Honestly, if WoTC didn't create it would 4e be D&D?

[Wormwood]

Ditto cleric, druid, barbarian, ranger, etc. These only have the advantage of having been wrong for a long time, so we're used to it.

This

 

[Fifth Element]

The cleric never implied a hierarchy. The next PC could tell them to stick their holy symbol where the sun didn't shine, because they a) worshipped another god, and b) could throw lightning bolts on a whim.

And they can't ignore the warlord....why?

It makes sense for a D&D party to need a "burglar", just as they do so in the Hobbit. The dwarves need a burglar, and Bilbo turns out to be it.

But "burglar" is not the name of the class, rogue is, and you were complaining about the name of the warlord class. Just find the right descriptive term for the circumstances, and use it. Just as you did with burglar.

The bard never ordered anyone about. World of difference.

Stop imagining them as orders, and off you go. Why can't you imagine the warlord as encouraging rather than ordering?

 

[rounser]

You really liked that mish-mash as is?

Not really. I'd consider doing things like rename Paladin to Knight, Cleric to Priest, and begin to REDUCE the number of D&Disms in the core gameplay, as opposed to INCREASING them, as WOTC has done...but there's not time or space to discuss that much further here.

 

[Fenes]

Dragonborn are, IMC, lizardfolk. I see no need for a new race when there's an ugly, scaly reptile humanoid already present, and has been for decades.

And I'll continue to use the Tieflings from 2E and 3E, with the full range of different looks those had. If anyone wants the 4E look - hey, it's covered as well.

 

[rounser]

And they can't ignore the warlord....why?

Because the warlord's own powers imply he or she is being listened to, and you need to do so to get the benefit of those powers. If your Conan clone considers the "warlord" a twit, and ignores him, then one of the PCs in the party suddenly becomes weakened in terms of powers. And as every happy little 4E camper knows, everyone not being equal is unfun, and obviously playing the game wrong. Far better to assume (correctly IMO) that the game has got it wrong by putting this class in there in the first place.

But "burglar" is not the name of the class, rogue is, and you were complaining about the name of the warlord class. Just find the right descriptive term for the circumstances, and use it. Just as you did with burglar.

Hair splitting. "Rogue" was subbed in for "thief", I'd assume for hand-wringing reasons of political correctness (maybe) and class scope (probably definitely). The guy who picks the locks is the burglar or the thief or the lockpick, and simply because the old thief has been expanded to include crusty jugglers, confidence tricksters and assassins, rakes, jesters, acrobats, swashbuckers and Pelor knows what else...a more generic term was needed. There are many rogues who would be better described by the more specific "burglar".

"Warlord" has no such excuse, and is not a generic name. More revealingly, there's nothing much you can substitute in there for it without implying that the PCs are an army, or that they're soldiers taking orders. Unlike "burglar".

Stop imagining them as orders, and off you go. Why can't you imagine the warlord as encouraging rather than ordering?

Because it's written in the text, and I don't want to fix the stupid powers based on the concept that Mr Warlord Knows Best that WOTC shouldn't have even included in the game in the first place?

I lack the desire to put effort into making up for the inadequacies and unwise oversights included in this game, because it rubs me the wrong way too much, and requires too much effort to fix. It's conceptually broken, even if the crunch isn't.

And a "warlord" without orders makes even less sense than it already does. "Life coach" is not a D&D character class either. You can doo eeet!

 

[The Little Raven]

If your Conan clone considers the "warlord" a twit, and ignores him, then one of the PCs in the party suddenly becomes weakened in terms of powers.

And if the wannabe also had a problem with religion, he'd run into the same problem with a cleric or paladin, since he doesn't want those dirty, lying evangelists touching him.

This has nothing to do with the warlord class and everything to do with one player wanting to play a certain way (antagonistic to at least one other player in the group). It's a cop out to blame it on the warlord.

There are many rogues who would be better described by the more specific "burglar".

A person who breaks in to commit a crime is a pretty narrow concept. Doesn't really leave much room for crusty jugglers.

"Warlord" has no such excuse, and is not a generic name.

Way more generic than burglar.

 

[Hussar]

The cleric never implied a hierarchy. The next PC could tell them to stick their holy symbol where the sun didn't shine, because they a) worshipped another god, and b) could throw lightning bolts on a whim.

A cleric never implied hierarchy? Really? With all the world's religions, you get no sense of hierarchy with a cleric?

It makes sense for a D&D party to need a "burglar", just as they do so in the Hobbit. The dwarves need a burglar, and Bilbo turns out to be it.

You went into taverns and announced a need for a "burglar"? And that would be better than announcing the need for a thief? Or maybe walking around and stating that you need a barbarian - a term which bears about as much relation to the class as it does the moon.

The bard never ordered anyone about. World of difference.

That's okay. I consider all your counterarguments refuted.

When does a warlord actually order anyone around?

Refutation noted and rejected.

Basically, you're saying that because you cannot get past your own hang ups with the class, it's a stupid class.

I accept 100% not liking something. That's everyone's god given right. But, trying to pass off your personal preferences as some sort of objective criticism of something is ludicrous.

Why try to justify it? Just say you don't like it and let it be that. You don't have to like it. Nothing is forcing you to like it. But, trying to claim some sort of intellectual higher ground here is very strange.

 

[rounser]

It's a cop out to blame it on the warlord.

True. Personally, I blame it on WOTC for saddling the game with such a bad design.

Way more generic than burglar.

Perhaps, if we were playing "Battlefields & Warmachines". Pity about the "totally inappropriate for an adventuring party" thing, then, really.

 

[Doug McCrae]

If your Conan clone considers the "warlord" a twit, and ignores him, then one of the PCs in the party suddenly becomes weakened in terms of powers.

What if your Conan clone only likes death metal and refuses to be inspired by the bard's folk music? What if your Conan clone worships Crom and won't accept healing from a pansy god like Pelor?

 

[Fifth Element]

Because the warlord's own powers imply he or she is being listened to, and you need to do so to get the benefit of those powers. If your Conan clone considers the "warlord" a twit, and ignores him, then one of the PCs in the party suddenly becomes weakened in terms of powers.

Consider the warlord a twit all you want, but if you choose to ignore the free actions that he gives you, that's your problem. Which just proves that the warlord is better at tactics than you. He would never pass up a free attack.

Hair splitting. "Rogue" was subbed in for "thief", I'd assume for hand-wringing reasons of political correctness (maybe) and class scope (probably definitely).

All right, use cleric instead. Walk into a bar and say "We need a new cleric!" Some guy with a holy symbol and a pile of scrolls, wearing robes walks up to you. "I'm a cleric! What ceremony do you need performed?" "Well, put on your armour, grab your mace, and let's go kill some goblins!" "Um...armour? You expect me to fight? I'm a man of the cloth!"

Cleric is a terrible name for the cleric class. But it's been the name of the class for so long that our perception of the word "cleric" has changed. Given time, the same will happen with warlord. Why can't "warlord" mean what it means in D&D in a fantasy world? There are many things we say as D&Ders every day that bear little resemblance to their everyday meaning. What's one more?

Because it's written in the text, and I don't want to fix the stupid powers based on the concept that Mr Warlord Knows Best

Stop thinking of them that way and the problem goes away. It's quite easy really. It's next to no effort. Just stop interpreting them in a way you don't like.

"Life coach" is not a D&D character class either. You can doo eeet!

Yeah, that's the bard anyway.