CapnZapp
Legend
...from Wizards of the Coast? Officially? In a printed product?
D&D 5E How much Warlord do you want?
- Thread starter Slit518
- Start date
Just to clarify, this was not a snark or complaint, I really am clueless about the appeal of this class. Somebody posted somewhere in this thread that warlords are supposed to be the big guys, high level stuff. Well, I am not native English speaker, which may impair my judgement of the meaning of this word, but I agree with that statement, I understand the name as a title of sorts, something that reflects the victories, conquests and prowess of a powerful individual, so I don't get what a 1st level warlord was supposed to be.
Said that, am I opposed to a warlord class being added to the game? Not at all, I can always choose which parts of the game I want to interact with.
The class really has its origin in 4th edition, where each class had a defined power source, and a defined role. A balanced party would have at least one of each role before doubling up on some of them, but the actual power sources didn't matter so much. The power sources in the core rules were Martial (pure non-magic skill), Divine (drawing on the power of the gods), and Arcane (magic); and the roles were Defender ("tank" in MMO parlance - good at taking damage and punishing those who attack the defender's allies instead of the defender themself), Striker (single-target damage dealer), Controller (debuffer and area damage dealer), and Leader (buffer and healer). So the fighter was a Martial Defender and the paladin was a Divine Defender - they both served a similar role in the party, but using different methods.
Similarly, the Warlord was a Martial Leader - a counterpart to the Cleric's Divine Leader. Both had the job of healing the party and making the party's attacks stronger, but they used different methods. The warlord used Inspiring Word for his healing, and either used powers with a tactical bent to make sure all the party members were in optimal position for dealing damage, or powers based on inspiring presence to spur party members to greater deeds. A typical attack for both the Warlord and the Cleric would be a variant on "deal some damage, and an ally gets a bonus to their next attack against that target."
The appeal is that many people want a character that can serve the same role in the party as a cleric - healing and buffing - without magic. They don't want the cleric, which is the most D&D-specific of all classes, to be a necessity when going adventuring.
Tallifer
Hero
Why are those three criteria necessary?
Because it adds an air of legitimacy?
For the same reason they release any other class rather than just letting third parties take care of it?
Tallifer
Hero
I would love to see the Warlord in a hardcover book published by the Wizards (I voted for All of the Warlord), but I think we will never see the glut of supplemental Players' Handbooks we saw in previous editions. We have to accept that the DMs Guild and other third parties are the new source of bonus material.
CapnZapp
Legend
Why do you like the color blue?
CapnZapp
Legend
As long as you don't include me in that "we" of yours, go right ahead.
Tallifer
Hero
I like Warlords and voted for Warlords on this poll, but I think we have to face the business realities for WotC. I like blue paint, but it is not necessary. I like warlords, but an official hardcover book containing Warlords is not necessary.
Manbearcat
Legend
I AM WANTING
AAAAAAALL THE WARLORD!
[video=youtube;9aIHkPNXuok]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9aIHkPNXuok[/video]
AAAAAAALL THE WARLORD!
[video=youtube;9aIHkPNXuok]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9aIHkPNXuok[/video]
Similar Threads
