I just realized what bugs me about Warlords . . .

[Shortman McLeod]

What, you think in the medieval times, a war was 100,000 men?

A contingent of heavy cavalry could number 8. Sometimes less. Pikemen could amount to 30 or 40. I dunno where you guys get the idea war was some massive undertaking. Maybe for Napoleon, when he levied the peasantry, but in the middle ages, not frackin likely.

Not that D&D is even remotely attempting to simulate historical medieval times . . .

But just to indulge you a bit, William the Conqueror invaded England with a fleet of 600 ships and over 7000 men back in 1066. Which virtually every educated person alive would agree was smack-dab in the middle of the medieval period. 600 ships and 7000 men is, like, a pretty huge force, bro.

So when you say that war in the medieval period wasn't a massive undertaking, you are, well, wrong, dude.

 

[Shortman McLeod]

Even though it doesn't fit for the class necessarily, I'm a big fan of Tactician, if only because of the nod towards Odysseus. The problem is that it's probably a Cha, rather than Int, driven class.

So Tactician is *really* inappropriate. "Speaker" . . .?

Only if "Motivational Speaker" can be a prestige class.

 

[Korgoth]

Officer?

 

[Gloombunny]

Even though it doesn't fit for the class necessarily, I'm a big fan of Tactician, if only because of the nod towards Odysseus. The problem is that it's probably a Cha, rather than Int, driven class.

So Tactician is *really* inappropriate. "Speaker", "Inspired", "Devoted" or "Dedicated", maybe?

I'm sure it'll have some inspiration-type abilities, but I think it'll have a lot of tactics-type abilities too. In that one playtest report, the warlord was able to strike in such a way that it opened the enemy up to an attack from the adjacent fighter. I think when the fighter killed the warblade to take its stuff, the warlord snuck in and nabbed all the White Raven goodies. There's some very juicy tactics-based powers waiting to be implemented in a leader class, and the warlord is just the class to do it.

 

[Stalker0]

I'm a fan of champion personally. Its suitably evocative, but it doesn't push the flavor too much.

But lets be honest, 3e names sometimes enforced a pretty strong sterotype. I mean rogue screams outlaw to me. And the monk enforces the sterotype of a cloistered warrior.

 

[ptolemy18]

What's wrong with Tactician?

I like "Tactician" as a name. I admit that, though, if I was a total TRPG newbie, I'd probably want to play a class called a "Warlord" more.

My biggest gripe with "Warlords" is the likelihood that they will be something like the "Marshal" from the 3.x Miniatures Handbook, and will provide buffs to their allies through the "flavor text explanation" that they are giving them constant tactical advice. I don't object to the idea of a class which exists to give buffs to its allies, of course (like the good ol' Bard), but this explanation seems to be full of logic holes to me: what if the Warlord is blinded and can't see the combat? What if the allies are deafened and can't hear the Warlord? And so forth and so on. :/ Obviously this is nitpicking but I find an overtly supernatural explanation more "plausible."

Still, if they are really planning to have a non-divine class which fulfills some of the functions of the cleric as the "resource base" for the party, that's a pretty impressive goal. Hope it works.

Jason

 

[Li Shenron]

I'm having a hard time envisioning, from a purely flavor-text/story perpsective, a first-level Warlord. Seems like a contradiction in terms, somewhat. When I think "Warlord", I think of a huge, grizzled old general who has fought in numerous wars and earned his stripes, so to speak.

Now I am aware that 4e characters are "heroes from the start" and all that, but come on, people--first level is first level. What if I'm running a 1st level human character who is 21 years old? Can I make him a "Warlord"?

Other people cannot stand to call "Paladin" or even "Wizard" someone who is only 1st level squire/apprentice.

 

[Plane Sailing]

Moderator/

It is OK to disagree with people, but please make every effort to keep things civil. It may be that you don't like the name 'warlord'. That's fine, by all means explain why you don't like it - but you don't have to try to convert other people to your point of view.

Also, we'll avoid getting drawn into real-world contemporary examples please.

Thanks

 

[Baby Samurai]

Of all the warlords loved by the gods, I hate the 4th Ed one the most…

 

[Nikosandros]

I can see the issues with the name warlord... it doesn't sound right. However, I really dislike tactician... it sounds awful to me.

In any event, I'm afraid that the while discussion completely moot. The name has already been decided, and I would be very surprised if WotC decided to change it at this point.