Warlord: STR-primary, not so much...

Tony Vargas

Legend
This is not forked from the closed Warlord thread, honest.

All classes have a primary stat (or two) that are used to determine whether thier powers hit. For most classes, nothing else is quite as important as getting that stat as high as is pheasible (only the increasing costs of 17s & 18s gets in the way).

The warlord might be an exception to that. The warlord gains substantial benefits from his build's secondary stat (via Commanding Presence and the occassional utility power), while most other classes benefit from secondary stats mainly when thier powers hit. The warlord also has some powers, including at-wills, that have desireable effects on a miss (like Wolf Pack Tactics) and even an at-will that doesn't require him to make an attack roll /at all/.

Given that, a warlord could skimp on STR. You could even have a warlord build around something like Hammer Rythm, who concentrated almost exclusively on powers that have good effects (other than damage) on a miss, and concentrate on his secondary stat & CON (1/2 elf inspiring warlord, for instance), doing as much or more damage on a miss as a hit. It'd be out there, but it might work. He could even multiclass to swap out levels where there are no powers that fit the bill for another classes power that uses his higher secondary stat to hit or is reliable.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Hawkeye

First Post
I play a tactical warlord and his primary stat is Intelligence, followed by strength and then con. I haven't had a combat yet where my attacks have missed by only a single point.

Hawkeye
 

xazil

Explorer
I have a gnome warlord who is built like that and performs quite well despite having STR as a tertiary ability. On the other hand although in the main campaign I DM the warlord definately feels he has to hit to contribute his own in combat as none of the other characters have a decent basic melee attack.
 


Wik

First Post
This is silly. A Warlord with high strength will 100% of the time be better than a warlord with low strength.

100%.


I dunno. I think if you put your points into int instead of str, you can make a pretty good warlord. And if you made str your tetriary ability (going int and cha), your warlord can still be pretty awesome.

Compare that to a fighter, for example, who made str his tertiary ability.
 

The Human Target

Adventurer
But you have to bear in mind that a lot of Warlord powers only do secondary things on a hit, which means that STR is still the most important stat for them as it determines their ability to get powers to activate.
 

cmbarona

First Post
Agreed. While there are a handful of powers that don't require the Warlord to hit (and therefore require STR), Hammer and Anvil is not one of them. I might be able to change my mind if someone posted a non-attacking Warlord build, but I just don't see it.
 

Hawkeye

First Post
This is silly. A Warlord with high strength will 100% of the time be better than a warlord with low strength.

100%.

I'll have to disagree here with you. The difference in the bonus granted by my warlord's intelligence vs his strength is 1. Again, I haven't had a combat situation where I have missed because of that one point. However, when using something like Lead the Attack, my allies have benefited from the extra +1 that the intelligence bonus gave them (+4 total currently.)

Hawkeye
 

cmbarona

First Post
Then in your case your Warlord does have high strength. Not as high as intelligence, but still high. The point being made is that strength is not and cannot be a dump stat for Warlords*, unless you forego many of the powers at their disposal. Hammer and Anvil, for example, requires Warlords to hit before granting a Melee Basic Attack. If you miss, no MBA. Show me a build through 30 where the Warlord only grants attacks, and I might change my position. Until then, I still think strength is important.

*For the sake of clarity, "dump stat" refers to a strength of 8, 10, or 12. 14 is debateable in my book.
 

Hawkeye

First Post
Yes, but the argument isn't that the Warlord can use Strength as a "dump" stat, but that they can give what the rules consider their secondary or tertiary stats higher consideration over strength. That's what I have done What you are talking about is someone playing a rogue with an 8 as an example. Not quite the same thing. I agree with you, that a Warlord with an 8 strength is at a severe disadvantage. A warlord with a 16 strength isn't 100% than one with a 14 strength.

Hawkeye
 

Remove ads

AD6_gamerati_skyscraper

Remove ads

Recent & Upcoming Releases

Top