PDA

View Full Version : Design and Development: The Warlord



Morty
2008-03-15, 07:18 AM
WoTC put up A Warlord Article (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/drdd/20080314&authentic=true) on their site, and I didn't see any thread about it.
So, what do you think? I must say I'm pleasantly surprised by the lack of "It's so cool" rethoric and poinless banter and the class looks interesting- I sort of missed that type of class in 3ed.

RTGoodman
2008-03-15, 07:34 AM
Article posted for those unfortunate souls who can't access it from wherever they are.

Number One: Directing Damage

Don't play the warlord if your only idea of a good time is personally wreaking havoc on your foes. I love the name of the warlord class. I supported using the name instead of the original "marshal" name we'd drafted from 3rd Edition. But some players' first impression on hearing the name "warlord" is that the class must be tougher than all the other characters, the nastiest battlefield hack-and-slasher in the game. The warlord can hold his own in melee and will frequently save the day thanks to outright combat mojo, but every warlord is more effective as a commander than as a lone hero.

For example, the warlord's 1st-level daily attack power, pin the foe, does as much damage as the best of the fighter's 1st-level daily attack powers, brute strike. Pin the foe's advantage is that it locks down the target's movement whether the attack hits or misses. This pin effect only functions if the warlord has allies with him to team against the enemy. So the power might be a big enough hit to slay the enemy outright. But against an extremely tough foe, or when pin the foe misses, the power creates a tactical advantage that depends on teamwork between multiple party members to keep the target from shifting freely around the battlefield.

At that stage, with an enemy who is pinned and fighting to the last breath, the warlord isn't as likely to be the party member who gets in the killing blow. Take a look at the fighter's brute strike power again. While the warlord's cool 1st-level daily exploit sets up a teamwork benefit, brute strike has the keyword "Reliable," meaning that the power isn't expended if the attack misses. Eventually, as long as the fighter is alive to swing, that brute strike is going to connect -- the warlord doesn't have that certainty. If you're the player who always wants to be finisher, the party's sword-wielding ass-kicker, play a rogue, ranger, or a fighter who uses two-handed weapons.

Pin the Foe Warlord Attack 1
No matter where your foe turns, one of your allies is waiting for him.
Daily
Martial, Weapon
Standard Action
Melee weapon
Target: One creature
Attack: Strength vs. AC
Hit: 3[W] + Strength modifier damage.
Effect: Until the end of the encounter, the target cannot shift if at least two of your allies (or you and one ally) are adjacent to it.

Brute Strike Fighter Attack 1
You shatter armor and bone with a ringing blow.
Daily
Martial, Reliable, Weapon
Standard Action
Melee weapon
Target: One creature
Attack: Strength vs. AC
Hit: 3[W] + Strength modifier damage.

Number Two: Play Well with Others

This is the shiny-happy side of the previous commandment. Fourth edition has fundamentally selfish classes that care only about their own combat tricks and successes. Fourth edition also has extremely unselfish classes, and that's where the warlord fits in. Different players at the table are likely to take a different approach to the combat encounter portion of the game. If you enjoy cooperative games like Reiner Knezia's Lord of the Rings boardgame or Shadows over Camelot, you're much more likely to enjoy playing a warlord. For example, your warlord can provide the entire party with an extra movement option with a power such as white raven onslaught.

During the early stages of design, we often used a sports metaphor, casting the warlord as the quarterback. Now that I think about it, I'm not sure quarterback is the right analogy -- after all, quarterbacks tend to land a huge percentage of the glory, MVP awards, and Hollywood girlfriends! Basketball point guard may be a more apt comparison. Not every combat depends on the warlord/point guard, but they distribute benefits the rest of the party thrives on. Without the warlord's assists, the party is often left only to its own devices, which might not be enough to triumph in a given encounter. You can operate without a warlord, but when you get to the playoffs against powerful competition, parties that don't have a warlord (or possibly some other to-be-designed tactical leader) have a rougher time of it. If you feel a glow of accomplishment when your assists combine with your attacks' damage to help the party succeed, the warlord is for you.

