Let Warlord be Warlord
- Thread starter Reaper Steve
- Start date
BASHMAN
Basic Action Games
Li Shenron said:No one agrees on the name, maybe because no one agrees on the concept? How about getting rid of class entirely and make space for the Druid?
Here Here!
I also agree with another poster that a lot of these sort of abilities could just be folded into paladin and fighter.
TwinBahamut
First Post
Commander isn't bad. It is simple, and conveys all the important points, without too much bad baggage. It just about the only thing that I would consider as an alternative.
Also, I actually rather like using the term Paladin to apply to a class like the Warlord. It works well. However, I don't forsee any change in the meaning of Paladin for D&D any time soon, because Paladins as holy warriors is so iconic in the game now. Oh well.
Also, I actually rather like using the term Paladin to apply to a class like the Warlord. It works well. However, I don't forsee any change in the meaning of Paladin for D&D any time soon, because Paladins as holy warriors is so iconic in the game now. Oh well.
Lurks-no-More
First Post
I foresee that if WotC did that, 90% of the people up in arms over the warlord would spontaneously combust from incandescent nerd rage.TwinBahamut said:
Gargoyle
Adventurer
It occurs to me that warlord, captain, and marshal make great ranks or titles for leaders of organizations, but poor class names. They don't describe abilities. The class names wizard, fighter, cleric, or rogue describe what that chacter can do, and they do so without connotations of experience or morality. Warlord's connotations bug me. I could see:
Warlord as a leader of an evil or militaristic organization.
Marshal as the leader of a law enforcement organization or as a solo enforcer.
Captain as the leader of a mercenary organization.
Knight is a word that I'm warming up to for the class. Knight has its own connotations, but I think it could be a great way to describe the abilities of the warlord, and it just seems like a better class name. I can envision D&D characters talking about knights the same way they speak of wizards, fighters, rogues, and clerics...not warlords so much.
Warlord as a leader of an evil or militaristic organization.
Marshal as the leader of a law enforcement organization or as a solo enforcer.
Captain as the leader of a mercenary organization.
Knight is a word that I'm warming up to for the class. Knight has its own connotations, but I think it could be a great way to describe the abilities of the warlord, and it just seems like a better class name. I can envision D&D characters talking about knights the same way they speak of wizards, fighters, rogues, and clerics...not warlords so much.
Shortman McLeod
First Post
Fifth Element said:
Easy, doode! It's like a police officer who isn't a member of a police force!
Shortman McLeod
First Post
TwinBahamut said:
The problem, of course, is that at some point someone is going to look at your first level Commander and ask, "He's the 'commander' of what, exactly?"
Shortman McLeod
First Post
Gargoyle said:
You've sold me here. 'Knight' is a superb name for a 'leader fighter' type of character. But I think this is all academic, isn't it? The books are gone to press and all that sort of thing. We're probably stuck with the warlord. (Sigh)
Oh well, at least all the 12-year-olds will get 'stoked' playing their 'phat warlordz' getting all their 'f**king sweet killz'.
Shortman McLeod said:
The rest of the group, presumably, though that's problematic in itself. You could ask the same about "Warlord" really. It's an inherent problem of the concept, and indeed the whole "Leader" role, if that role is going to be anything more than support.
Personally, I'd be inclined to just let a Fighter with good CHA and/or INT do the job, at least in the early levels. Stick in "Warlord" or "Commander" as a prestige class later.
