Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Guest 6801328" data-source="post: 7047747">Popping by to add my 7 cents:1) I'm not sure I buy that the Warlord "controversy" is driven by 4e-haters who have chosen the Warlord as the poster child for everything they didn't like about that edition (or whatever that exact reasoning was.)  Given that the number of classes exploded in 3 and 4, and now we only have a handful, I have to wonder where the zealous, uncompromising defenders of those other missing classes are?  Sure, here and there is somebody looking for a Hexblade or a Runepriest or a...something (look I'm making this part up because I don't know what those classes are) but nowhere is there a relentless drumbeat of demand that comes anywhere close to that for the Warlord.  So clearly there's pro-Warlord zealotry going on.2) Just to distinguish my concerns from Corwin, I'm not basing my opposition on the fear that some jerk is going to play the leader aspects of his Warlord to the hilt and be a nuisance at the table, any more than I'm concerned about some jerk playing the pious aspects of his Paladin to the hilt and being a nuisance at the table.  That concern has nothing to do with my argument about the nature of a "Leader" class, which is based on the premise of such a class itself, not its vulnerability to abuse.3) I love paladins.  (On the other hand, I loathe the rapier, so I'm with lowkey on that one and agree with pretty much everything he said in that thread, but couldn't say so because he has me blocked...)</blockquote>

Verification