White Raven Onslaught Warlord Attack 1
You lead the way with a powerful attack, using your success to create an opportunity for one of your allies. Each of your comrades in turn seizes on your example and begins to display true teamwork.
Daily
Martial, Weapon
Standard Action
Melee weapon
Target: One creature
Attack: Strength vs. AC
Hit: 3[W] + Strength modifier damage, and you slide an adjacent ally 1 square. Until the end of the encounter, whenever you or an ally within 10 squares of you makes a successful attack, the attacker slides an adjacent ally 1 square.
Miss: Choose one ally within 10 squares. Until the end of the encounter, the ally slides an adjacent ally 1 square after making a successful attack.

Number Three: Order Up!

If you often find yourself suggesting a tactical course of action to your fellow players, the warlord might be for you. Back when we designed the original version of the marshal class for the Miniatures Handbook, the marshal owed a good deal to the vision and example of Skaff Elias. Skaff is famous for having excellent suggestions for what other players should be doing with their turns. The warlord class, as a descendant of the marshal, is partly an exercise in turning that sometimes annoying habit into a positive contribution that will be appreciated by other players, rather than resented.

Iron dragon charge is an example of how we're trying to make this type of guidance a welcome addition to another character's glory. Getting to charge as an immediate reaction when it's not your turn is a fantastic addition to any melee character's life, not an onerous order that forces your ally to spend their turn following your commands. Few players complain when the warlord in the party uses a well-timed exploit to give their PC a charge, another basic attack, or the chance to shift away from encroaching foes. Ditto for warlord powers that simultaneously allow the warlord to attack and inspire his allies to attempt a saving throw or recover hit points.

The warlord doesn't have unlimited license to boss other players around. Taken to extremes, that style of gameplay is still annoying. But if you're the type of player who loves studying tactical situations and trying to puzzle out the best way to get everyone through alive, the warlord provides roleplaying hooks and flexible powers to support your play style in a way that will endear you to your allies.

Iron Dragon Charge Warlord Attack 9
Like a rampaging iron dragon, you hurl yourself at your adversary, landing a terrific blow that inspires your allies to charge as well.
Daily
Martial, Weapon
Standard Action
Melee weapon
Target: One creature
Attack: Strength vs. AC
Special: You must charge as part of this attack.
Hit: 3[W] + Strength modifier damage.
Effect: Until the end of the encounter, as an immediate reaction, an ally of your choice within 5 squares of you can charge a target that you charge.


Looking at some of the cool goodies that Warlords are gonna get, looks like that may be the first 4E I roll.

Grey Watcher
2008-03-15, 07:38 AM
I really liked reading it, too.

I'm glad that, unlike the 3e Marshal or the Bard, you get to actually do stuff to be a leader, as opposed to hang around granting passive bonuses while looking like a Medium- (or Small-) sized target.

SamTheCleric
2008-03-15, 07:40 AM
Like I've been saying... take the bard... add in the marshal... let simmer on high... and you've got a warlord. :smalltongue:

KIDS
2008-03-15, 08:33 AM
I really like it and am glad to see all fears about improper class naming leaking into its class features. I'm also overjoyed to see the White Raven's legacy preserved. However, one thing is puzzling...


"whenever you or an ally within 10 squares of you makes a successful attack, the attacker slides an adjacent ally 1 square."

attacker? why would the attacker slide anyone when you hit someone, or I'm reading it wrong?

Lord Lorac Silvanos
2008-03-15, 08:45 AM
attacker? why would the attacker slide anyone when you hit someone, or I'm reading it wrong?

You and every ally within 10 squares may do the following when attacking if you have used White Raven Onslaught.

1. Attacker (you or an ally within 10 squares) hits.
2. Attacker checks to see if there is any allies in the adjacent squares.
3. If so, the attacker decides whether to slide one adjacent ally one square.

Zincorium
2008-03-15, 08:46 AM
attacker? why would the attacker slide anyone when you hit someone, or I'm reading it wrong?

I think it's an abstraction of you beating someone back while someone else slips past/continues moving forward.

While I don't have much to go on, I'm guessing it's a way of keeping someone from getting stuck in a useless positoin during their turn.

Dragonmuncher
2008-03-15, 10:35 AM
Sounds neat. I just really dislike the names- Iron Dragon Charge, White Raven Onslaught... blech.

Pin the Foe is fine, but that other stuff just sounds goofy. Wasn't there a big reaction against something like "Nine Dragon Tail Sweep" or the like in a preview a while back?

TheThan
2008-03-15, 10:51 AM
It seems interesting and potentially very good. But Id rather have the bard back.

Scintillatus
2008-03-15, 11:18 AM
The Bard's gone? Hell no. He's even more badass than he was before.

