[4E] Leaders

[Hzurr]

So I finally got a chance to read the bard preview (Apparently, you don't need a DDI subscription to read the French version of the preview articles), and I really liked it, so it got me thinking about leaders a bit, and the differences between them. As far as I can tell, here's a quick rundown over the 3 different leader classes:

1) Cleric - Focuses on healing, better than anyone else. Aside from healing, does a lot on buffing fellow party members.
2) Warlord - Focuses on combat aid. Increases damage, increases party mobility, and makes the party more effective in combat
3) Bard - Focuses on protecting the party. Has a lot of ways to prevent enemies from attacking party members (through things like granting invisibility, sliding party members out of the way, or forcing marks). Tends to be a bit more reactive than the other two.

I'm not really sure where to classify the artificer (mainly because I haven't gotten to look at it in several months).

So...am I identifying their (sub)roles correctly? In play, I've seen how differently the warlord and the cleric are from one another, but I'm curious to see how different the bard or artificer play.

Also, what other type of leader sub-roles do you see coming out of 4E?

[Tengu_temp]

Warlord is also a respectable damage dealer on his own - the damage of his attacks grows on only a slightly slower rate than Fighter's.

http://www.joystiq.com/media/2006/1/Psychonauts-Raz.jpg
"Which is awesome."

[Asbestos]

Having just looked at the artificer (which is available to everyone still, here (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/drfe/20080702)) I still don't really know where it fits in there. Its a lot of AC boosts for allies and boosts to damage against enemies and has some controller powers (acid walls, ranged bursts, etc) thrown in as well.

I'm terribly curious as to what the Shaman will be... (think it previews next week)

[Aron Times]

Having a warlord in the party, especially a tactical warlord, drastically increases the party's burst DPR. They basically enable the party to defeat the enemy faster.

A cleric, on the other hand, increases the party's survivability. They allow the party to survive longer than normal.

The bard and the artificer are leaders who dabble a bit as controllers. They offer a mix of offensive and defensive buffs to the party, in addition to hindering the enemy's actions.

Personally, I like the warlord because he multiclasses well into wizard and sorcerer. That and playing a warlord feels like being Lelouch from Code Geass.

[TheEmerged]

Keep in mind, warlords in 4e can heal too (Inspiring Word).

[Tengu_temp]

Warlords in general are made of win. Pretty versatile, too - they have the best defense from non-defenders, good damage potential, good healing and great buffs.

[Aoric]

yeah, the Warlord in our party is super versatile, acting as a quasi-defender, quasi-cleric, and as the actual "leader" of the party during non-combat RPing.

We only have one defender, so the warlord is up there all the time, working with the fighter - usually to real good effect. As we have no cleric, his inspiring word comes in real handy.

[Hzurr]

Keep in mind, warlords in 4e can heal too (Inspiring Word).

All leaders can heal in some way Bards simply aren't as good as the cleric or warlord (their "inspiring word" type ability does 1d6 less healing, but you can shift your allies a space), and while artificers don't heal nearly as much, they can give temporary hit points to all allies in a burst. The point was simply that Clerics heal best. By a long, long margin.

-Edit- Ahh, I should have looked at artificer more closely. They also have the healing infusion power, which works exactly like the "Inspiring word" power. I guess this means that bards are at the low end of the healing spectrum