Level Up (A5E) What would you call a 'Warlord' class? (+)

[Lanefan]

The more I think about it the more I like Commander. The only real downside is people worrying about the "I'm the leader!" issue, and I think that would be pretty rare. And in many cases the character that the Warlord/Commander embodies is a leader or commander type character.

On the criticism of Tactician being too focused on intelligence, what stat is this character class going to use? Do you honestly expect a class that can use intelligence, wisdom or charisma? Any of the three? That would be unique among all of the character classes. Wouldn't it be best to just pick one and stick with it? If the character class is focused on intelligence I think the tactician would be a good name. But I think Commander feels more powerful, and would fit regardless of the primary stat used.

The problem with Commander as a name is its counterintuitivity: to me that name very strongly implies that whoever is playing one is in command of the party. Most new players on seeing that as a class name would likely leap to the same conclusion and then have to be talked out of it. Why even set this misinterpretation up to happen in the first place?

Same goes for all the other rank-like name ideas e.g. General, Captain, etc.

Now if the intent is to have it that playing this class does give that player some sort of command of the party, then the name is perfect. But given as that seems an extremely unlikely design goal, on the list presented Tactician is by far the best option. That said, there's gotta be something better, though no ideas are leaping out at me.

 

[turnip_farmer]

Synergist.

Sounds like something I would hear about while sitting through Marketing's tedious presentation on the latest branding redesign at work.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Bob

 

[Tales and Chronicles]

When I wrote my own ''warlord'' class for 5e, I tackled directly the idea of having a character being in command of the group only because of its class choice; I called it the Companion. It forced the idea of a character that was better when fighting WITH his party, making sure the Help action was front and center.

Think Sam Gamgee: the class.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Sounds like something I would hear about while sitting through Marketing's tedious presentation on the latest branding redesign at work.

Consignia

 

[Auramancer]

“Officer”?

Avoids the concerns about high ranks, can be applied to both military and civil/criminal organizations.

 

[Remathilis]

Here is something to think about...

There are thirteen backgrounds in the PHB (plus variants). Combine them with the class name you prefer and see if any of them sounds odd or nonsensical. Then try it with your next favorite, etc. The one with the least amount of WTF combos should probably be the name.

 

[TheSword]

I like tactician at first glance. But then I realize that it implies other classes aren’t tactical which is clearly not the case.

 

[Minigiant]

It might be going the wrong way but.

I'm more in favor of taking the combat skill out the class and calling the class the Scholar. Tactics, Medicine, Speechcraft, Technology, and Lore would be the class' thing. So a Warlord would be a Fighter/Scholar multiclass who focuses on Defense, Tactics, and Speechcraft.

But that's going the other way. However it does clear up the confusion that the "Warlord" is the party leader. They are just Brains in the Smart Club with the Wizard or the Face in the Cool Club with the Bard, Paladin, Sorcerer and Warlock.

 

[DemoMonkey]

I think people are right that "Warlord" has too many real world negative connotations.

How about "Overseer". That's a nice neutral term.