Paladin should kill the Warlord and take his stuff!

[Sitara]

Seriously. It seems to me that the Paladin would make an effective 'leader', without requireing a fancy new class called warlord. The paladin could have the leadership abilities, aura's, boosts,etc. Just remove paladin spellcasting and add in everything else from the warlord and what you already have for the paladin.

I dunno, just something about the paladin screams 'LEADER'.

 

[Sol.Dragonheart]

I'm sure the Paladin can fulfill a leadership role in the party outside of combat, given what we know so far. However, as far as combat goes, the classic version of the Paladin does seem to be more in line with the Defender, the chosen champion of his deity standing firm and strong on the battlefield.

The Warlord is a great idea. D&D at last has a class that fits the role of the stirring martial leader, a character archetype that has been lacking full expression for a while in the D&D system.

 

[Ulorian - Agent of Chaos]

Seriously. It seems to me that the Paladin would make an effective 'leader', without requireing a fancy new class called warlord. The paladin could have the leadership abilities, aura's, boosts,etc. Just remove paladin spellcasting and add in everything else from the warlord and what you already have for the paladin.

I dunno, just something about the paladin screams 'LEADER'.

I agree with you. I have a feeling, though, that the combined power of the two might be too much oomph for a single class.

 

[Sitara]

Well, they could have balanced it out easily. I just see it as waste; a waste of a time designing a new class, a waste of page space which could have been used for barbairan, bard, monk or swordmage, and a waste of the paladin's potential.

I can easily see the paladin standing strong on the battlefield and inspiring his allies. Heck, you could tie it into his smites; he smacks someone with a smite, all allies get a +1 inspiration bonus to attack rolls.

 

[Sol.Dragonheart]

Except that the Warlord provides for an archetype that has not been addressed by D&D in the past, that of the exceptional warrior hero who is just as notable for his leadership as his prowess in battle. And, again, I personally see the Paladin as more of a Defender in combat than a Leader. The stalwart, unshakable bastion of faith and divine power standing in the thick of combat protecting allies and cutting into the heart of the enemy at the front lines.

 

[ZombieRoboNinja]

Well, they could have balanced it out easily. I just see it as waste; a waste of a time designing a new class, a waste of page space which could have been used for barbairan, bard, monk or swordmage, and a waste of the paladin's potential.

I can easily see the paladin standing strong on the battlefield and inspiring his allies. Heck, you could tie it into his smites; he smacks someone with a smite, all allies get a +1 inspiration bonus to attack rolls.

Umm, how would this be any different from clerics?

 

[Jack99]

Well, they could have balanced it out easily. I just see it as waste; a waste of a time designing a new class, a waste of page space which could have been used for barbairan, bard, monk or swordmage, and a waste of the paladin's potential.

I can easily see the paladin standing strong on the battlefield and inspiring his allies. Heck, you could tie it into his smites; he smacks someone with a smite, all allies get a +1 inspiration bonus to attack rolls.

I get why someone might argue that WoTC should include barbarian, bard, or monk, but the sword-mage? That might be the way you swing, but I am sure that more people would like to see something, I don't know, the druid perhaps, in the first PHB.

I personally am looking forward to playing a Warlord (assuming i ever get to actually be a player), even though I quite dislike the name.

 

[Stogoe]

Edited by Piratecat. We're not so much a fan of the insults, especially after the problems yesterday.

 

[Klaus]

Except that the Warlord provides for an archetype that has not been addressed by D&D in the past, that of the exceptional warrior hero who is just as notable for his leadership as his prowess in battle. And, again, I personally see the Paladin as more of a Defender in combat than a Leader. The stalwart, unshakable bastion of faith and divine power standing in the thick of combat protecting allies and cutting into the heart of the enemy at the front lines.

That archetype, in the past, went to Fighters.

Y'know, I'd love to see the Fighter get an inspirational talent tree, and have a Paragon Path titled "warlord" later on.

 

[Sitara]

Umm, how would this be any different from clerics?

ummm, clerics provide healing, are not as good at combat, and can't both attack and provide a + boost to attack rolls at the same time?

Anyhow, this is ntot a post against the warlord. Basically what Ia m saying is that it makes more sense for the paladin to do the things the warlord will do, in addition to doing paladin things. It seems a waste to have another class do something when an existing class could do it and have it make more sense flavorwise.