Warlord - punished for sacraficing

[Pickles JG]

Cleric also gets to target something besides AC -- whereas the Warlord always targets AC. (sigh)

Except with Furious Smash, though that seems to me like a below par Commanders strike (for Inspirers).

As regards what Plane Sailing said - Warlords certainly have a make others attack schtick but they can easily avoid those at wills & their other ones are pretty useful (or annoying with my DMs hat on). It is irritatingly hard to make a warlord that only gives out attacks - their encounters & dailies are more like regular attacks. I expect this is balanced .

 

[chitzk0i]

It is interesting in the light of your original concerns to consider comparing the warlord with the cleric.

It is noticeable that when it comes to the at-wills the cleric gets to do something which gives a benefit as a side effect, while the warlord tends to have powers which give up his attack to give someone else a benefit.

(I say 'seems to' because I've not gone through the list carefully, but just on observations on what the warlord players have done and what cleric players have done over the first 5 levels of the game I've been running).

Cheers

There are four Warlord at-will powers in the PHB. Two of them are essentially melee basic attacks with a rather conditional bonus. One allows an ally to shift one square, the other gives an ally an OA if the target shifts. The other two are Commander's Strike and Furious smash. Commander's Strike gives and ally an attack with a bonus to damage, whereas Furious Smash does minor damage (equal to your strength modifier) and gives an ally a bonus to their next attack and damage.

Martial Power has one more at-will, but I don't recall exactly what it does. I think that if you hit, you can either slide the target or grant an ally a melee basic attack.

 

[77IM]

The warlord in my group really gets a kick out of commander's strike. He considers his main weapon to be the dwarf fighter. "For my action... you attack that guy."

If a game is an interesting series of decisions, then the warlord isn't sacrificing. If anything, he's making MORE decisions than the other party members.

-- 77IM

 

[Spatula]

Cleric also gets to target something besides AC -- whereas the Warlord always targets AC. (sigh)

Not always. The warlord does have a smattering of powers that are vs Fort (including an at-will) or vs Reflex.

 

[Spatula]

As for what I expected - I had thought the classes would be well balanced with respect to sacrafice (since they are apparently well balanced in other respects). So if the Warlord Presence ability uses up a class feature slot and does them no good, then the other classes should have something similar. The fighter's mark is a good example - it encourages the bad guys to attack the fighter. That's a fair trade for the benefits a Fighter may get from a Warlord. A Paladin's Lay on Hands fits into that mold too - helps others, not self. If every class had (exactly) one equivalent ability that only helped the group, then that would work out well and be balanced. The way it looks to me though is that the Warlord is a sucker class.

So fighters have a "self-sacrifice" class ability and that's fine, and also paladins, but the same thing makes a warlord into a sucker class? Warlords have three class abilities (combat leader, commanding presence, inspiring word), and only one of those (commanding presence) does not benefit the warlord directly. Building a "selfish" warlord isn't much different than a selfish fighter. Pick the exploits that give you, personally, the most damage output and go to town.

If you want all the glory for yourself, play a striker.

 

[0-hr]

So fighters have a "self-sacrifice" class ability and that's fine, and also paladins, but the same thing makes a warlord into a sucker class?

If you want all the glory for yourself, play a striker. The role sounds like a good fit for you.

I don't hold so strongly to that statement at this point (having realized the relative frequency of presence vs other abiltiies). When I did though it was a matter of degrees. The fighter can mark a target, making himself more likely to be attacked. That's self sacraficing. The Warlord gives up an attack so that someone else can roll one. That's a much larger sacrafice. Still, the sucker part of it is where the Warlord can't consider himself an ally. It makes little sense and is just punishing a player who wants to help everyone out. I'd rather see the abilties toned down to whatever level they need to be in order to balance with the Warlord being considered an ally of himself.

As for what suits me, a Striker is out of the question because I'd feel guilty getting benefits from a Warlord and giving him nothing in return. If we're just looking at classes, something like the fighter suits me best as it is easy to mix selfishness and selflessness.

Just yesterday I took my first hard look at the magic item section. I saw that there are lots of "selfless" items in there - so that might be a way to make a striker who also helped others. For now though, I'll be looking at defenders for low level and hope that someday I'll get the chance to play a Warlord following the Flamebrow paragon path.

 

[Nail]

Not always. The warlord does have a smattering of powers that are vs Fort (including an at-will) or vs Reflex.

True enough.

The non-AC powers are so poor, I'd forgotten them. Lemme list them here:

At-wills in the Players Handbook:

• Furious Smash

Encounters/Dailies in the Players Handbook

• Hammer and Anvil (Atk 1; Str vs. Ref)
• Villian's Nightmare (Daily 5; Str vs. Ref)
• Beat Them into the Ground (Atk 13; Str vs Fort)
• Chimera Battlestrike (Atk 27; Str vs. Ref)

Paragon powers in the Players Handbook

• Force Retreat (Battle Captain 11, Str vs Ref)
• Skirmish Ploy (Combat Veteran 11, Str vs. Ref)

That's it, in the PH anyway. That hardly "a lot"....does it qualify for a "smattering"? Either way, Warlord has much less variety than other classes. That hurts the class, IMO.

 

[cjais]

That's it, in the PH anyway. That hardly "a lot"....does it qualify for a "smattering"? Either way, Warlord has much less variety than other classes. That hurts the class, IMO.

I count 4 Fighter powers (non-paragon path, mind), vs. the Warlord's 5.

 

[Plane Sailing]

If you want all the glory for yourself, play a striker. The role sounds like a good fit for you.

Y'know, I'm finding it hard to see this not being a pretty rude way of saying "you are a glory hog".

Now it might be that I'm misreading it, and if you want to edit your post that is all well and good, but if you leave it as it is then I'm going to have to take some action against you, especially considering the fact that I've already had to give one warning in this thread.

 

[Storminator]

As for what suits me, a Striker is out of the question because I'd feel guilty getting benefits from a Warlord and giving him nothing in return.

You might want to check how your other players feel about that. I play a cleric, and I live to give our rogue attack bonuses.

You say you give the Warlord nothing in return.... what piles of dead foes no longer counts?!

PS