Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Mirrorrorrim" data-source="post: 9016590" data-attributes="member: 7040132">Warlord was the first 4E class I played. I did have a lot of fun. However after all is said and done, what matters to me in this case, ever since the 4E debates, is the narrative role in the world. A &quot;military leader&quot; isn't limited to one class called a &quot;Warlord&quot; (no decent person should ever call themselves a &quot;Warlord&quot;), nor is it just for Fighters.&nbsp; A Ranger or Barbarian or Paladin should be able to take military leadership ability options, as much as a Fighter could. Narratively, all those &quot;Warlord&quot; abilities are better suited as options that should be spread across a number of &quot;Leadership&quot; feats, maneuvers, and subclasses, rather than living with one class.Once universal feats and maneuvers are created, I would rather have each class get a &quot;Leadership&quot; subclass which would get its share of remaining leadership abilities that make sense for that class. Examples of such subclasses include the existing Banneret Fighter, the Mastermind Rogue, and for newer reimagined stuff, perhaps the Bravura Bard, the Thaneborn Barbarian, the Warden Ranger, and heck, maybe even magic-boosting leaders on the caster side of things.But a class called the Warlord that gets all that stuff shoehorned into it and other classes don't get those options? Nah.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Mirrorrorrim, post: 9016590, member: 7040132"] Warlord was the first 4E class I played. I did have a lot of fun. However after all is said and done, what matters to me in this case, ever since the 4E debates, is the narrative role in the world. A "military leader" isn't limited to one class called a "Warlord" (no decent person should ever call themselves a "Warlord"), nor is it just for Fighters. A Ranger or Barbarian or Paladin should be able to take military leadership ability options, as much as a Fighter could. Narratively, all those "Warlord" abilities are better suited as options that should be spread across a number of "Leadership" feats, maneuvers, and subclasses, rather than living with one class. Once universal feats and maneuvers are created, I would rather have each class get a "Leadership" subclass which would get its share of remaining leadership abilities that make sense for that class. Examples of such subclasses include the existing Banneret Fighter, the Mastermind Rogue, and for newer reimagined stuff, perhaps the Bravura Bard, the Thaneborn Barbarian, the Warden Ranger, and heck, maybe even magic-boosting leaders on the caster side of things. But a class called the Warlord that gets all that stuff shoehorned into it and other classes don't get those options? Nah. [/QUOTE]

Verification