Skirmishing Warlord


log in or register to remove this ad

It does look like an interesting build. However, I was hoping to nab a ranged power for my inspiring warlord to do something cool all those times I end up having to chuck a javelin. Feel like I got the proverbial middle finger. If you are a charisma warlord, most of the powers are duds.

For the Skirmishing build, I really like Skirmishing Presence. But I generally have a "Mobility rules" outlook.

The archer captain feat seems pretty unimpressive, unless you have a dagger throwing rogue who likes to be a safe distance from the enemy. But they can spend their own feat.

Paint the Bull's Eye is nice if you have a ranger or if your Int/Wis is greater than your strength, otherwise, decent but not impressive. If it had been Str+1 vs AC, it would have been perfect.

I like Risky Shot. Plain, simple, when you don't know what else to do, you use Risky Shot. Not leader-like at all, but sometimes you don't need to lead, just need to take something down.

Race the Arrow is excellent, especially with a Barbarian or other charger in the group.

Inspiring Shot has a bard-like feel to it. Not my favorite. I sure hope the build didn't get stuck with one option for a daily (and I hope they didn't pick "more healing" as a theme for a skirmishing build).

Over all I like what I see, as expected there are some cherries, and pickles. If I had to voice one concern, I sure hope there are enough ranged options to choose from for this build, since they will not easily be able to dip into currently published warlord powers.
 

I guess the second build for warlords in MP 2 must be Wis secondary... could also multiclass well with the seeker (I bet their second build is Wis/Int).

I Skirmishing Presence's choice of Wis/Int. How many times have I started to build a ruthless ruffian thinking they can get Str or Cha bonuses to damage, only to abandon the build because it's Str only (Cha really makes sense for that build).

Was it Gnome Works who had a huge rant when 4E was coming out that he couldn't make a ranged warlord?
 

Strength for bow attacks now, huh? Why don't they just get rid of ability scores all together, since they're pretty much absolutely meaningless outside of class powers. Most classes will have decent NADs thanks to the redundancy, and so basically the only thing they govern is skills.

New suggestion: Make each character get the same bonus for attacks and damage, since that is the most important function of the class, and have (for example) Cunning Curt the tactical warlord spend his points on "Tactical" ability score, rather than the "Intelligence" ability score because Intelligence does NOTHING outside of NADs, skills, and the classes that use it.

It would make the classes more flexible. Instead of being a "Tactical warlord" you could have an array of scores that looks like:
Tactical: 18, Inspiring: 13, Resourceful: 16, Bravura: 8, Archery: 10

It would serve just as well and dispel the illusion that you things like "Strength" and "Intelligence" mean anything in the new gamist paradigm (which I'm not against, I just with they went all the way with it).

No, this is not a serious suggestion, it's satire of how meaningless ability scores are now. I realize the problems this would cause across the board.
 

Strength for bow attacks now, huh?
[...]
New suggestion: Make each character get the same bonus for attacks and damage, since that is the most important function of the class, and have (for example) Cunning Curt the tactical warlord spend his points on "Tactical" ability score, rather than the "Intelligence" ability score because Intelligence does NOTHING outside of NADs, skills, and the classes that use it.

I lol'd. So true.
 

Maybe we will get a feat that allows Dex for all strength based powers next! I do have to agree that attributes are starting to mean nothing. Maybe we can just eliminate them and just use Reflexes, Fortitude, and Willpower!

Honestly, I don't like how 4e relies on specific attributes for each class. If you want a fighter that doesn't rely on brute strength you pretty much have go rogue. I miss the weapon finesse feat. I like to tell everyone in my group that my fighter is not strong, he's wirey (with an irish accent like the guy in The Replacements)
 

Oooh! Shiny!

I see something *very* interesting in the new powers: a choice of two secondary stats (Int or Wis) for each power.

You can create a Str+Wis or Str+Int Warlord and use the same powers with equal effectiveness.
 

No, this is not a serious suggestion, it's satire of how meaningless ability scores are now.

I really wouldn't mind it. Right now it troubles me enough that you can have a group that has a dwarf paladin typically attacking with a +5 vs AC and a halfling rogue typically attacking with a +12 vs Reflex.

You could still leave attributes in the game for various effects, riders, and the like, but base attack and damage bonuses would come from a fixed matrix. Of course it would be a major haul and not really feasible at this point as you say.
 


I really wouldn't mind it. Right now it troubles me enough that you can have a group that has a dwarf paladin typically attacking with a +5 vs AC and a halfling rogue typically attacking with a +12 vs Reflex.

LOLWUT

+1 from racial attribute.
+1 from weapon difference.
+1 from dagger rogueyness.

How does this equate to a +7 difference?

And don't say 'combat advantage' cause that's not exclusive to halflings OR rogues... the dwarf is his most likely flank partner, after all.

---------------


Anyways.


Or Wisdom?!?

Did they not get the memo that Warlords are Charisma based in so many ways?

The other build, what was it called?
 

Remove ads

Top