D&D 5E Warlord Name Poll

[El Mahdi]

Warlord seems to be the worst possible name for the class - except for all the others.

Too True.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

I still say Warlord rolls best off the tongue, and its overall connotation is fine, someone that leads or commands men in battle, which is after all a lot of what the class is about, and engages in politics of some sort, another aspect of the class.

The problem is that Warlord implies commanding a lot of troops. You don't have a squad (ie, adventuring party) with it's own warlord. A Warlord commands the whole army, or better yet, the whole dang nation. I think that might be an even bigger hang-up for me than the unsavory implications.

 

[Celebrim]

The 5e fighter, sadly, is no exception. You've heard it said, "Fighters can't have nice things."

Between that and fighter being an utterly generic class concept, martial concepts occasionally get broken out because the fighter just can't do them justice.

Every edition of D&D ever...

Designer #1: What sort of spells should we make for the wizards?
Designer #2: Well, I mean they are a wizard, they should have spells to do EVERYTHING, right?
Designer #1: Of course, silly me. And what about the fighter?
Designer #2: Well obviously, they are good at hitting things with big sticks. That's the only thing they do.
Designer #1: What about soldier stuff, like giving orders or thinking up battle plans.
Designer #2: Soldier? No, we'd need a whole new class for that. Better to just stick with hitting things with sticks. That will be balanced, right?
Designer #1: Oh of course. Hitting things with a stick is clearly as broad based of a power as having phenomenal cosmic power to literally force the universe to conform to your wishes. Because, I mean, you could just hit it with a stick.

 

[The Human Target]

Why not just call the Warlock 'Witch', since a Warlock is just a male Witch in folklore. Both historically connote someone who has made a pact with the devil in return for unnatural powers. Not that I really dislike the name 'Warlock', but I never got the notion that its any different from 'Witch'. Perhaps they might be slightly different subclasses in 5e, but given that the Warlock already exists and its name isn't going to change...

I still don't care about the alphabetization. What difference does it make? Nobody is going to confuse the two names, they just come adjacent in the PHB, if there's ever one that includes both again, which is unlikely.

I still say Warlord rolls best off the tongue, and its overall connotation is fine, someone that leads or commands men in battle, which is after all a lot of what the class is about, and engages in politics of some sort, another aspect of the class.

Two problems with Witch.

1) When people hear Witch they think of an ugly monster woman, and as the majority of D&D players are men it's kind of a bad idea. I know a lot of the guys in my group would be iffy in playing a witch over a warlock. And come to think of it the "ugly" connotation is going to be a turn off for people too, even if its baseless in the actual game.

2) There are people in the world right now who consider themselves to be Witches as a member of a religion. So it's kind of a problematic word, especially when the crossover of Wicca folk to gamers is probably high.

 

[El Mahdi]

Yeah, I don't have a real issue with Warlord, it rolls off the tongue in a way that very few of the other options do. I don't really feel like there are strong connotations either. Yes, Warlord can mean "man who rose to power by force in troubled times", but it has also been more broadly applied to various sorts of self-made martial leaders, historically. Warlords are far from being an evil bunch, more just 'bringers of order in times of chaos'...

Well, its an interesting 'digression'. What I immediately thought was the opposite is true. Its not that 'nobility leads', its that 'leaders are ennobled'. If you're a really effective leader, you're going to achieve status and rank in a warrior society, which is what Feudal Europe was at its heart. Even well beyond those days, perhaps even more so in later times, talent was rewarded with rank.

Yes, hereditary nobles had a huge inside track, just like the upper class always does in every society, but just because you were born first son of some Comte in 12th Century France didn't mean you were even going to be knighted. If you showed little talent as a leader, you hired someone else to do it for you, or you were passed over for somebody more capable.

IMHO the Warlord is that guy. He's the one that simply has the talent to lead and inspire. Is he nobility? Eh, maybe, but that's why he's 'warlord' and not 'baron', 'knight', or 'marshal'. Maybe he'll be that, maybe some background will give him that on day one, but that part of things is largely a matter of details of the setting and game, not really part of class mechanics proper.

