Warlord Player's job is to tell other players what to do??

[Michele Carter]

Isn't any class ability problematic if the player is going to be a prick about using it?

This.

I don't understand why we are not supposing that "ally" will be a voluntary status.

And also? This. Times a million. Ally = willing ally as a default; otherwise, "No thank you, warlord, I do not wish to be moved today."

My warlord doesn't get insulted when this happens, and she doesn't assume it's because they hate her, either.

 

[Wormwood]

Ally = willing ally as a default; otherwise, "No thank you, warlord, I do not wish to be moved today."

/thread

Dear sweet merciful gods, let this be /thread

 

[Hypersmurf]

And also? This. Times a million. Ally = willing ally as a default; otherwise, "No thank you, warlord, I do not wish to be moved today."

Do you know if this has been codified? Or is it the assumend social convention in your playtest groups?

There's also a difference between what you quoted (times a million), and what you describe; it sounds like you're saying "Any time a power affects 'an ally', that ally may decline to be affected by the power", as opposed to the bit you quoted, which was postulating that "A character may at any time declare himself to be no longer an ally"... which has wider-reaching effects, given that it would then prevent the use of any power that relies on the ally-relationship between those two characters.

-Hyp.

 

[Michele Carter]

Do you know if this has been codified? Or is it the assumend social convention in your playtest groups?

There's also a difference between what you quoted (times a million), and what you describe; it sounds like you're saying "Any time a power affects 'an ally', that ally may decline to be affected by the power", as opposed to the bit you quoted, which was postulating that "A character may at any time declare himself to be no longer an ally"... which has wider-reaching effects, given that it would then prevent the use of any power that relies on the ally-relationship between those two characters.

*is tempted to see this argued about for another five days*

But yes, codified; why would I post about a house rule? (Don't answer that.) And yes, you can decline to be affected by a power.

I suppose you can decide you're no longer an ally as well, but then the rogue slides you into the lava and you don't have any choice about it.

 

[Fallen Seraph]

Hehe, thanks Miko hopefully some of the arguing will die down from this

 

[BryonD]

Isn't any class ability problematic if the player is going to be a prick about using it?

It is interesting that 4E is the solution to players being pricks in 3X games (for example - DMs were jerks who would arbitrarily make you take AoOs for kicking a table out from under npcs in 3X but not in 4e), but when the problem exists in 4e it is just the player's fault.

I agree 100% that it is up to the players to make the game good. This warlord "issue" is a non-issue.

I just wish 3X could get the same slack around here instead of the double standard treatment.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

*is tempted to see this argued about for another five days*

But yes, codified; why would I post about a house rule? (Don't answer that.) And yes, you can decline to be affected by a power.

I suppose you can decide you're no longer an ally as well, but then the rogue slides you into the lava and you don't have any choice about it.

Ranged Irresistible Command (minor 1/round; at-will) • Charm, Fire
Range 10; affects one allied devil of lower level than the pit fiend; the target immediately slides up to 5 squares and explodes, dealing 2d10+5 fire damage to all creatures in a close burst 2. The exploding devil is destroyed.

this has to be changed then...

i propose: scratch allied. This would have the nice side effect, that noone can claim anymore, that they are too weak to be the rulers of the nine hells...

To the rogue:
positioning strike as artful dodger will be the most deadly maneuver at Lvl 1, and it can also be used to bring an ally in a advantageous position... at least for the rogue...

 

[Wormwood]

this has to be changed then...

Why?

The devils don't get to choose whether they are allied or not. I do.

 

[Cadfan]

WOTC-Miko:

Thanks for that information. That makes the Warlord's power a bit more tactically interesting- the "pusher" picks where he wants to slide the "pushee," and the pushee decides whether to go along with it.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Why?

The devils don't get to choose whether they are allied or not. I do.

If i can chose, the devil can too (theoretically)... it won´t hurt scratching allied in the irresistable command... and i would really like it, if in a fight between devils once per round an enemy devil exploded...