Paladin should kill the Warlord and take his stuff!

[rounser]

I've got to sign out of this argument for now. It's time to go play my White Raven character from Bo9S. It's good to know now that I can boss the other party members around in exchange for the bonuses I provide. It will sure surprise the rest of my party, since there's no support for it in the rules. But, hey - it's implied, right?

Some other things imply stuff too, like the name "warlord", and the fact that they couldn't even come up with a name for it with any meaning the first time around ("White Raven"?) because there's no archetype here. It's just random crunch, and doesn't belong in the core.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

There have been plenty of "warlords" in fantasy fiction.

1) Merlin (King Arthur)
2) Brynden Tully aka "the Blackfish" (A Song of Ice and Fire)
3) General Kael (Willow)
4) Aragorn and Faramir (Lord of the Rings)
5) Matrim, Gareth Bryne (Wheel of Time)

Five (plus) characters from five separate series.

This doesn't even take into account large numbers of characters in DnD novels, like Daine (Eberron novels, the Dreaming Dark series), Azriim (a slaad who featured in a chapter called "Senseless Slaughter, Sensibly Done" in the Erevis Cale series), or many characters in the Drizzt series (Obould I, Drizzt, Jarlaxle, etc).

I find it mystifying that people don't remember such characters.

 

[rounser]

You're only saying that because they stood out the front of armies at some stage. And they're not "warlords", for goodness sake - general (or some other military title) or king fits much better for most of them.

Warlord even has implied villainy, genocide...it's just a terrible name IMO. Except maybe for an orc or some robber baron NPC.

 

[mhacdebhandia]

He's not a supporter, though. Anyone who lectures you on how to best outflank that goblin is telling you what to do. That's called an order. Just because it's implied in a bonus doesn't mean that what's implied doesn't stink roleplaying-wise. The fact that you're going to outflank that goblin anyway doesn't matter.

D&D deserves better, IMO.

And cocaine is a hell of a drug, clearly.

 

[rounser]

And cocaine is a hell of a drug, clearly.

For who, me or WOTC?

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

You're only saying that because they stood out the front of armies at some stage.

I am?

Marlin never did, and some of the characters (like Azriim) were never affiliated with a military force of any kind. (Azriim is super-chaotic, and acts more like a smart gangster than a general. His party consists of five slaadi.)

Aragorn spends most of LotR associating with a group of nine (or fewer) people. It isn't until the end that he starts leading armies.

And they're not "warlords", for goodness sake - general (or some other military title) or king fits much better for most of them.

Warlord even has implied villainy, genocide...it's just a terrible name IMO. Except maybe for an orc or some robber baron NPC.

If you can come up with a better name, there's nothing preventing you from using it. But, in the meantime, I think a bandit gang leader is best represented by the Warlord class, and dozens of other archetypes I have seen, read or can whip up.

 

[rounser]

But, in the meantime, I think a bandit gang leader is best represented by the Warlord class, and dozens of other archetypes I have seen, read or can whip up.

A bandit gang leader is usually an NPC in charge of bandits, unless you're running some themed campaign.

And most people will tell you Merlin is a wizard, without blinking. I'm sure you're going to tell me how they're wrong, though.

If you can come up with a better name, there's nothing preventing you from using it.

If D&D were designed properly, and the "warlord" given a decent name, there would be no need to, which is why I'm disappointed. Plus there's the constant translation required every time you open a book.

 

[Zaruthustran]

They don't, but why do you have to assume that the PC listens to the "warlord's inspiring tactics" when they don't even respect him, or want to listen to what he says?

It's bollocks, and makes big assumptions about other people's characters.

Good grief man. Did you have this same issue with the Bard's inspire courage? With the Paladin's aura of courage?

Where did you get this idea that the other party members don't respect the Warlord? He's skilled in tactics. His ideas *work*. What, are the other party members idiots? If they complain when the warlord uses a tactical maneuver, do they likewise whine when the wizard announces his intention to fireball? I honestly don't understand your issue.

And yes, a party leader is indeed an archetype. Any group--any group, in any setting--works better when there's a clearly defined leader. Combat is not a time for decisions by committee. And a D&D party is by definition a 4-person combat squad.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

A bandit gang leader is usually an NPC in charge of bandits, unless you're running some themed campaign.

NPCs frequently use PC classes.

And most people will tell you Merlin is a wizard, without blinking. I'm sure you're going to tell me how they're wrong, though.

Several of the characters I mentioned were multiclassed. Aragorn is multiclassed with fighter (and maybe ranger, and maybe cleric), Drizzt and General Kael are mainly fighters ... and Merlin has mostly wizard levels. However, Merlin was a noted strategist (something King Arthur himself seemed to fail at). In many interpretations of King Arthur, Merlin was hardly considered a wizard.

 

[rounser]

NPCs frequently use PC classes.

No primarily NPC class deserves to be in the PHB.

However, Merlin was a noted strategist (something King Arthur himself seemed to fail at).

Okay, so we're out of "Warlord as White Raven" territory and back into "Warlord as Sergeant" territory, then?