*flips through Races and Classes*

"A master of artistry and social grace, a Bard is a Leader who wields magic both dramatic and subtle. Harnessing a natural talent for creativity (be it song, painting, dance, or oratory) a Bard draws magic from otherworldly patrons that admire the Bard's work."

Bards no longer "sing at monsters"; they rock out so hard that the Gods start headbanging.

Arakune
2008-03-15, 11:46 AM
Bards no longer "sing at monsters"; they rock out so hard that the Gods start headbanging.

Fear the power of the god of METAL!!!

KIDS
2008-03-15, 11:57 AM
It seems closer to my senses now, thanks for the explanation :)

The J Pizzel
2008-03-15, 12:04 PM
Iron Dragon Charge looks pretty cool. One of my players (currently a Warblade) loves to charge. He'll probably like this.

jP

Azerian Kelimon
2008-03-15, 12:06 PM
What, my bard can finally play Holy diver and an angel actually comes down and gives everyone kickassery bonuses? HELL FRICKIN YEAH!

And the warlord is really nice too. The only thing I'm curious about is how the fighter's damage will scale, because if he has the same power scale as the warlord, he's again rendered obsolete, but not by NON spellcasters.

Haruspex
2008-03-15, 12:24 PM
Sounds neat. I just really dislike the names- Iron Dragon Charge, White Raven Onslaught... blech.

Pin the Foe is fine, but that other stuff just sounds goofy. Wasn't there a big reaction against something like "Nine Dragon Tail Sweep" or the like in a preview a while back?

The default names need to be exciting and I guess. Straightforward attack names like Cleave, Brute Strike, Tide Of Iron, and Passing Attack were already taken by the Fighter. So the Warlord being more of a leader, perhaps is more likely to view combat in a philosophical manner hence the fancy animal-inspired names.

MorkaisChosen
2008-03-15, 12:31 PM
I think it's because it's quite a ToB-style class- the tactical martial fighter. White Raven is dircetly from there, and Iron Dragon's similar.

I like the look of the class- it's a pretty good one for the Knight archetype (helping their alies and shouting at people...).

horseboy
2008-03-15, 12:52 PM
I read Iron Dragon and all I kept hearing my mind was an UrQuan shouting "LAUNCH FIGHTER". I wonder what's going to keep 4 warlords from simu-smacking the crap out of something.

Tren
2008-03-15, 01:33 PM
And the warlord is really nice too. The only thing I'm curious about is how the fighter's damage will scale, because if he has the same power scale as the warlord, he's again rendered obsolete, but not by NON spellcasters.

Technically neither class is meant as a striker anyway, the fighter is a defender (which in his case seems to also imply some battlefield control) and the warlord obviously a leader. And based on the comparison they showed of their powers, it seems like they're supposed to be roughly equal in damage from abilities. If that's the case I wouldn't have a problem with it, both are front-line combatants and neither is meant to particularly focus on raw damage.

Azerian Kelimon
2008-03-15, 01:51 PM
That makes no sense. A Rogue is theoretically supposed to do more damage than a fighter in 3.5, but a fighter is also supposed to do more damage than a cleric. Same thing here, and don't get me started on the ridiculousness of a fighter being a defender.

Beleriphon
2008-03-15, 02:02 PM
And the warlord is really nice too. The only thing I'm curious about is how the fighter's damage will scale, because if he has the same power scale as the warlord, he's again rendered obsolete, but not by NON spellcasters.

Even if they keep the same scale of damage the different effects from the attack other than straight damage will keep them far enough apart that it shouldn't matter. Also note the fighter gets and ability that if it fails to hit he can try to use again.

Azerian Kelimon
2008-03-15, 02:09 PM
Yeah. And one use anyway if it hits. If at least it was something like 1/hour, well, it would actually be useful, but if the option is always missing or using up your daily, it's a lose-lose situation.

For all we can see (And I KNOW, it's too soon to make comparisons, etc., thank you very much, now let the debate proceed), a warlord would get all the damage of a fighter, plus the chance to oneshot an enemy with the help of allies. Not a good thing, I'm tellin' you that. We'll have to wait, but if the fighter doesn't get a correspondingly kickass effect (You can use this power three times per day, dazes for 2 rounds if the target makes the saving throw, stuns for 1d4 round + your STR modifier if you hit, reliable), we'll be seeing the fighter relegated much like it happends in 3.5, but by a non spellcaster.

