|
The newest Excerpt is up: The Warlord
For those who don't care to link
This last point is one of the reasons why the warlord is in the new Player’s Handbook. Just as 3rd Edition introduced the sorcerer (and re-introduced the barbarian) up front, we felt that 4th Edition should introduce one or two classes that weren’t previously part of the core D&D experience.
The warlord first appeared in our second design draft of 4th Edition as the marshal. Those of you familiar with the 3rd Edition Miniatures Handbook might remember this class. (You might also wonder why we changed the name from marshal to warlord. The answer is that we wanted to broaden the concept from a medieval military commander to someone who might be a barbaric warchief, an elven marchwarden, or a noble-born knight-commander.) Of course, the 4E version was only loosely based on the 3E version; among other things, the new marshal has access to the same sort of power selection as any other 4E class, instead of a boatload of auras. It was also moved more clearly into the Leader role, while the 3E marshal was a class that fell “in between” roles, and certainly couldn’t replace a cleric or a fighter in the typical party mix.
The 4E warlord now helps alleviate that unfortunate requirement of party composition in all previous editions of Dungeons & Dragons: before, a party had to include a cleric in order to be effective. Very early on in 4th Edition design, our work on character roles led us to the idea that any character serving as the party’s “cleric”—whether a bard, shaman, warlord, or whatever—needed to be as good at that job as the cleric or else we’d have yet another edition of D&D in which every party still needed a cleric. That led us to the idea of the Leader role, and the warlord as just one of several possible classes that can fill this role. Of course, the warlord fills it in his own unique way, with powers that have a strong flavor of clever tactics and heroic inspiration. Read on a bit, and you’ll see for yourself!
--Rich Baker
---------------------------------------------------------------
“Onward to victory! They cannot stand before us!”
Warlords are accomplished and competent battle leaders. Warlords stand on the front line issuing commands and bolstering their allies while leading the battle with weapon in hand. Warlords know how to rally a team to win a fight.
Your ability to lead others to victory is a direct result of your history. You could be a minor warchief looking to make a name for yourself, a pious knight-commander on leave from your militant order, a youthful noble eager to apply years of training to life outside the castle walls, a calculating mercenary captain, or a courageous marshal of the borderlands who fights to protect the frontier. Regardless of your background, you are a skillful warrior with an uncanny gift for leadership.
The weight of your armor is not a hindrance; it is a familiar comfort. The worn weapon grip molds to your hand as if it were a natural extension of your arm. It’s time to fight and to lead.
Class Traits
Role: Leader. You are an inspiring commander and a master of battle tactics.
Power Source: Martial. You have become an expert in tactics through endless hours of training and practice, personal determination, and your own sheer physical toughness.
Key Abilities: Strength, Intelligence, Charisma
Armor Proficiencies: Cloth, leather, hide, chainmail; light shield
Weapon Proficiencies: Simple melee, military melee, simple ranged
Bonus to Defense: +1 Fortitude, +1 Will
Hit Points at 1st Level: 12 + Constitution score
Hit Points per Level Gained: 5
Healing Surges per Day: 7 + Constitution modifier
Trained Skills: From the class skills list below, choose four trained skills at 1st level.
Class Skills: Athletics (Str), Diplomacy (Cha), Endurance (Con), Heal (Wis), History (Int), Intimidate (Cha)
Build Options: Inspiring warlord, tactical warlord
Class Features: Combat Leader, Commanding Presence, inspiring word
Warlord Class Features
All warlords have these class features.
Combat Leader
You and each ally within 10 squares who can see and hear you gain a +2 power bonus to initiative.
Commanding Presence
Choose one of the following two benefits.
Inspiring Presence: When an ally who can see you spends an action point to take an extra action, that ally also regains lost hit points equal to one-half your level + your Charisma modifier.
Tactical Presence: When an ally you can see spends an action point to make an extra attack, the ally gains a bonus to the attack roll equal to one-half your Intelligence modifier.
The choice you make also provides bonuses to certain warlord powers. Individual powers detail the effects (if any) your Commanding Presence selection has on them.
Inspiring Word
Using the inspiring word power, warlords can grant their comrades additional resilience with nothing more than a shout of encouragement.
Creating a Warlord
The two warlord builds are inspiring warlord and tactical warlord. Some warlords lean more on their Charisma, while others rely on Intelligence, but Strength is important to every warlord.
Inspiring Warlord
You lead by exhortation, encouragement, and inspiration. Your powers help your allies find new surges of courage and endurance within themselves, helping them heal, shrug off debilitating conditions, and defend themselves from attack. Your attack powers rely on Strength, so that should be your best ability score. The benefits you give your allies, though, depend almost entirely on Charisma, so make that second best. Intelligence is your best third choice, so you can dabble in other warlord powers and to help your Reflex defense. Select powers that make the best use of your high Charisma score.
