Design & Development: Warlord Article UP!

[Revinor]

More specifically a competitive board game to be played at organised play events with organised play having a lot of similarities to an MMO at the table.

I would say that it is a board game, then CARD game and only then MMO. I see a lot more influence from Magic the Gathering then from World of Warcraft. And there is some RPG part you can do between you 'play the game'

Jokes aside, if we were able to roleplay 2nd ed AD&D were archers where shooting 1 arrow per minute and dual classing human had to forget his previous class to not 'pollute' his experience with new one, we can manage the boardgame elements in 4th ed.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Just a quick note on movement in D&D:
From the D&D Experience, we know this:

To move on your own desire (barring any exceptional situations and powers), you need to spend a move action. This does even apply if you shift. Shifting is the type of voluntarily movement that allows you to avoid Opportunity Attacks and basically the 3E 5 ft step, except that it still costs a full move action.

So, if a power disallows you to shift, it doesn't mean your movement is restricted. It just means that due the circumstances, you are under so much pressure that you can't move careful enough to avoid an Opportunity Attack. In a way, this power creates "difficult terrain" (shifting on difficult terrain is usually impossible in 4E, barring - as always - exceptional powers and abilities.)

Sliding is generally movement outside of your turn, typically involuntarily or forced - and does not provoke attack of opportunity. Presumable because you are not actively concentrating on your movement which lets you "drop" your guard.
I take the Warlords White Raven Onslaught ability to mean that the movement is voluntarily, but due to the cover of a successful attack from the allied attacker, it is "safe" (does not provoke Opportunity Attacks).


My worry here is that I am not sure that the ally can choose not to move, which would make it involuntary and allies bossing each other around. Without having seen further contexts of "slide" powers, I am not sure.

 

[Ian O'Rourke]

I would say that it is a board game, then CARD game and only then MMO. I see a lot more influence from Magic the Gathering then from World of Warcraft.

I'd agree with that. My MMO comment was more related to organised play.

 

[tomtill]

forced movement

I don't know if the warlord's ally slides are forced or not. It's not clear from what I have seen so far.

However, if they are forced, in a way it is just enforced role-playing.

After all, if you have a warlord in your party, it's because you respect and trust his martial tactical abilities. You trust him to make the right decisions in the heat of battle.

This doesn't necessarily mean that he leads the party. But in battle, you have learned to trust his instincts, and when he says jump, you jump.

That's role-playing. And, if for some reason your character has an occasional need to break his instinctual response to the warlord's commands, I'm sure the DM can adjudicate that on an exceptions based approach.

 

[Charwoman Gene]

That's role-playing.

No, that's railroading, and completely antithetical to the design philosophies of 4e.

"Touching my pawn" is NOT FREAKING COOL.

Seriously.

What if my character hates the Warlord but adventures with him out of need? I might like to refuse to use his "tactics". Later on I might see the benefits and accept them, cementing a relationship building of trust.

Yeah, that's roleplaying. "YOU MUST TRUST ME IT SAYS WARLORD ON MY SHEET, I AM A LEADER YOU MUST LISTEN TO MEEEEEEEEE!" not so much.

 

[Jon Wake]

Common sense seems to tell me that you can never force another player on the same side to take an action. This seems to agree with the design philosophy mentioned in the article: you never have to do what a warlord tells you, but it pays off if you do.

I'm really curious, and I know I'm just baiting the bear, but how is an expert at small squad tactics who, after studying the reactions of a monster can direct his buddies to exploit it is any stranger than a monk who can punch a hole in a wall?

Can't make sense of it in RP terms?
Here:

Drogo the Warlord watches his friends swarm the Red Dragon. It snaps, dodges, spits fire and slashes out with its claws. Drogo sees it in a completely different way, not as a single animal but as a shifting mass that follows patterns. There--the break in the pattern--a bare flank when it spins its bulk into place.

"YARICK!" he shouts to his fighter, "Black Cloud, two-by-two!"

Yarick nods, knows the code and presses in to the left flank of the beast. Why didn't he see it sooner? The dragon twists whenever it pushes forward, exposing thin scale.

Yarick puts his axe into the beasts flank, a sloppy blow, but a few scales fly off. The dragon can move, but now Yarick knows what to look for.

There, see? This gift of verisimilitude I give to you, for I so love the term.

 

[FourthBear]

It should be clear from the powers and class descriptions we've seen so far that the Warlord isn't just some guy shouting out orders here and there. The concept is that he's a preternatural tactical genius, who can spot opportunities in battle and weak spots in defenses in ways that other characters can't. Just as the fighter class represents a combatant well above and beyond "a good warrior", the warlord class isn't just a character who can give orders. Turn based combat leads to abstraction and problems with simultaneity. Characters aren't standing stock still between their turns, they are assumed to be jockeying for position, looking for attack opportunities and ensuring that their own defenses are in order. The number of actions a character gets as well is also an abstraction, as it has been in every edition of D&D. It doesn't represent literally how many swings or actions a character could attempt in the time alloted, just how many are effective overall. Giving another character an action doesn't represent some kind of time-distortion power or magical haste acceleration. It simply represents giving another character another opportunity by the abstracted game rules.

 

[Derren]

And why can the warlord use this command only once a day?

Its easy to make examples when you ignore what really happens.

 

[FourthBear]

And why can the warlord use this command only once a day?

Considering that this is in no way unique to this ability of the Warlord and is common to all of the daily powers of martial classes, I assume that this can be phrased as a more general and common complaint about martial characters having per day and per encounter powers. Since this is one of the central conceits of 4e's martial character designs, it should be addressed for all such abilities, not simply one in isolation. Here are two ideas:

Such abilities are actually quasi-mystical, as the martial power source is only the least magical of the power sources. Therefore, daily and per encounter martial abilities represent the preparation and expenditure of focus that can't simply be repeated like mundane skills.

The use of such powers represents an unusual opportunity, not something that can be found at the PCs wish. A PC can't use the ability more than daily or per encounter because the opportunity comes only so often in the system and the PC's decision (and any other requirements) dictate when that opportunity arises. The explanation is largely narrative as to when and how the opportunity arises.

 

[Derren]

Such abilities are actually quasi-mystical, as the martial power source is only the least magical of the power sources. Therefore, daily and per encounter martial abilities represent the preparation and expenditure of focus that can't simply be repeated like mundane skills.

That works unless some other rules contradict it. Some people might not be happy with magical martial abilities but its the most plausible explanation. But this explanation becomes problematic when the daily or encounter abilities aren't really mystical at all like tripping enemies. (NPC halberd wielders can trip people, why can't the heroic or even paragon guy do this unless he is empowered by mystical energy?)

The use of such powers represents an unusual opportunity, not something that can be found at the PCs wish. A PC can't use the ability more than daily or per encounter because the opportunity comes only so often in the system and the PC's decision (and any other requirements) dictate when that opportunity arises. The explanation is largely narrative as to when and how the opportunity arises.

Then you have problems when you have two warlords (or other martial class) in the party. Why can warlord 1 use the opportunity and warlord 2 can't (because he used his daily already)? Because he can't see this opportunity? But what when he has a higher level than the other warlord (maybe even much higher level)? Why can the low level warlord see an opportunity that the high level one can't?