D&D 4E My Warlord Concept - Why Does 4e Fail?

[mach1.9pants]

I don't know how to resolve my particular issue

It is easy, GW, just get so blindingly drunk that you forget all your preconceptions and then play a game....

Oh make sure you video the session or record it or something, 'cos otherwise you won't remember if it was any good in the morning....

Yeah also best to make sure all the other players and the DM are at least 1/2 cut; it is always boring to have to put up with someone who is blotto when one is sober.

Always happy to help, remember the words of Homer (the wise) "Beer: the cause of, and solution to, all my problems"

 

[Chris_Nightwing]

Start with bard, multiclass into rogue, go more heavily into rogue than bard (probably anywhere from 6/14 to 8/12), focus on charisma skills, with some emphasis on appropriate knowledge skills (history, local, nobility).

Flavor the singing as more intimidating encouragement than actual singing, probably using perform (oratory). I would probably stop "singing" immediately after using it, for flavor reasons.

Might consider a couple levels of ranger, depending on how the campaign goes. That would probably involve favored enemy (humanoid [human]), and taking the archery path.

Useful? Not necessarily, but I'm not looking to make something utterly mechanically optimal.

Your 3.5 character, in a combat round, can either support the party or used a ranged attack. Your optimal strategy would be to start 'sing/speaking' and then fire whilst maintaining it. Oh and you'd have magic.

Your Warlord character can do the same. There are (if not seen yet) powers that can be activated without hitting someone with a stick. You already have an aura. You can alternate between using a power and firing your gun or something similar. I really think that when you see the full list of Ranger and Warlord powers you'll find a happy medium - bow shots (gun shots) that penalise foes or help allies seem plausible, rallying cries that don't need you to hit someone - a combination is the best bet.

You are right that playing by the book is the best way to test the rules as written. Equally, finding a concept that is supported by the current core rules is the best way to test the rules as written. 4E isn't pretending to be GURPS, you can't do everything to start with. You can't play an unarmed, unarmoured ninja at first. Until then you either be flexible and alter your concept, or you modify the rules, maybe when you've got used to them, to allow your concept.

 

[mach1.9pants]

I might have a solution for you, giving your 3E build. Try Cleric. You don't seem to bend on having the buffing/leading stuff to feel "tactical". The DDXP Cleric was surprisingly focused on ranged attack powers, IIRC.

yeah and you could re-fluff the powers to sound martial (if your verisimilitude will stretch that far)

 

[FireLance]

But it seems to be a stretch, by virtue of the fluff. They wouldn't say, "Strength is the most important stat for a warlord!", then go ahead and make a bunch of powers that are ranged (and presumably Dex-based). If they did that, they probably would've mentioned that in the excerpt, I imagine.

Fluff is less limiting than mechanics, and mechanics-wise, I think 4e will be even less limiting than 3e.

An out of the box warlord will probably rely more on Strength than on Dexterity, and will probably have more melee powers. Now, if you just plan to use 4e out of the box, and there is no option in the box to turn that melee warlord into a ranged warlord, then yes, that is a strike against 4e.

However, if you're willing to tinker a little with the system, 4e seems mechanically flexible enough to accomodate the idea of a ranged warlord. Ranged weapons have the advantage of range, but they also seem to deal less damage on average. The sample fighter's one-handed warhammer deals the same base damage as the sample ranger's two-handed longbow, for example. Given the warlord's proficiency in military melee and simple ranged weapons, there might already be an even steeper inherent trade-off, damage-wise, for activating warlord powers with ranged attacks (except for elf warlords, of course, due to their racial proficiency, but maybe that's not a bad thing since it's supposed to be a benefit).

One home-brewed feat later, and your ranged warlord is ready for play.

 

[ShockMeSane]

Just a quick reply to the original post:

I think, as others have mentioned, the best way to handle this concept (from what limited info we have) would be to make a Ranger and multi-class Warlord. Heres my reasoning:

1) Obviously you will be solid with your gun/crossbow.
2) We know that virtually all of the class features of the Warlord actually give their benefits at range. Both action point abilities, the initiative aura, and your minor-action word of inspiration (the heal) are going to be ranged. Unless "You shout a word of encouragement" turns out to only work at melee, which I highly doubt considering I would bet serious money that it is a Minor ability, just like the Cleric's heal, seeing as WotC has said they don't want healing to be a full time job for anyone anymore.
3) Although we have seen some powers for the Warlord class, there are many that we haven't seen. Around 80+ powers per class, not even taking into consideration Paragon Paths or EDs.

I really think you'll _probably_ be able to pick and choose a few Warlord abilities at certain levels and come up with a pretty solid Gun-shooting leader hybrid. Of course, this is hypothetical, but I'd be shocked if EVERY warlord ability was keyed off a melee hit, seeing as NONE of the class features are.

Now, this may very well provide a character that feels more "Rangery" or "Strikerish" than your tastes allow. I think a Bard/Ranger multiclass would probably fit this concept better, but you'll have to either wait on PHB2 or homebrew a Bard class. And if there's one thing I am scared about 4e is that homebrewing a class with 80+ powers, 4 paragon paths and an ED sounds like a pretty terrifying amount of work.

In any case, and I don't say this to bash 3.x, but rather for the purpose of relativism.... it wasn't like you could just come up with a character concept with only the 3e PHB that would necessarily work. I mean, sure if you wanted a sword swinging mage out of 3e PHB you could multiclass Fighter/Mage. The problem was, the actual underlying math made this a laughably underpowered choice. Time to go roll up my bomb-throwing deathpriest ninja.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

And if there's one thing I am scared about 4e is that homebrewing a class with 80+ powers, 4 paragon paths and an ED sounds like a pretty terrifying amount of work.

Totally agree. That sounds like a lot of work.

 

[FireLance]

Totally agree. That sounds like a lot of work.

Not if you do it one step at a time. At 1st level, you only need to come up with 2 at-wills, 1 encounter, 1 daily, and a smattering of class features. In addition, you can always crib and adapt from the other classes in the PH.

 

[Incendax]

There is a feat that allows a Rogue to count a specific weapon type (rapier for example) as a Small Blade. This lets him use all his maneuvers and get his sneak attack with Weapon X if he expends the feat to do so.

Given that, I find it hard to imagine there won't be an equivalent feat for Warlords.

Feats like that seem integral to 4E multiclassing in general, as well as a potential blockade to multiclassing too freely.

 

[pukunui]

GW - just thought I'd say that if it turns out your concept really honestly can't be realized just using what's in the first 4e PHB, if you're willing to wait, the Martial Power splatbook might have something in it that's more to your taste. If not and you're willing to wait a bit more, then there might be something in the PHB2 for you ...


I think the biggest problem here is simply that you seem to expect 4e to be as versatile straight out of the gate as 3.5 is after many years and many splatbooks ... and I don't really think that's a fair expectation on your part.


EDIT: Also, don't forget that there are going to be 150 feats in the first PHB. Who's to say that there isn't going to be something in there that could help you realize your concept?

 

[cangrejoide]

[/Sarcasm] You know I feel the same, I wanted to play a Green slime piloting an Organic Mecha that had an Aboleth gun, that's a gun that shoots 50 aboleths per second. But when I read the PHB lite I was disapointed, WTF 4e sucks I can't make the character I want. [/Sarcasm]

Don't you think you are just out to screw 4e? You are finding faults where none are.

Could you do your character concept under 3e? 2e? 1e?

Here is a suggestion: if you are DM is so keen on house rules, why not just ask him to lower the damage of all the warlords powers and have then work at range?

Was that so hard?