Warlove? Warhate?

[CleverNickName]

It's that time again, folks...another class released, another like-it-or-not poll. Come on, it's fun.

Earlier this week, Wizards of the Coast released a preview of the new-fangled Warlord class. Now that everyone has had a chance to debate the finer points of this scoop, I wonder how this board feels about it in a general sense. Are you liking it, for the most part? Or is it just not your bag?

Yes, this is a binary poll...if you are still on the fence about the Warlord (as most of us are, since the books haven't been released yet), just vote in the direction you are leaning.

 

[DanChops]

I loved the concept of the Marshal class when it came out in the MHB, and am thrilled to see it reborn as a tactically interesting, role-play possibility rich class in 4E.

 

[Dausuul]

Some of the fluff on the abilities is a bit off, and I'd prefer "warleader" to "warlord," but in general I like it.

 

[Torchlyte]

I hated it before the writeup, now I'm leaning on the positive side.

 

[Black Knight Irios]

*Weeeeeeeeeeeeeeh*

Waryet waranother warwar-warthread!!!


I still like the warlord and I don't think that will change.

 

[Dunamin]

Hmm, I can't make up my mind about it, though I suppose I'm slighly positive for now.

On one hand I love the concept, the flavor, and the fact that Intelligence and Charisma are the most important abilities after Strength. Conceptually, it’s pretty much the warrior I've always wanted to play. Also, it’s impressively distinct from the other Leader class in the PHB, the cleric.

On the other hand, I've yet to see a Warlord power that really makes me go "wow, that is awesome!" to the same extent as with other classes. I'm also slightly concerned about the absence of heavy armor training even though it’s a melee-focused class, though I suppose their AC should still be ok in light armor due to decent Int.

I do like Commanding Presence though and Pin the Foe seems fairly decent for a level 1 daily. Also, roleplay-wise there’s great potential and it’s very much in sync with how I play most of my warrior-based characters. I'm definitely looking forward to check out the full product.

 

[FreeXenon]

I was really stoked when I initially heard about it, now I am kind of meh.

I really need to see more, especially the At-will abilities, assuming they get them.
Perhaps they get the aura-type abilities in place of at will abilities?

 

[CleverNickName]

I like the concept...a good leader, without all of the divine flavor or magical horse. It's like a martial paladin.

I'm not liking many of these abilities, though. All of the emphasis on squares and movement really amplifies the "boardgamey" feel of 4E. Not a good thing.

And I really don't like the name. Knight, Marshal, Commander, even Soldier would have been better choices, IMO. But that horse carcass has been flogged for months in other threads. The book has already been printed. I will just have to roll my eyes and deal with it.

 

[Sphyre]

Ever since the first announcement of the Warlord, I've kept my opinion to myself. I didn't care for it because it didn't look like a class that I'd like to play.

Everything has confirmed that since then. That said, I still don't see why that's a problem. I think it's good to have a martial leader, but that doesn't mean I'd like playing one. I'm actually quite interested in a fighter much more than before. I like the idea of the fighter marking system and making it hard for things to get away. It really makes the fighter a "up in your face" kind of guy. I'm not against the warlord at all, I just feel it's not targeted towards me.

 

[Kzach]

I quite like it now that I've seen the capability for it in the system and how it would interact in and benefit a party.

Having said that, I still think the name sucks