Beleriphon
2008-03-15, 03:10 PM
Yeah. And one use anyway if it hits. If at least it was something like 1/hour, well, it would actually be useful, but if the option is always missing or using up your daily, it's a lose-lose situation.

Yeah, but he gets a retry effect. Thats still good.


For all we can see (And I KNOW, it's too soon to make comparisons, etc., thank you very much, now let the debate proceed), a warlord would get all the damage of a fighter, plus the chance to oneshot an enemy with the help of allies. Not a good thing, I'm tellin' you that. We'll have to wait, but if the fighter doesn't get a correspondingly kickass effect (You can use this power three times per day, dazes for 2 rounds if the target makes the saving throw, stuns for 1d4 round + your STR modifier if you hit, reliable), we'll be seeing the fighter relegated much like it happends in 3.5, but by a non spellcaster.

Lets keep in mind that we have no idea what side effects the corresponding effects from the fighter's first level daily ability will actually do. For all we know it will knock the target prone, making them not move, and he gets a free attack when they stand. The whole point of the fighter is that he's a defender, he shouldn't be dealing big, big damage (that's the rogue's job), but he should be soaking up damage and keeping enemies in place.

I think one needs to keep mind the type of equipment that a fighter can use, combined with what his other abilities might entail. He one big per day ability may compare with the warlord, but he at will or per encounter could be considerably more powerful from a straight combat perspective.

Azerian Kelimon
2008-03-15, 03:24 PM
Lussmanj explained what brute strike did in his thread, so we DO know. Incidentally, I believe it says in the sheets that hit at will and per encounter powers do 1.5 and 2 times the damage + bonus.

Now, let's imagine what a warlord can do.

Make a character have a more powerful healing surge? Check, one of the abilities of Leader's.

Grant bonuses to allies with his powers? Check, another leader feature.

(Speculation) Grant an ally more things to do by using a Warlord's powers? Probably, a lighter version of the iron dragon's charge should be one level 1 power, likely.

Now, imagine that every encounter, you can get an ally to have a freebie attack. That can get out of hand, quick. Imagine a rogue, who gets combat advantage from that. One power later, the foe is at 25% health.

Meanwhile, the fighter is smacking him for average damage every time he moves out of his range. Boo-hoo. Acrobatics, flight, or anything like that and the foe is far away and ready to unleash hell on the incompetent nincompoop who wanted to stop him from getting away.

Granted, I'm exaggerating, and this is Wild Individual Guessing, but I doubt this is going to be too far away from reality. Comparing, a Fighter's skills seem lackluster. A fighter should be doing very, very serious damage (Though situationally, such as if the foe attempts to flee), even over the rogue, who can do it most of the time, to penalize a foe to balance the equation, or he must be able to inflict some very serious penalties, such as the aforementioned stun, or a grossly lowered AC, or attacks doing nil damage. Else, we get the cleric effect again, with characters who don't have a "smack things with pointy sticks" as their job description outshining the fighter. Of which I'm very afraid of, since 4e has mostly solved problems that have been rather serious in my games, from what I've been able to glean.

Roderick_BR
2008-03-15, 03:49 PM
Interesting. The warlord can maneuver allies to create effects in-game. More fun than the 3e marshal, indeed. At least it is giving reasons on why his abilities are martial, instead of "magic that is not called magic".
The others 2 moves looks like some abilities from Tome of Battle. I like the flavour of the 1st one, where you actively unbalances foes to make them easier to hit by your allies. It's like a revert Opportunist ability.
And the brutal strike looks like 4e's version of the power attack. Kinda weird that you can use it once a day, though. "Hey, hit him hard again" "I don't feel like it".

ImperiousLeader
2008-03-15, 03:58 PM
What's interesting is that the Warlord looks like it'll play quite differently from the other classes. Most classes will hold onto their daily powers, using them as a last resort, or attempt to set up situations where their dailies will definitely hit. Warlords, however, almost want to open an encounter with a daily, as it's effects will linger throughout the encounter, so the earlier the use, the more advantage one gets. This means Warlords will be looking at the situation initially, and decide within a turn or two, whether this encounter will require the use of a daily power.

Reel On, Love
2008-03-15, 04:53 PM
Now, imagine that every encounter, you can get an ally to have a freebie attack. That can get out of hand, quick. Imagine a rogue, who gets combat advantage from that. One power later, the foe is at 25% health.

