Robert Schwalb releases his version of Warlord

Robert Schwalb, who designed one of my favorite games (Shadow of the Demon Lord), with a version of one of my favorite classes? Sold.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

(Happily) guilty!

Well, at least you admit it.

Wait...no....seriously?!?!?! They had a section on "how not to be a douche while playing this class"???

I'm speechless (but laughing hysterically inside.)

I mean, half the classes in the game could use a similar section.

See? Confirmation that people think it's the class that gives orders. I knew it!
You figured out my secret: I'm a Warlord IRL. So I can't help it.

More confirmation that people who don't like the warlord see it that way, and make a big deal of it.

Ok, to be less snarky for a minute...

I agree with this. As I tried to do with my Bravura homebrew a while ago, going with Int removes the "Natural Leader" bit that I find so antithetical to the D&D ethos, and allows you to use cleverness to manipulate NPCs, leaving your fellow PCs alone.

When I came up with it, I was taking at face value the claims that, "It's not about giving orders, it's about tactical options." Ok, so I tried to build something with tactical options that didn't involve dictating how other players' characters feel about your character.

Some Warlord fans liked that approach, but others seem stuck in the "No it must be pretty much identical to the 4e Warlord, and must include non-magical healing."

Sigh.

Eh, it doesn't need to be identical, it just needs to accomplish the same basic things, like enabling tactical movement, and helping the other team members accomplish their "role" more effectively.

For some Captains (this is my hill, and I won't abandon it. Captain is a better name in every way), this will mean making attacks that leave openings for team-mates to take advantage of. For others, it will involve moving the characters on both sides of the fight around "the board" to create advantages for their team. For still others, it will be about leading the charge, dealing decent damage, while inspiring others to hit harder and take harder hits in turn.

IMO, a great Captain would have a subclass like what you built, and one that primarily grants extra actions and bonuses on actions, and one that behaves a lot like a 4e Defender with leader-esque auras, and an inspirational one that has non magical healing. And yes, we want non magical healing. I don't think most warlord fans are going to budge on that. If it has more of a cost than magical healing, fine, let it cost the target's Hit Die. I'd be fine with healing spells doing that, in fact.

But if you take elements of the Battle Master, Cavalier, and Purple Dragon Knight, Fighters, the Mastermind Rogue, and some of Mike Mearls' Warlord ideas on the happy fun hour, you've got a great basis for a class and some subclasses.

 

[Guest 6801328]

I mean, half the classes in the game could use a similar section.

Maybe, and I can certainly think of some annoying archetypes. Rogues who think it's ok to treat their companions as marks. Paladins (especially those of the AD&D era) who think they need to constantly moralize. Druids who think 'neutral' means "it's ok if my friends die, as long as animals don't".

But despite how common stuff like that is, WotC didn't add sections on etiquette for those classes, did they? (Although correct me if I'm wrong; as I've explained many times I skipped 3e and 4e so don't know what's in those books.)

And yet the Warlord fans, they concluded, needed to have it explained to them that they aren't the boss.

I wonder why?

(Actually, I don't. That was a rhetorical device.)

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Maybe, and I can certainly think of some annoying archetypes. Rogues who think it's ok to treat their companions as marks. Paladins (especially those of the AD&D era) who think they need to constantly moralize. Druids who think 'neutral' means "it's ok if my friends die, as long as animals don't".

But despite how common stuff like that is, WotC didn't add sections on etiquette for those classes, did they? (Although correct me if I'm wrong; as I've explained many times I skipped 3e and 4e so don't know what's in those books.)

And yet the Warlord fans, they concluded, needed to have it explained to them that they aren't the boss.

I wonder why?

(Actually, I don't. That was a rhetorical device.)

lol because it was a new archetype for the game (well, not really, but the mechanics supporting it were). No need to invent something that isn't there.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Maybe, and I can certainly think of some annoying archetypes. Rogues who think it's ok to treat their companions as marks. Paladins (especially those of the AD&D era) who think they need to constantly moralize. Druids who think 'neutral' means "it's ok if my friends die, as long as animals don't".

But despite how common stuff like that is, WotC didn't add sections on etiquette for those classes, did they? (Although correct me if I'm wrong; as I've explained many times I skipped 3e and 4e so don't know what's in those books.)

And yet the Warlord fans, they concluded, needed to have it explained to them that they aren't the boss.

I wonder why?

(Actually, I don't. That was a rhetorical device.)

it was the 3.5 Marshal not the warlord...although many see it as a protowarlord.

 

[R_Chance]

Back in 3.x I homebrewed "Captain" and "Knight Commander" prestige classes. This concept (Warlord) strikes me as something more suited to that or to mid to high level Fighter options. Maybe a Mercenary archtype / subclass with things built in at a higher level... well, we'll see.

 

[Grimkrieg]

It's charisma creep.

I've posted on this before, and it's definitely worth its own topic, but charisma has morphed from a dump stat that was often confused/conflated with "physical attractiveness" back in the day to a world-eating stat that will soon envelop all of Intelligence and Wisdom.

Nom nom nom.

That's ok. When Dex becomes a casting stat in 6E, Charisma can join the other five as a dump stat. We can have a whole section on how your lowest non-Dex stat is a story​ choice.

 

[Guest 6801328]

That's ok. When Dex becomes a casting stat in 6E, Charisma can join the other five as a dump stat. We can have a whole section on how your lowest non-Dex stat is a story​ choice.

Really the game could just have two stats: "Body" and "Mind".

 

[TwoSix]

Really the game could just have two stats: "Body" and "Mind".

The game doesn't "need" stats at all, you can simply narrate successes or failures based on your character concept.

Realistically, though, a game that's based on D&D but uses a different set of stats is simply one of a long line of fantasy heartbreakers.

 

[Guest 6801328]

The game doesn't "need" stats at all, you can simply narrate successes or failures based on your character concept.

For years I've been playing without stats. Or dice. Or narration. Or really any form of human communication.

I just close my eyes and imagine really great stories.

Best. RPG. Ever. (R)

 

[TwoSix]

For years I've been playing without stats. Or dice. Or narration. Or really any form of human communication.

I just close my eyes and imagine really great stories.

Best. RPG. Ever. (R)

"Dear Dragon Forum,

You'll never believe what just happened to me in our last session. There was this elf maiden with an 18 Comeliness...."