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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="tomtill" data-source="post: 4108939" data-attributes="member: 37444">military hierarchyWell, I'm no military genius, but I'm pretty sure that just about every military power in the world acknowledges the tactical benefits of having a group leader of some sort who has the authority to issue military commands that all the soldiers under his rank MUST obey (with certain exceptions in extreme cases). To me, that's why it's strange that some people have trouble with the "powers" of the warlord. They are mundane. They happen every day in wars around the world. Sure, not those exact powers, but remembering that D&D battle is an abstraction, very very similar powers. Watch a few war movies. Watch how the leader leads. That is the warlord. Making military judgements, coming up with strategies, issuing orders with words, gestures, and leadership.A party with a warlord is like a squad with an extremely competent group leader. They excel because of his direction, his insight, his tactical genius, his intuition and their willingness to follow him.That being said, I understand that players playing a game do not like the idea of other players touching their stuff. So I doubt that forced movement of allies is RAW. BUT, if it is, I can see why the default response is to allow the warlord to do his thing. That is role playing. You are adventuring with him, so you do respect his abilities, by default. There is no time for democracy in the midst of a battle. The military superiority of disciplined troops versus a bunch of fighters is well established. If you want to role play an exception to this rule, I'm sure your DM can accommodate you with an exceptions based approach.This is, after all, the HUGE advantage of pen and paper D&D to any computer game, and why, all comparisons aside, D&D, even 4th edition, is in no way a computer game. The rules are guidelines, not hard-coded railroading. Follow the rules, and the designers promise it will be balanced and fun. Feel free to break them as need be. Absorb the consequences.The most recent podcast explicitly points out that one design goal of 4th edition is to remove the extra player—the rule book—and reinstate the DM as the ultimate arbitrator of the game. The 4e DMG is supposed to have tables that give us the expected game effects if we want to arbitrate alternate rules, assisting the DM in balancing house rules with the rest of the game. Sounds great. Can't wait to see it.</blockquote>

Verification