Warlord. A bad or a good Cleric?

[vhailor]

1. Can a warlord substitute effectively a cleric?
2. Is it too much for a party to have an Inspiring Warlord and a Cleric?

I was thinkink about my Human Warlord

STR 18 +4  Max HP    25     Healing Surges   8
CON 13 +1  Bloodied  12     Value            6
DEX  8 -1  
INT 11 +0  AC  17 
WIS 10 +0  FORT  16 
CHA 16 +3  REF  12 
    WILL  15 
Feats:Armor Proficienvy Scale, Inspired Recovery
Athletics   8
Diplomacy   9
Endurance   6
Heal    5
History   5
Basic Attacks      Att   Damage
Maul               +6    2d6+4
At-Will (dagger)   Att   Damage
Furious Smash      +6      4    +  An ally adjacent to me or target gets +3 to attack and damage.
WolfPack Tactics   +6    2d6+4  +  An ally adjacent to me or target shifts 1 square as free action.
Encounter          Att   Damage
Guarding Attack    +6    4d6+4  +  An ally adjacent to me gets +4 to AC against the target's attacks 
      until end of next turn
Daily
Bastion of Defense +8    6d6+4  +  Allies within 5 squares of you gain a +1 power bonus to all defenses until 
      the end of the encounter.
For the 2nd Level I'm thinking:  
Knight's Move  OR  Shake it Off

3. I would love having him hold a Maul, but a friend told me that a Longsword is better,
since it gives +3 and not +2 to attacks, and the warlord has to hit frequently in order
to give the advantages to the allies.
4. Would he be better with Longsword + Light Shield giving him
Basic attack +7 1d8+4 and AC 18 ?

 

[Kaelkatar]

Yes, you can substitute a cleric with a warlord easily.
You could also have one of each, remember though that in order to deal with this both leaders should be combat focused, and the large pool of heals will be enough support.
In my past campaign the warlord always took the highest +atk weapon he could get, as the extra damage from your attacks isn't so great if your cool powers don't hit. If you are concerned for melee damage, use commander strike as your at will on another melee player.
If you are going longsword, take a shield.

 

[vhailor]

Thank you for your reply. You helped me a lot.

 

[DracoSuave]

Yeah if you've got a cleric, then another leader should be more damage-based. Go tactical instead of inspiring, and take a reach weapon to go with that Commander's Strike, and, combined with a heavy hitter, you'll be dealing a lot of damage. No one will complain for your lack of support, because while the Cleric will be more defensively oriented, you can focus on enabling massive burst damage while still being a more-than-capable backup healer.

 

[Victim]

I agree that a tactical warlord might work better with a cleric.

However, you can get some nice buffing circles going on between Righteous Brand and Furious Smash.

 

[ricardo440]

Our party has A cleric a Warlord AND a paladin. IT works fine. We have a wizard too. A lack of striker can be a bit of a pain as battles can last longer, but the group works well.

 

[Slaved]

The greater the number of Party Members the Better a Warlord becomes.

Clerics tend towards the opposite.

What is the Size of your Party?

 

[Vayden]

A lot of it depends on party make-up. If you have a great weapon fighter and/or a rogue in the group, the tactical warlord is in my opinion the strongest leader class, as you can increase the damage output by a massive amount, and doing more damage is still a better way to win than healing more damage.

In general, the more melee types in the party, the better the warlord does. If your party only has one melee character holding the front line, a cleric may be better, as that one defender is going to need the extra healing from the cleric.

Either way though, a warlord subs in just fine for a cleric, and is a fair bit of fun to play too.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Warlord can stand in well for a Cleric. I am played a Dragonborn Warlord (17th level now), and I can't see how any class could spend more healing. (I fear I might have focused on healing too much, in fact, and maybe should have locked more on powers that allow saves or grant attack bonuses).

Cleric and Warlord still make a good time. It might be useful to ensure that at least one of you has a few more powers that help the parties attacks or defenses (or both).

 

[Mathew_Freeman]

The only reason I'm playing a Cleric over a warlord in my 4e game is that my DM kindly confirmed that yes, he was thinking of putting a fair amount of undead in the game.

Otherwise I'd have happily been bolstering my team-mates.