, that the class abilities of the Warlord, the martial controller, are being questioned in importance as something that any party should manage if it is at all possible. If a coordinated group can prevent shifting with tactics, why do they need a warlord to do so? Sometimes it seems as if only explicitly magical powers get any respect as abilities that can be modeled by the system and kept exclusive and powerful.

...

The Warlord's powers are quite straightforward, he has the ability to coordinate attacks, movement and the actions of his allies to allow for additional attacks and movement and actions during combat. In the limits of D&Ds turn based combat system, the designers are modeling this with the powers we've seen.

This. Just say no to attention-hogging Wizards. Better still, let's nerf-bat them all into Evokers and scatter all of their ridiculously multi-focused utility belt abilities to the four corners of the wind (ie. an actual Illusionist class, actual Necromancer, give Psion his own unique playground of mind-control etc.) so that all the classes get similar amounts of cool impressive, mechanically interesting abilities.

I like the Wizard and his arcane buddies, really I do. But then again I like other classes too. In 3.5, I had to consistently multi-class and feat dip out of 3 or 4 different books just so I could have a warrior-archetype who felt like he had 1/3 of the variety of battlefield options of a similar-level spellcaster (Bo9s of course made this task more manageable). And then of course it sucked due to lack of focus!

The argument that I've seen made that "well it's simple really, you should just pick a Fighter if you want to roll dice and not think too hard about things, and a Wizard if you don't mind massive bookkeeping. We won't look down on you at all, sir." always felt a little disingenuous to me. So I'm happy to see what was begun with Bo9s come to completion with 4e setting things straight on this score.

 

[MaelStorm]

I'm wondering, will we see the comeback of disciplines a-la Bo9S in 4E? Or will it be just name of powers that sound like Bo9S maneuvers?

 

[JesterOC]

Yes they are. It isn't required that ALL movement be prevented. On the dragons' turn it may desire to shift and that movement is prevented. It prevents movement.

It does not prevent movement, the dragon can move if it wants to. It prevents a special type of movement. A shift allows the target to move and not provoke an attack of operatunity. It can't shift but it can move. If the DM decides not to move the target that is a tactical descision. You can't claim that just because one particular special case type of movement is not allowed that no movement is allowed.

Are you houseruling already? Cause I don't see that in the article.

No he isn't. Since the target can't use shift to step away from attackers, then it must use a move action. And using a move action will provoke an AoO. The target now must make a tactical choice, move and get exposed to extra hits, or not and deal with the current situation. This could induce some targets to stay put (thus being pinned) or they will risk the AoO's try to better it's position. Either way it is a cool effect and will be fun for the party to pull off.

JesterOC

 

[Jack99]

I am somewhat concerned we are seeing martial powers not getting the respect they deserve. In particular, that the class abilities of the Warlord, the martial controller, are being questioned in importance as something that any party should manage if it is at all possible. If a coordinated group can prevent shifting with tactics, why do they need a warlord to do so? Sometimes it seems as if only explicitly magical powers get any respect as abilities that can be modeled by the system and kept exclusive and powerful. If the only way you can imagine a PC is able to coordinate a party's attacks and movements to have powerful effects on the overall flow of D&D's tactical combat system is to have magical powers, then I think you're going to have to declare powers such as Pin the Foe magical. Frankly, I think it's a bit disappointing, since it seems to indicate that the scope for non-magical abilities in many people's minds is very limited. I just suspect that if the Warlord character were a Battle Caster with *spells* that allowed all of these tricks, rather than exploits that result from non-magical tactical ability, we wouldn't be having much of this discussion. This is going to come up again and again, I think, as the designers come up with broad ways for martial characters to compete on the same field as spellcasters.

Every martial character's powers are vulnerable to the question of "why can't everyone do this"? If the only way to get respect is to have magical powers, then we should just go the Earthdawn route and have all of the classes have explicit magical powers. Then the Warlord can have magical battle affecting powers that manage exciting game effects and not have to constantly defend these effects from the charges that they seem too magical. The Warlord's powers are quite straightforward, he has the ability to coordinate attacks, movement and the actions of his allies to allow for additional attacks and movement and actions during combat. In the limits of D&Ds turn based combat system, the designers are modeling this with the powers we've seen.

Very good post, and I agree with you, but I feel compelled to point out that the warlord is the martial leader, not the martial controller.

 

[Keefe the Thief]

A very interesting preview. I cannot wait for the first couple of players who choose a warlord and come up with interesting stories about his background, training and powers....

... wait, i´m doing something wrong, do i?

Ahem.

Ah...

Verisimilitude!

 

[MaelStorm]

It first look, I was kind of skeptical about the warlords' powers. But after reading the fluff text many times, it is now making more sense. Another important factor is that these are daily powers, and the third power is a level 9 warlord attack.

 

[FourthBear]

fighters, and wizards started targeting explosive spells and grenade like stuff INTOthe mountain to bring part of it down on the dragon.

Your description does sounds very exciting, although I do wonder where exactly the non-spellcasters' class abilities came into play. It sounds as though they were relegated to managing nets, grenades and making basic attacks. You specifically mention that the wizards got to use their iconic spellcasting abilities to aid in defeating the dragon. Did the fighters get a chance beyond making basic attacks?

 

[Derren]

I agree with KarinsDad and Falling Icicle. This powers are completely unbelievable.

Why can a Warlord pin down an enemy only once a day? Why remains the enemy pinned down for the whole combat even if the warlord moves away after applying this ability and this enemy is not threatened by any PC for several turns?
Why can the warlord forcibly move his allies around? How can the warlord hasten his allies with nonmagical abilities?