Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="drothgery" data-source="post: 1591539" data-attributes="member: 360">Hmm...Barbarian - has skill points, and is certainly impressive enough in battle to win the respect of the grunts, but no knowledge skills are class skills, and intimidate's the only social skill that is. So if a barbarian is going to lead a civilized army (rather than a barbarian horde), he'll probably be high level with surprising Int for a barbarian, or multi-classed. Can't be lawful, but that's not too much of a problem. Bard - has all the social skills, and class abilities you'd want. Spells aren't too shabby. Not all that great in melee, and typically not tempermentally suited to command. Could certainly be done, though it'd be weird. Cleric - good melee abilities (especially with the right domains), good spells, and can claim divine favor. Often expereinced with leadership roles. But of the social skills, only Diplomacy is a class skill by default. A high-int Cleric with the Knowledge and War domains would make an excellent general. Druid - Can be devastatingly effective in battle, and has 4 skill points/level, but only one social skill (Diplomacy) is a class skill, and tend to be loners. Not very fond of civilization. It'd be a very rare druid who takes command of an army. Figher - Certainly the best in melee, which helps with impressing the men, but with few skill points and neither knowledge skills nor social skills as class skills, probably should pick up a PrC before moving to a leadership role. Monk - Stylisticly a hit&run type, which may be effective, but doesn't impress your average soldier. Usually favor small groups. Some social skills (diplomacy, sense motive) and 4 skill points per level. Monk generals will only be slightly more common than Druids. Paladin - See Cleric, except that the Paladin is typically more charismatic, and has Sense Motive as well as diplomacy. If almost no one in your army is evil, Paladins make excellent generals, except that they tend to have a bad habit of involving themselves in the fighting. Ranger - May rise from the ranks of scouts. Neither social skills nor knowledge (tactics) are class skills, but with 6 skill points/level, a ranger can afford to buy ranks cross-class. Rangers are better at leading a commando team than a whole army, but still would make decent generals. Rogue - May easily have the social skills and knowledge skills to be a good general, and may very well keep a generalship they were appointed to, but unlikely to work their way up the ranks (except in societies were assassination is considered an acceptable means of advancement). Sorcerer - High charisma and the typical role of a sorcerer (blow stuff up with magic) are likely to impress common soldiers. But Bluff is the only social skill that's a class skill, and with only 2 skill points/level, is unlikely to have dropped points into cross-class skills. If a sorcerer leads an army, it's by force of personality, and probably wins battles mostly because of his magic, not his command ability. Wizard - Has knowledge skills and the Int to use them, plus the wizard's broad array of spells. Not likely to be a charismatic leader, but could do well with underlings who manage the firing-up-the troops well.</blockquote>

Verification