| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I recently started writing on a blog, called Halfling's Den. I try to write at least one article per week, and every week I provide the readers with pregenerated characters (PCs and NPCs) to use when in a hurry.
Today I posted a homebrew class I made to satisfy one of my players' cravings for a martial, non-magical, non-divine leader that could, mechanically, grant extra combat actions to allies. Much like 4th edition warlord, but with a few tweaks to make it feel more "at home" in a Pathfinder game.
If you'd like to know more, here's the article: A personal take on a new class: the Warleader
I have tested this class for a couple of sessions, and things seem to go well. You can find a torough description in the article. To answer some questions already:
- Yes, I know the use of warleader's command is heavily limited. Trust me, you don't want to feel like your PC is simply shouting in the fight. We want players to act!
- The picture of the ogre warleader is something I drew last year.
- Although the idea of a ranged warleader archetype seemed really cool, we're still debating on wether it's too strong (or at least, stronger than the base version making it obsolete).
Please let me know your opinion on this!
|
Very interesting - a nice take on the non-magic battlefield commander
If you don't mind my saying, there are a number of similarities to the Order of the Citadel from Advanced Options: More Cavalier Orders by Super Genius Games
Thanks Marc. I didn't know about this supplement. I hope I've not spent days on something that already existed :D Truth is, we felt the urge of a completely new class to make everything work. A simple cavalier archetype or alternate order didn't feel right and customizable enough, I guess. With the warleader class you can build any type of leader, from the savage to the knight to the bandit lord.
(not a shameless bump!)
I forgot to mention, I'm currently working on racial favorite class bonuses for the warleader:
- Drow: once per day (and an additional time for each time this bonus is selected) the warleader can affect a vermin ally with her command, even if the vermin can't understand the warleader's language and is usually immune to mind-affecting effects.
- Dwarf: the morale bonuses granted by the warleader's tactics increase by +1/4.
- Elf: the warleader gains 1/6 of a new tactic.
- Gnome: once per day (and an additional time for each time this bonus is selected) the warleader can affect an animal ally with her command, even if the animal can't understand the warleader's language.
- Half-elf: the warleader gains a +1/2 bonus on Diplomacy checks.
- Halfling: the insight bonuses granted by the warleader's expose weakness feature increase by 1/3 (max +5).
- Half-orc: the warleader gains a +1/2 bonus on Intimidate checks.
- Human: the warleader gains 1/2 of an additional daily use of her command.
- Ifrit: add +5 feet to the warleader's command range when trying to affect an Outsider ally with the fire subtype.
- Oread: add +5 feet to the warleader's command range when trying to affect an Outsider ally with the earth subtype.
- Ratfolk: the warleader gains a +2,5 feet bonus to her base speed (max +10).
- Sylph: add +5 feet to the warleader's command range when trying to affect an Outsider ally with the air subtype.
- Undine: add +5 feet to the warleader's command range when trying to affect an Outsider ally with the water subtype.
Fantastic artwork of the half-ogre!!!
Nice class - similar to Drejk's Commander if I recall correctly...
Thanks Oceanshieldwolf. I guess I was not the only one loving 4E's warlord!
Drejk's take on that class shares some affinities with mine in fact, I'm particularly amused by the fact we both incorporated "tactics" as options to add depth to the commands the PC is issuing across the battlefield. Also, reading Drejk's post reminded me of something... I have yet to create some custom feats for this class!
As a dedicated Sylph player, I just wanted to say that the Favored Class option is way too situational. Nobody would ever take it. Which is probably just as-well, since I can't imagine anyone would picture themselves as a Sylph Warleader. :P
That being said, I like the idea/concept. We always had a Warlord in our group, and I can't imagine 4e without them... Accurate Strike might be a bit much... maybe consider a +1 ToHit Command Tactic and -then- Accurate Strike which has that +1 ToHit Command Tactic as a pre-requisite?
I like the concept, but I feel it is a little too MAD at the moment. It gains abilities that use all of the mental stats (if you take into account the heal ability for wisdom) and one of them even uses both charisma and intelligence for different things, not to mention it is a full BAB class with flanking bonuses so you are going to want all your physical stats to at least be decent.
I also agree that the sylph and other elemental race favored class options are far too situational.
Hm. Well, first of all thanks for the comments! I agree about the sylph & co. favored class options and I'm already looking for something less situational to replace them. I'm open to suggestions!
On a more specific note:
@Sphynx: Your opinion on Accurate Strike is totally understandable, and I had the same doubt when first writing it. However, as Sah observed, it's really hard to abuse any of the class features without losing the others. The class itself (like the paladin and monk class, for example) was written with a balanced ability scores array in mind. Just as a monk's Wisdom bonus to AC can become overpowered if the PC has an 18/20 in both Dex and Wis (resulting in a very high armor class at low levels without wearing any armor) but meaning he probably won't have good scores in Str and will then be punching for few damage points, the warleader can't really dump any stat besides Dex and Wis (and even then, he shouldn't have a score lower than 10). In a 20 point buy with a human PC, the scores would probably be 14 12 13 14 10 16, already applying the +2 racial bonus to Cha. So no, I don't think it's that much, considering each command can only have one tactic applied to it and you have limited use of the command.