What mechanics can do is give the character the mechanical basis of 'tactician', 'leader of men', etc. Like all mechanics the DM and players should RP to it, and if they don't it may seem flat, but that isn't really the fault of the rules. Fighters can seem like just awkward mechanical cutouts too.

I absolutely hated the name Warlord...until this. You've swayed me quite a bit in its favor. And you're right, strictly by definition, even feudal lords were Warlords. Central authority was a very tenuous and variable thing in feudal Europe.

Honestly, with Warlord actually a fairly modern word and the negative connotations a mostly modern aspect, maybe it's not as bad as I've previously judged it.

Though I still prefer Consul.


What I'll likely do is keep Warlord as the name of the dedicated class for the Warlording the Fighter thread (seems only fair, and the poll is leaning that way anyways and was mostly only for fun), obviously keep Battle Master and Valor Bard/College of Valor for the archetypes, but name the Prestige Class Consul (a member of the College of Consuls).

Then throw it all at the wall and see what sticks.

The Prestige Class won't be as martial focused as the dedicated class, and even less martial focused compared to the Battle Master. Since the Prestige Class is something meant for any class to be able to multi-class with, I think the concept of a "counsellor with tactical, strategic, and leadership training - and maybe the proxy/liaison of someone with authority - but doesn't have the personal implication of authority" works really well. It can fulfill the concept of Leader Rogues, Leader Rangers, Leader Barbarians, Leader Clerics and Paladins, even Leader Druids, etc...

 

[LuisCarlos17f]

My suggestion is two words from Spanish languange: Adalid and arraéz.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adalid

I imagine the warlord like a fighter with the poses and maneuvers of White Raven school from "Tome of Battle: book of nine swords". Why not a pack of subtitutive class features? You get the options you like, someones to be used with some modules like henchmen, skirmishes and mass battles.

 

[El Mahdi]

My suggestion is two words from Spanish languange: Adalid and arraéz.

Adalid is cool. It basically means Captain, right? I do love the extra narrative content that the name brings with it. However, I see it more as a title than a class name. Honestly, for any Warlord character, I see people not actually calling them Warlord. It won't be "Hey, Warlord...", it will be "Hey, Captain..." or "Hey, Adalid...", etc.

I couldn't find a reference or translation for arraéz though, other than a surname; and I couldn't find a meaning for the surname either. I did find a possible Basque link, though. Is it originally a Basque word/name? I had a roommate when I was stationed in England that had a Basque surname: Urrutia.

Can you translate arraéz for us?

 

[The Human Target]

I think this thread has convinced me I like Warlord.

 

[Jessica]

I voted for Warlord(4e class name), Marshall(3.5 class name), Commander(13th Age class name), and I put one for other. I think Captain is a possibly good name because despite the military connotation(as an American non-naval military 0-3 rank and a naval 0-6 rank) it is also a police rank, a position on a football team, a leader of a group of mercenaries, and even a person in charge of waiters/waitresses.

While I like the sound of certain latin/spanish names for Warlord, I tend to prefer using an English-ish name for classes unless it's most iconic/defining example is from a non-English culture(e.g. Samurai). I'm not some speak-English-in-muh-country-or-giiiiiit-out type, but it feels weird sometimes when a class goes non-English despite being a concept that is perfectly common/doable in English(obviously this is the case for the English version of D&D and would not apply, for instance, to a Spanish translation of D&D). Also doesn't Caudillo generally refer to Franco?

 

[Tony Vargas]

Honestly, for any Warlord character, I see people not actually calling them Warlord. It won't be "Hey, Warlord...", it will be "Hey, Captain..." or "Hey, Adalid...", etc.

For most classes, really.


This thread did start me thinking about names, and a few minutes with a Thesaurus, starting with "Ally" yielded:

Adjutant (on your list)
Cohort
Comrade
Confederate
Consort
Partisan
Patron

and...

Sidekick ;P