Meanwhile, the fighter is smacking him for average damage every time he moves out of his range. Boo-hoo. Acrobatics, flight, or anything like that and the foe is far away and ready to unleash hell on the incompetent nincompoop who wanted to stop him from getting away.
Somehow, I think they handled it.
Imagine that the Warlord's daily power misses and is wasted. Meanwhile, the Fighter's daily power was labeled Reliable, which I've read means that if they miss with it, it's NOT used up.

[quoteGranted, I'm exaggerating, and this is Wild Individual Guessing, but I doubt this is going to be too far away from reality. Comparing, a Fighter's skills seem lackluster. A fighter should be doing very, very serious damage (Though situationally, such as if the foe attempts to flee), even over the rogue, who can do it most of the time, to penalize a foe to balance the equation, or he must be able to inflict some very serious penalties, such as the aforementioned stun, or a grossly lowered AC, or attacks doing nil damage. Else, we get the cleric effect again, with characters who don't have a "smack things with pointy sticks" as their job description outshining the fighter. Of which I'm very afraid of, since 4e has mostly solved problems that have been rather serious in my games, from what I've been able to glean.[/QUOTE]
Given that they knew this was one of the big problems with 3.5, I really doubt that they replicated it. Wait until you've seen more fighter abilities/powers than the level 1 ones.

There's an enormous amount of speculation here. The Fighter will almost certainly be just fine.

Tren
2008-03-15, 05:44 PM
There's an enormous amount of speculation here. The Fighter will almost certainly be just fine.

You never know, they might screw up everything past level 1, but based on the power comparison we've seen-- the fighter gets a guaranteed (eventual) hit for 3W, the warlord gets a chance for 3W damage and a minor situational bonus in combat-- that seems reasonably balanced to me.

The_Snark
2008-03-15, 06:11 PM
That makes no sense. A Rogue is theoretically supposed to do more damage than a fighter in 3.5, but a fighter is also supposed to do more damage than a cleric. Same thing here, and don't get me started on the ridiculousness of a fighter being a defender.

Er, why should the fighter not be a defender? It seems to me that if the fighter's role is going to be a defender, he's going to get abilities that have to do with that. The warlord deals some extra damage and gives his allies tactical options, the fighter deals some extra damage and helps defend his allies, the rogue or whatever does nasty things to the enemy and prays not to get hit too often.

I'm sort of betting that the fighter will have abilities vaguely similar to that of the crusader and knight in 3.5; imposing penalties on attacks made against nearby allies rather than against the fighter, making it harder for enemies to slip past, possibly abilities that let the fighter make immediate attacks against enemies who ignore it in favor of other party members. This is all speculation too, of course, but the crusader is considered a very effective tank class, and this article has shown that they're taking quite a lot out of Tome of Battle.

namo
2008-03-15, 09:14 PM
@Snark : I can't remember where, but I seem to remember someone mentioning Fighter powers that basically recreate Lockdown (Thicket of Blades + Standstill). That's pretty good if you ask me.

Reel On, Love
2008-03-15, 09:29 PM
You never know, they might screw up everything past level 1, but based on the power comparison we've seen-- the fighter gets a guaranteed (eventual) hit for 3W, the warlord gets a chance for 3W damage and a minor situational bonus in combat-- that seems reasonably balanced to me.

They might, yeah. I don't think they will, especially with the more-linear scaling.

Furthermore, because of the nature of the system, if there are problems, the problems will almost certainly be with individual powers, which makes both errata and simple house-rule fixing a lot easier than balancing classes against each other. Is the Fighter's One Punch! ONE PUNCH! power doing way more damage than any power of equal level? Fixing that power is pretty easy.

RTGoodman
2008-03-15, 09:43 PM
Regarding "Defenders" - I remember some source (I think maybe Races & Classes) saying that Fighters and Paladins are both Defenders, but they do so in different ways. A Paladin defends by giving his opponent penalties for not attacking the Paladin himself; the Fighter keeps the enemy locked down with enough damage that it's just better for the enemy to attack the Fighter instead of anyone else.

Terraoblivion
2008-03-15, 11:35 PM
I like the look of this class a lot. The fighter class was never good at emulating the warrior kings so common in the settings WotC themselves published in the past. And fighters being as dumb as a sack of bricks and with the charisma to match is a common stereotype of the game. The warlord fills that niche well. The fighter is the big brute who smashes the enemy whereas the warlord is the skilled warrior who can do more than just fight, but is presumably worse at plain fighting.

