Let Warlord be Warlord

[Lackhand]

Herald is pretty much my least favorite. Who are you tied to? What messages do you bring? etc. Its a very defined subordinate role.

Your point is completely valid. I'm about to make a point by using middle definitions of words. I think it works, but it's not an exact fit: nothing will be, because the role of proto-warlord doesn't exist apart from a cross between Fighter and Life-Coach.

3. a person or thing that proclaims or announces: A good newspaper should be a herald of truth.
4. (in the Middle Ages) an officer who arranged tournaments and other functions, announced challenges, marshaled combatants, etc., and who was later employed also to arrange processions, funerals, etc., and to regulate the use of armorial bearings.

Wouldn't be the first time D&D warped the meaning of a word to fit what it needed it for.
I find that the jump from Herald to Life-Coach (with a battleaxe) isn't as disconcerting as the jump from Warlord to Life-Coach (with a battleaxe). Mileages may very well vary.

 

[olshanski]

Herald is awful! Heralds are perfumed dandies, not masters of battle!

Somebody suggested Myrmidon which I think is outstanding. A professional soldier without the encumbrance of the military association!

This is a joke right? I cannot tell after spending so much time on the internet.

Myrmidon has exactly the same amount of baggage as Warlord... that's a hell of a lot.
The Myrmidon baggage is that the term also means mindless followers.
The Warlord baggage is that the term also means 3rd world dictator.

Count me in for liking "Herald".

 

[Exen Trik]

Why don't they just use Warrior? So far as I know they aren't using NPC classes, and we already associate them with soldiers and the like but the term isn't limited to them. Their shtick is 'war' but they aren't necessarily a lord of it, nor necessarily not. I can't think of one downside to it.

 

[KoshPWNZYou]

But "evil" is still what i associate with warlord, regardless.

The funny thing is that a very large group of people associate 'evil' with 'wizard' and 'warlock.' And even 'druid' for that matter. That association is a little more archaic, but just as relevant. I know many parents who would be far more frightened at the prospect of a child role-playing a wizard than a warlord.

I'm a Knight man myself. Knight encompasses the battle-leader theme well, and any Paladin-Knight confusion can be dispelled easily -- the Paladin doesn't necessarily lead, the Knight isn't necessarily a man/woman of faith. But I don't think Warlord is terrible.

 

[pawsplay]

The funny thing is that a very large group of people associate 'evil' with 'wizard' and 'warlock.' And even 'druid' for that matter. That association is a little more archaic, but just as relevant. I know many parents who would be far more frightened at the prospect of a child role-playing a wizard than a warlord.

I'm a Knight man myself. Knight encompasses the battle-leader theme well, and any Paladin-Knight confusion can be dispelled easily -- the Paladin doesn't necessarily lead, the Knight isn't necessarily a man/woman of faith. But I don't think Warlord is terrible.

But knights don't necessarily lead at all... heck, good luck getting them just to follow!

 

[Fenris]

I think we ought to call the new leader class Soldier and the old fighter class the Warrior. That leaves the warrior to well fight, as he does best and generall by himself. But it provides some reason for the soldier to have leadership qualities, but as many people have pointed out, doesn't load the class down with a high rank associated name from the begining.

 

[TwinBahamut]

Your point is completely valid. I'm about to make a point by using middle definitions of words. I think it works, but it's not an exact fit: nothing will be, because the role of proto-warlord doesn't exist apart from a cross between Fighter and Life-Coach.



Wouldn't be the first time D&D warped the meaning of a word to fit what it needed it for.
I find that the jump from Herald to Life-Coach (with a battleaxe) isn't as disconcerting as the jump from Warlord to Life-Coach (with a battleaxe). Mileages may very well vary.

Heh, my brother (who seriously studied middle ages tournaments and the like in college) is behind me ranting about the complete falsehood of that dictionary.com entry concerning heralds. Apparently,, in the 11th and 12th centuries when tournaments were at their height, heralds were a bunch of commoners who went around following the tournamnet circuit, selling their knowledge of heraldry to lords who barely tolerated their existence. They were pretty much the geeky fanboys of the middle ages. Hardly leadership or warrior material.

I guess I finally see why professors like dictionary.com about as much as they like wikipedia.

 

[Kobu]

I think we ought to call the new leader class Soldier and the old fighter class the Warrior. That leaves the warrior to well fight, as he does best and generall by himself. But it provides some reason for the soldier to have leadership qualities, but as many people have pointed out, doesn't load the class down with a high rank associated name from the begining.

I agree. They ought to have ushered out Fighter along with Thief and Magic-User. The contrast between Warrior and Soldier would be easy to grasp.

 

[Wepwawet]

Soldier sounds so US army/marine! It just cannot be in D&D
(although I like men in uniforms LOL )

 

[Fifth Element]

Somebody suggested Myrmidon which I think is outstanding. A professional soldier without the encumbrance of the military association!

Hold on, a professional soldier without having a military association?

How can you be a professional soldier without being associated with the military?