Suggested Feat: Inspired Recovery (Human feat: Toughness)
Suggested Skills: Athletics, Diplomacy, Heal, History
Suggested At-Will Powers: commander’s strike, furious smash
Suggested Encounter Power: guarding attack
Suggested Daily Power: bastion of defense
Guarding Attack Warlord Attack 1
With a calculated strike, you knock your adversary off balance and grant your comrade-in-arms some protection against the villain’s attacks.
Encounter Martial, Weapon
Standard Action Melee weapon
Target: One creature
Attack: Strength vs. AC
Hit: 2[W] + Strength modifier damage. Until the end of your next turn, one ally adjacent to either you or the target gains a +2 power bonus to AC against the target’s attacks.
Inspiring Presence: The power bonus to AC equals 1 + your Charisma modifier.
Bastion of Defense Warlord Attack 1
Honorable warriors never fall!
Daily Martial, Weapon
Standard Action Melee weapon
Target: One creature
Attack: Strength vs. AC
Hit: 3[W] + Strength modifier damage. Allies within 5 squares of you gain a +1 power bonus to all defenses until the end of the encounter.
Effect: Allies within 5 squares of you gain temporary hit points equal to 5 + your Charisma modifier.
Tactical Warlord
Your leadership takes the form of quick commands, cunning strategies, and tactical superiority. Your powers guide your allies to extra and more powerful attacks, as well as helping them move quickly in combat situations. You also assist your allies by moving your enemies around or knocking them prone. You use Strength for your attack powers, so make that your best ability score. Intelligence is secondary, because your Intelligence determines just how effective a leader you are. Charisma should be your third best score, so you can dabble in other warlord powers and to improve your Will defense. Select powers that make the best use of your high Intelligence score.
Suggested Feat: Tactical Assault (Human feat: Weapon Focus)
Suggested Skills: Endurance, Heal, History, Intimidate
Suggested At-Will Powers: viper’s strike, wolf pack tactics
Suggested Encounter Power: warlord’s favor
Suggested Daily Power: lead the attack
Warlord’s Favor Warlord Attack 1
With a calculated blow, you leave your adversary exposed to an imminent attack from one of your closest allies.
Encounter Martial, Weapon
Standard Action Melee weapon
Target: One creature
Attack: Strength vs. AC
Hit: 2[W] + Strength modifier damage. One ally within 5 squares of you gains a +2 power bonus to attack rolls against the target until the end of your next turn.
Tactical Presence: The bonus to attack rolls that you grant equals 1 + your Intelligence modifier.
Lead the Attack Warlord Attack 1
Under your direction, arrows hit their marks and blades drive home.
Daily Martial, Weapon
Standard Action Melee weapon
Target: One creature
Attack: Strength vs. AC
Hit: 3[W] + Strength modifier damage. Until the end of the encounter, you and each ally within 5 squares of you gain a power bonus to attack rolls against the target equal to 1 + your Intelligence modifier.
Miss: Until the end of the encounter, you and each ally within 5 squares of you gain a +1 power bonus to attack rolls against the target.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Warlord Overview
Characteristics: You are a strong warrior in melee, able to stand beside the fighter or paladin in your party. Your powers grant allies immediate actions (usually moves or attacks), provide bonuses to attack or defense, and grant healing in the midst of battle.
Religion: Warlords favor martial gods such as Bahamut and Kord, and those who have a particular eye for strategy or leadership esteem Ioun or Erathis. Evil and unaligned warlords often worship Bane.
Races: Dragonborn make excellent inspiring warlords, and half-elves are equally inspiring leaders. Eladrin are skilled tactical warlords. Tiefling warlords are versatile, combining powers from both builds, and humans can excel at either path.
I love how they assume every party *has* to have a cleric. And since when does a party have to have certain roles filled by certain people?" Why can't the bard be the leader? Or the wizard? Of all the silly 4E stuff, the concept of roles alternatly amuses me and irritates me the most.
As a player, the party I am currently playing in has none (ok, we do have a druid, but he too chaotic to heal), and the campaign I am GM'ing, the cleric is rather martial and only heals the survivors. In other words, their are a few more healing potions given out, and wands of CLW are worth alot.
I suppose I shouldn't be amused anymore at how WOTC bigwigs still assume that the way they play the game is the only way to play the game, but I still am......
I love how they assume every party *has* to have a cleric. And since when does a party have to have certain roles filled by certain people?" Why can't the bard be the leader? Or the wizard? Of all the silly 4E stuff, the concept of roles alternatly amuses me and irritates me the most.
Lefric, you're confusing the name of the Role of a class with the characters role in the party.
Warlords and Clerics are in the Leader Role, meaning their powers are focused on healing, providing party wide buffs, and moderate combat abilities.
