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

[Emirikol]

I get the impression from the description that the warlord player's job is to tell other players what to do?? I always thought this was on the top 10 list of gamer no-no's. Isn't the cleric a "tell other players what to do" class too?

Thoughts?

"The warlord doesn't have unlimited license to boss other players around. Taken to extremes, that style of gameplay is still annoying. But if you're the type of player who loves studying tactical situations and trying to puzzle out the best way to get everyone through alive, the warlord provides roleplaying hooks and flexible powers to support your play style in a way that will endear you to your allies."



jh

 

[Cadfan]

The warlord creates tactical options.

A player who says, "Flank that orc over there! Not this one, that one! Its the better move, I tell you!" is annoying.

A player who says, "Flank that orc over there! I set it up so you get +5 on all your damage rolls if you flank him!" is useful.

 

[Wolfspider]

A player who says, "Flank that orc over there! I set it up so you get +5 on all your damage rolls if you flank him!" is useful.

And what do you call the player who ignores such a bonus after the warlord has gone out of his way to use one of his precious powers in order to set up such a situation?

I have a pretty good idea what the player of the warlord would call him....

 

[Three_Haligonians]

I just assumed there would be some kind of dialogue. Like this:

Warlord Player: "What were you planning on doing this round?"
Other Player: "Was thinking of moving, then attacking that -Insert Monster- over there."
Warlord Player: "Cool, let me give you a bonus with -Insert Ability-"
Other Player: "Great, thanks.. since it will be such a great bonus to hit, maybe I'll use an encounter power instead of an at will one."

Or some such thing..

Am I wrong in thinking this is a good way to do things?

J from Three Haligonians

 

[Lanefan]

The warlord creates tactical options.

A player who says, "Flank that orc over there! Not this one, that one! Its the better move, I tell you!" is annoying.

A player who says, "Flank that orc over there! I set it up so you get +5 on all your damage rolls if you flank him!" is useful.

Yet at least the first can be said in character, with the other player able to in-character tell the first to get lost, or comply, as the situation and personalities suit.

The second is pure metagaming and more annoying than you can possibly imagine. (characters have no idea what hit points are, or what "+5" means!)

Lanefan

 

[Voss]

Unfortunately, from the preview of daily powers, the warlord does both. Sometimes he's just giving you opportunities to act or benefit from, but in another case, he's moving other party members. And allowing other party members to move yet other party members.

Unfortunate, and a simple rewording would have nipped the whole problem in the bud. Instead of 'the attacker slides an adjacent ally', they could have said, 'an ally adjacent to the attacker may slide', leaving it both optional and the character under the appropriate player's control.

Hopefully most of the powers won't cross this line and WotC will have the sense to fix the ones that do before the send the final version to the printers.

 

[outsider]

And what do you call the player who ignores such a bonus after the warlord has gone out of his way to use one of his precious powers in order to set up such a situation?

I have a pretty good idea what the player of the warlord would call him....

I would probably call him a jerk. Deliberately choosing suboptimal actions just to spite another player is just as bad as ordering another player around. If the player had a good reason(eg despite the bonus it's still a poor tactical choice, or some rp reason), that's different, but D&D is a cooperative team game. The belligerent "I'll do whatever I want no matter what the rest of the party thinks!" attitude is not something to be encouraged.

 

[Fallen Seraph]

Or one can use common sense, and simply go okay, realistically there is no way a Warlord could "force" the character to move, so it is a choose right there.

As for for "metagaming" do you consider it metagaming when in a fight, a person throws sand in the dust of the person their attacking so their companion can sucker punch them.

Or, a soldier charging into a line of troops, dispersing them allowing their companions to charge and break the line more.

That is what the Warlord does, and it is hardly metagaming to see that the characters would see the advantages (+5) in-game.

 

[Exen Trik]

Yet at least the first can be said in character, with the other player able to in-character tell the first to get lost, or comply, as the situation and personalities suit.

The second is pure metagaming and more annoying than you can possibly imagine. (characters have no idea what hit points are, or what "+5" means!)

Lanefan

To be fair, this is an out of character conversation, but with a bit of roleplay and creativity it can fit well enough in character.

Warlord Character: "Hold a moment! What do you mean to do, simply charge in like a fool?
Other Character: "That beast there, he seems the hungriest, I shall feed him a foot of steel!"
Warlord Character: "There is an ounce of sense in you after all! I'll distract the brute, and allow you room to serve your blade."
Other Character: "Thank ye, I shall this make chance count well! YEEAAAHHHHH!!!"

 

[Incenjucar]

Alternatively, you can ASK players "Hey, you wanna charge the hell out of this guy?"