Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Mal Malenkirk" data-source="post: 4688901" data-attributes="member: 834">Well, the nost immediate concern is that a Tactical Warlord does much better with STR based classed allies, the fighter probably being the best of them all for a variety of reasons (Marks an extra target, +1 to hit over other STR build, usually sticks near the group and isn't prone to engage in maneuvering that would take him far from the Warlord, typically less likely to go down than a striker etc.)Taclord have a lot of very cool and efficient powers that grant basic attacks to allies, starting with the commander's strike at-will.&nbsp; It is of course much better to rely on a fighter wielding a bastard sword to implement these free basic attacks than on a charismatic paladin...In fact, in the absence of at least one buddy with a strong basic attack, the taclord is greatly diminished.&nbsp; Any of the three other warlord is better in that case (with insipiring probably being best since he is rarely invested in granting extra basic attack).---Concerning whether or not to use a polearm for the warlord, this also depends on allies.&nbsp; If you have only one buddy who is a melee based character, than your warlord pretty much must pickup a shield and stand to his side.&nbsp; in a six man party, you want at least 3 melee characters to hold the line.&nbsp; If you have only two ally who can do the job, you owe it to the team to pick up a shield and hoin them.&nbsp; If the front is laready fairly thick, hanging back with the polearm is is a pretty good option, actually.&nbsp; Covers more ground, can help more friends.If you go polearm, take the Eladrin and go down his PP.If you fight at the front, take the Genasi and go Battle Captain.Since you said your friends lean toward melee classes, probably that a highly mobile Eladrin Polearm warlord could do very well.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Mal Malenkirk, post: 4688901, member: 834"] Well, the nost immediate concern is that a Tactical Warlord does much better with STR based classed allies, the fighter probably being the best of them all for a variety of reasons (Marks an extra target, +1 to hit over other STR build, usually sticks near the group and isn't prone to engage in maneuvering that would take him far from the Warlord, typically less likely to go down than a striker etc.) Taclord have a lot of very cool and efficient powers that grant basic attacks to allies, starting with the commander's strike at-will. It is of course much better to rely on a fighter wielding a bastard sword to implement these free basic attacks than on a charismatic paladin... In fact, in the absence of at least one buddy with a strong basic attack, the taclord is greatly diminished. Any of the three other warlord is better in that case (with insipiring probably being best since he is rarely invested in granting extra basic attack). --- Concerning whether or not to use a polearm for the warlord, this also depends on allies. If you have only one buddy who is a melee based character, than your warlord pretty much must pickup a shield and stand to his side. in a six man party, you want at least 3 melee characters to hold the line. If you have only two ally who can do the job, you owe it to the team to pick up a shield and hoin them. If the front is laready fairly thick, hanging back with the polearm is is a pretty good option, actually. Covers more ground, can help more friends. If you go polearm, take the Eladrin and go down his PP. If you fight at the front, take the Genasi and go Battle Captain. Since you said your friends lean toward melee classes, probably that a highly mobile Eladrin Polearm warlord could do very well. [/QUOTE]

Verification