That does not mean they are supposed to be the character in charge of the party for role playing purposes. Any class makes a great party leader, it all depends on how the players want thir party to be run. Nothing in the Leader role says they actually have to be in charge.
As a player, the party I am currently playing in has none (ok, we do have a druid, but he too chaotic to heal), and the campaign I am GM'ing, the cleric is rather martial and only heals the survivors. In other words, their are a few more healing potions given out, and wands of CLW are worth alot.
I suppose I shouldn't be amused anymore at how WOTC bigwigs still assume that the way they play the game is the only way to play the game, but I still am......
You know, great straw man arguement. You're doing fine without a cleric, thus WotC must be wrong.
But you know what? You are playing with a cleric. Those potions and wands are functioning as your cleric. If you didn't have them but kept playign the same way you are now, you would die a lot more often. Go on, try and remove those potions and wands. See how long you'll last.
The game doesn't break completely without a cleric or druid, but it does significantly change the way you play. And most people see that change as a bad thing.
The folks at WotC are not saying it's impossible to have a party without a cleric. They are saying that most people still see clerics as an unavoidable nessisaty because the other classes lack the ability to heal themselves, and they wanted to change that.
They gave us the Warlod, who is a very different type of class fromt he cleric but stillfills his shoes, and they gave every class the ability to heal through healing surges. Now, you won't have to have acleric, or a warlord even, and you won't have to spend your treasure on gallons and gallons of healing potions. What exactly is so bad about that?
I love how they assume every party *has* to have a cleric. And since when does a party have to have certain roles filled by certain people?" Why can't the bard be the leader? Or the wizard? Of all the silly 4E stuff, the concept of roles alternatly amuses me and irritates me the most.
I believe you may be confused about the meaning of the word "leader" in this context. When 4e talks about the role of leader, it doesn't mean "the person who makes decisions for the party." That is still very much a non-rules player issue. In the context of 4e, "leader" means a character who contributes by making the rest of the party stronger/better (via buffs, healing, extra moves, etc). It describes the types of things the character is good at (particularly in regard to combat).
In 3e/3.5 it has always been assumed that the ideal party would have a cleric. That is not to say every party *has* to have one, but certainly without one, the party must make up for the healing in other ways (such as through potions and wands). Part of the design goal of 4e seeks to spread the abilities of the 3e/3.5 cleric around to other classes, precisely so that the ideal party no longer assumes a cleric. This means that if a party does not include a cleric, they can make up for it by using another "leader" class. Interestingly, the bard actually *will* be a "leader."
With regard to the concept of "roles," I think it is important to note that 4e views "class" slightly differently than 3e/3.5 too. In 3e/3.5, "class" represents what you *are*. You essentially choose to *be* a fighter, ranger, wizard, etc, much as in the real world, we decide to be a doctor, writer, professional athlete, etc. Then you go on to define yourself further by what you can do (both in and out of combat). In 4e, class decribes more what you *can do*. You first decide what types of things you want your character to do -- fight in melee, shoot from range, manipulate the battlefield through magic, etc. Then you decide how best to model that using the "class" designations in the rules.
"Class" is really more a collection of abilities, rather than what you are. In this context, dividing the classes into what types of roles they fill makes a lot of sense. If your character's primary abilities revolve around shooting from range, it would be silly to decribe your class as a "leader" in the sense that 4e uses. Now, if you wanted your character to do multiple types of activities (e.g. ranged combat and healing), you would be best served modelling the concept with a hybrid of abilities from such classes as the ranger and the cleric.
I love how they assume every party *has* to have a cleric. And since when does a party have to have certain roles filled by certain people?" Why can't the bard be the leader? Or the wizard? Of all the silly 4E stuff, the concept of roles alternatly amuses me and irritates me the most.
As a player, the party I am currently playing in has none (ok, we do have a druid, but he too chaotic to heal), and the campaign I am GM'ing, the cleric is rather martial and only heals the survivors. In other words, their are a few more healing potions given out, and wands of CLW are worth alot.
Of course potions and wands cost a LOT (especially potions, which are single-use and usable by anyone), meaning that the party falls behind in treasure unless you add more.
While this can fix things, it doesnt change the fact that someone needs to dump points into Use Magic Device (which sucks for people who dont get it as a class-skill) and hope that it works.
Basically, a cleric that costs a crapton of money.
I suppose I shouldn't be amused anymore at how WOTC bigwigs still assume that the way they play the game is the only way to play the game, but I still am......
It amuses me how many people assume that Wizards plays the game in a very alien, unique fashion that apparently "no one" else follows, even slightly (forcing us all to completely restructure the way we play into something vastly different).
I'm sure that based on message board threads, surveys, and actual playing that they discovered a very unusual trend: MOST people use a cleric or other class that has cure X wounds on its spell list.
Not all of us like to have our warblade down a potion to restore a whopping 28 points of damage, just to have it hewn away by the next attack from the monster.