As for the powers revealed in the article they seem mostly solid and definitely play into the more positioning based gameplay that WotC is intending for 4e. If i recall what i read a short while ago all three of them deals with either allowing allies movement or denying enemies movement.

MorkaisChosen
2008-03-16, 07:39 AM
We've seen some Fighter abilities under Marking Marked- I think the Fighter was giving penalties to hit against everyone else with his marked enemies, while the Pally damaged them when they attacked anyone else or something like that. The Warlord doesn't seem to be using Marking so much, from what we've seen.

Arbitrarity
2008-03-16, 09:40 AM
Amusingly, I used the first 4E level characters in a once off against first level 3.5 characters, and the 4E's lost due to massive cheese and assault capability of the 3.5's. (sleep, swindlespitter dinosaurs, etc.).

I think the warlord's 1/day ability seems balanced enough. The reliable effect of Brute Strike is more useful than it might seem, and pinning the foe seems slightly situational. The manner in which warlord's should use their abilities early in a fight is quite interesting.

No, you can't yell "War Leader's Charge!" when you use Iron Dragon Charge. You can't yell "Iron Dragon Charge!" either. :smallannoyed:

Indon
2008-03-16, 09:59 AM
Well, the game still has immediate actions. That's nice.

I think I know what "golden wyvern" (from way long ago previews of 4'th edition stuff) means now, though - it's probably a reference to a spellcaster discipline, similar to White Raven and Iron Dragon.

Rutee
2008-03-16, 10:00 AM
No, you can't yell "War Leader's Charge!" when you use Iron Dragon Charge. You can't yell "Iron Dragon Charge!" either. :smallannoyed:

Aw. What about FALCON... PUNCH! for Brute Strike?

On topic, I dig the Warlord a great deal. It seems a worthy replacement for the Bard, even if it is a fair bit different. I do hope that ally sliding is considered optional (That is, the slid ally can opt not to slide), though. It does feel a /little/ weird that their first Daily hits as hard as Brute STrike, but it may be balanced.

Indon
2008-03-16, 10:09 AM
It does feel a /little/ weird that their first Daily hits as hard as Brute STrike, but it may be balanced.

How's it weird? Neither class is a striker, they're probably designed to be about equal at dealing damage (the Fighter may be a _bit_ better, because it has less potent taunting abilities than the Paladin does, but that's probably in terms of average rather than max damage, which leads to things like the 'reliable' ability).

Kurald Galain
2008-03-16, 10:11 AM
Actually, it feels weirder that you can only move your team around if you whack an enemy, and that you can only succesfully "surround" (pin) an enemy if you hit him first. Apparently, clever tactics don't work on something with a high armor class.

Rutee
2008-03-16, 10:12 AM
Ah, I had forgotten that little tidbit. Still, I hope that a Fighter that /is/ set up to be a Striker can top it :P

MorkaisChosen
2008-03-16, 10:17 AM
Actually, it feels weirder that you can only move your team around if you whack an enemy, and that you can only succesfully "surround" (pin) an enemy if you hit him first. Apparently, clever tactics don't work on something with a high armor class.

The enemy has to be distracted before you can move your allies- you open up an opportunity for them to move and your ally takes the opportunity, dodging past the enemy while they're distracted.

Kurald Galain
2008-03-16, 10:30 AM
The enemy has to be distracted before you can move your allies- you open up an opportunity for them to move and your ally takes the opportunity, dodging past the enemy while they're distracted.
That would make sense if this power was only for moving people past enemies (which it's not) and if moving past enemies was normally impossible (which it's not either). Nope, doesn't work out.

Deepblue706
2008-03-16, 10:48 PM
Eh...I'm not really impressed. Doesn't look terrible, though. I guess, for what this edition appears to be going for, it works.

Oh, I actually liked the name Marshal more than Warlord, too.

Bleen
2008-03-17, 12:15 AM
Glad to see they took a less-hyped-up approach to this one than some of the previous stuff. If I can ever get a gang into 4e, I'll definitely be giving Warlord a spin, because I like the concept.