@Sah: In addition to what I wrote above, which gives a reason to the spread use of ability scores, you shouldn't forget that, while decent at melee and ranged combat, the Warleader is mainly a buffer and enabler for his allies. His main stat is Charisma, his secondary stats are Intelligence and Strength. Dexterity, Constitution and Wisdom come last and you really should choose which ones to improve based on the type of leader you want. A demagogue will probably have high mental stats and pack less serious hits in melee; a field tactician will have good melee stats and settle on an average Charisma, limiting his leadership but considerably improving his chances to do something when in melee apart from granting the Expose Weakness bonus. At the same time, I really can't imagine which stats to make less relevant in a similar character concept. He's a martial character, so there's no reason for him to have low or medium BAB. And he's a leader and tactician, meaning good Cha or Int (not both, but that's because he forces you to make a choice when building the character). What would you dump?
I wouldn't dump anything because you need them all as is. If I was writing the class though I would pick either CHA or INT for all of the abilities tied to mental stats, not both.
Also if you what you want for the class is to be more of a buffer and enabler then maybe he shouldn't be a full BAB class that has a major class feature that requires melee combat. I could see (if buffing is the primary goal) easily being a 3/4 BAB class. Heck the bard is a buffer and it has 3/4.
As is I feel like you are trying to do too much at once.
I see. As I mentioned before, I thought of using both CHA and INT to basically give to players the option of focusing on one or the other, and then have different builds. Obviously, if one's trying to get the max out of both stats' features, he's gonna have an hard time and probably he won't be able to put many points (or good rolled numbers) into physical stats, which is detrimental to his fighting abilities (and chance of survival). Problem is that I really can't figure a martial leader not using INT (for tactics) or CHA (to bolster his comrades). And the full BAB is because, contrarily to the bard, this class has received military training and might need feats that require a BAB of +1 at 1st level; its combat prowess is far better than that of a minstrel. And yes, the warleader is meant to be at least decent in combat himself, given his command feature use is limited. As you see, there's a logical reason for every choice; however, this doesn't mean those choices are necessarily right.
Let's say we drop Expose Weakness (it can't be CHA-based, honestly, it's about seeing openings in the target's defense...) and make all bonuses granted by the features Charisma-based. I guess people would now think it's a bit OP. Charisma already is strong in both roleplaying situations (Diplomacy) and combat (Intimidate), and making all the warleader tactics depending on it might lead people to dump INT and play with a dumb warleader, which is terribly wrong from a flavor point of view. I honestly don't know what would be best.
I see where you are coming from, and it is your class do it however you like, I just was putting out how I viewed it.
Honestly I could see using CHA for Expose Weakness, but instead of it being used to intelligently notice weaknesses (which I don't quite understand how that would work anyway, if you actively tell your ally about a weak point wouldn't the enemy guard that better?) it is the Warleader's force of personality that distracts the enemy, causing them to focus on you, giving your ally an opening.
I was also under the impression that of the six attributes CHA is usually considered the weakest. Without specific class features it does not help you do damage (str), help you not take damage and bolster a save(dex), help you survive and bolster a save (con), give you skill points (int), or bolster a save (wis). By itself it only helps skills really (which all of the others except con do as well). After all, all of a Sorcerer, Bard or Oracle's abilities scale off of CHA and it is not like they are game breaking.
But again, this is just my opinion, if you disagree, it is your class and go whatever way you want with it.
Hey, I know, but although "it's my class and I can do what I want", I posted it here to get some advice. Which you did, and this is why I'm trying to incorporate your thoughts without eliminating what I myself love about the class.
I like your Cha approach to Expose Weakness, with the 'leader getting the enemy's attention instead of his allies. It works both mechanically and logically. I'll try a couple of session with this variant and write about it here. Thanks!
*places a banner marking this location for future view
*welcomes the banner*
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
*places a banner marking this location for future view*welcomes the banner*
*places second banner, looks up at drejk's banner, changes banner for a bigger one*
hahah, I guess that's a case of "banner envy", as good ol' Freud would put it :D
*shrug* Bigger banner, bigger targeting mark for my siege engineers unit.
Oh, and some siege engine-related abilities would be great for class such like this, possibly also some mass combat-influencing abilities.
everybody better quite looking at my self esteem. I just wanted to say, if this class can make MAD work I'm all for it myself.
Heh, well, MAD surely can be a problem with this class... if you want to max every feature within, let's say, level 7/8. Otherwise, the various ability score increases and wondrous items that enhance them can solve the problem, if you have patience. That said, I DO understand that, to some people, a MAD approach might not appeal. I kinda want, as it is, to find a balance between the possibility of optimization (and, if that's the case, minmaxing) and the class concept I had in mind.
Drejk's hint at siege engines and mass warfareis cool, but I wonder if something that specific (which could easily never come into play if the DM or the party have no big war in mind) should belong to an archetype. The bonuses from Expose Weakness could be switched for morale or insight bonuses to siege engines' crews, and there could be a new tactic to apply which allows an engine's crew to reload or fire quicker and better than the average.
I'm open to ideas and suggestions!
Drejk's hint at siege engines and mass warfareis cool, but I wonder if something that specific (which could easily never come into play if the DM or the party have no big war in mind) should belong to an archetype.
It could as long as it is additional ability and not the primary ability at that level (like the siege engine-related use of Expose Weakness). Such abilities would also be great as customizeable features such as tactics, rogue talents, witch hexes, instead of being fixed class features. That way the player can make the choice to get such abilities if the campaign focuses on siege engines/mass combat.
Wise suggestion.
I personally think I'd write them as tactics, mainly because this gives me a chance to worry about their interaction with the warleader only, whereas labeling them as feats I'd check for compatibility/balance with all the classes/feats around. Also, I can apply the "can't take this before n level" clause. However, I'll first have to familiarize myself with the siege engine rules (I'm running a pirate campaign, already had to learn ship to ship combat... guess I'm in for a bit of study this month!)