I doubt the Warrior will be rendered obsolete by a single move that is similar (but less-reliable) than one of his own. If I remember, his job isn't to churn out damage, it's to hold enemies down and make it disadvantageous for them to attack his squishier allies. Now, if he has an ability that nails a foe with a huge chunk of damage for trying to run away, or turning his back on the Fighter as he attempts to attack the nearby Rogue, that would be awesome. But his effectiveness isn't ranked solely by his damage output any more.

I'd be more worried about, say, whether or not he can keep enemies still and survive their blows than another "Protector" or whatever class.

Jothki
2008-03-17, 01:04 AM
Aw. What about FALCON... PUNCH! for Brute Strike?

On topic, I dig the Warlord a great deal. It seems a worthy replacement for the Bard, even if it is a fair bit different. I do hope that ally sliding is considered optional (That is, the slid ally can opt not to slide), though. It does feel a /little/ weird that their first Daily hits as hard as Brute STrike, but it may be balanced.

I'm curious about whether you can use the skill to slide "allies" off of a cliff. Would they stop being your allies before or after the effect triggered?

Thinking about it, it's actually possible to justify that use of the skill. If the victim trusts you enough, hearing a quick order to dodge into what they assume must be solid ground might be enough to send them over.

TheOOB
2008-03-17, 01:31 AM
I'm liking what I'm seeing. The class looks interesting, and will most likely be a good alternative to a cleric if you need a leader but don't want a divine caster.

That said, without seeing the system as a whole it's impossible to tell how balancing these abilities are, but they do seem fun.

Sebastian
2008-03-17, 04:28 AM
Somehow, I think they handled it.
Imagine that the Warlord's daily power misses and is wasted.

Maybe I'm reading it wrong but it seems the [effect] part always work, either if you hit or you miss.

Personally I don't like it, but because I don't like the 4e philosophy, it is just a bunch of cool mechanics with no real solid explanation or rational of how they work in game. actually some of the rules seems also a little shoddy, for example.


"whenever you or an ally within 10 squares of you makes a successful attack, the attacker slides an adjacent ally 1 square."

something I notice reading this.

A) it don't say the warlord need to be conscious for this power to work, it could be asleep, or even dying, or even dead and if someone hit an enmy within 10 squares of his body he can slide an adiacent ally 1 square
b) and how exactly this work? because from the way it is written even the adiacent ally don't need to be willing, able to move or even alive, does this mean I can slide a dying character out of way harm? certainly useful, but how does it work exactly? or that I can slide someone, i.e. grappled by a monster, like into a chocker's grasp? or even inside a gelatinous cube?
c) it don't say "attack an enemy" just a succesful attack. Can I attack i.e the ground if I absolutely, positively need to slide someone adiacent to me one square right now?

I hope the rest of 4e rule cover these situations because there is a lot of potential for abuse/nonsensical situations here, That is, unless I'm missing something really obvious.

Bleen
2008-03-17, 07:55 AM
I hope the rest of 4e rule cover these situations because there is a lot of potential for abuse/nonsensical situations here, That is, unless I'm missing something really obvious.
While I can't change your mind on Wizards' design philosophy of 4e (which I myself find to be quite a bit sketchy - I personally feel that 4e will by no means be a replacement for 3.5e but a system with a different 'feel' altogether, and I will probably shift between the two depending on my needs) - but it's noteworthy that what we see here is only an early look. There's a pretty derned high chance that when WoTC actually publishes the book, these rules will be more fleshed out - right now, they're just giving you a general idea of "What this guy does" from a basic perspective.

Basically, they're (hopefully) assuming common sense - You wouldn't slide 10ft off a cliff, and said slide is most likely going to be optional anyway, and most ongoing powers in general probably won't work once their "caster" dies or becomes incapacitated. And so on.

Roderick_BR
2008-03-17, 08:33 AM
Actually, it feels weirder that you can only move your team around if you whack an enemy, and that you can only succesfully "surround" (pin) an enemy if you hit him first. Apparently, clever tactics don't work on something with a high armor class.
It may vary from power to power. One described here shows that by hitting an enemy the right way, you stun it enough so your allies have a better opportunity to hit. If you miss, you won't be able to umbalance it. As I said, like the Opportunist ability (you gain an AoO from an enemy just hit by an ally), except that you grant it to others instead of picking yourself the ability. There would have others abilities that requires you different a difrent kind of action. It will really be weird if you always need to hit it, though.

MorkaisChosen
2008-03-17, 12:05 PM
From what I've seen, it usually specifies which bits hapen on a hit and which bits don't.