Warlords and Combat Change

[Louis]

So obviously, warlords are going to be greatly affected by changes to combat. Now more than ever, Warlords, being masters of battle and weapons, will have large choices to make pre-fight and mid-fight. Here are things you need to check now:

* Average damage and primary/offhand hit/dam rolls
* STR and DEX hit/dam and parry/dodge influences
* Vulnerabilities and armor class susceptibilities
* Foreign weapon types
* Offensive vs Defensive weapon types
* Enhanced damage bonus to two handed vs none to offhanded
* Double grip
* Favoured weapons
* Using a shield
* Bows and point blank (with its radical game changing traits)
* Forms
* ? - More changes to come

Think you can handle the choice? The Matrix has you in 2005!

[Quiet Wanderer]

Chalktalas new BS decree on not being able to rank with mages? Or did I read it wrong?

[Louis]

that's more of a philosophy thing, not combat =)

[Matthais]

I think Chalktala's decree was a step in the right direction. Warlords aren't for the faint of heart. This is only going to strengthen that philosophy.

[Kalist19]

We are in for some interesting times, to say the least.

And while the enforced philosophy of no ranking with mages or clerics may slow things down a bit, it opens up more room for conflict between warlords and magic users. You can't even group with fighting classes that use any magical aids, such as potions or scrolls. Might cause some animosity and hopefully a lot more killing!

Get that possession up!

[Davairus]

Its very rare that a leader has the necessary vision to come up with changes to his cabal that better it, and that has come as a welcome surprise. This may put Warlord back on the road to being one of AR's most popular & well-liked cabals instead of just a crummy duelling cabal, which you should know by now is a good thing, after what has happened to Mystic.

Unfortunately the resident peanut gallery is focusing on the wrong change, that Warlords no longer rank with magic-users.

Warlord cabal has two major orders of business, a primary and a secondary. The primary order is that they fight their battles alone, for glory, the secondary is that they don't want anything to do with magic. The Warlord cabal skills reflect the fact that they have chosen this to deal with - as a matter of fact, just look at forms you can see they easily have the most powerful cabal skill right there.

What Chalktala has done is made two BIG changes, that affect the approach Warlords take towards their goals. The big one being, that they've now got a very simple reason to deathmark (isn't that what you guys like? Simple, old-fashioned, all-out war?), described right here in help warlord:

[a_man201]

It's the stupidest thing I've ever heard of and I heard some pretty stupid shit hell I've said some pretty stupid shit but that aint the point. Its a PvP
STRATEGY and you taking hits for a mage sure sounds like strategy to me since well MAGES DO NICE DAMAGE with some spells and Chalktala saying that you are a little bitch and will be kicked out of Warlords if you group with a mage well lets go back to some logs say Lorath vs Chalktala the first one Chalktala's ENERGY DRAIN DISEMBOWELS Lorath and Chalktala with a long list of mages he grouped with says no one can group with mages I think he is going down the right road of being a fire giant without the speech inpedament. You ask me hes dumb as fuck don't listen do what you want follow the OLD guidlines of Warlords not some dipshit with his dick in his hand.

[divsky]

In response to A_man's post: See signature.

(except for the part about him having a girlfriend)

[Nuonorp]

I, for one, actually appreciate the changes to Warlords. In my mind, Chalktala's new decree seems to strengthen what it means to be a Warlord, and combined with the new training system, it should prove an even greater challenge for people to be inducted into Warlords. Maybe I can log on, see a Warlord, and believe that they stand for something more than they have good training scripts and a lot of time to kill. Kudos! AR is definitely changing, and I think that it's for the better..... not that my characters are going to be helped any, but that's life.

[Louis]

some things i want to clear up about warlords.

1, there is no traditional and understood model for a warlord. the warlord that always bowed and let you take the first hit in a duel and refused to leave the area (as a show of his honor) was totally smashed - duels are supposed to model real fights anyway.

2, deathmarks are a good thing and i've always thought that way. even before making a warlord i was put off from playing one because i thought they were just dueling nutcases. deathmarking those who prey on the weak does not mean we are turning into knights. in fact i would hope there would be a lot more evil vs good conflict with the chummy knights and the handful of evil warlords. warlords should be an aggressive and conflict oriented cabal - that's the basic idea behind all cabals save heralds anyway..

i just hope you warlords understand though that a deathmark is a deathmark and nothing keeps you from your enemy ~ except maybe the dishonorable 5 on 1 gangbang should he be fighting 4 others at the same time (or fighting some knights and you're evil (align complications).. and so on).

though i'm interested to know what some current warlords think about all this new stuff.

[Rezakhan]

As a current Warlord, I have mixed feelings about the changes. I dislike the strictness of the ranking with mages thing, simply because I think that does create a cookie-cutter roleplay for Warlords--not all Warlord characters are played to hate magic users as well as magic. My character had personally been very friendly with some magic users--this change means basically that Warlords are expected not to be friendly with mages/clerics, except to fight them.
At the same time, I like the idea of limiting interaction with magic for Warlords--I know personally I ranked for a while with illusionists hasting groupmates, and looking back on it that certainly would not go over well with a Warlord's mentality. I think an equivalent purpose would be served if it was changed so that Warlords could group with anyone, as long as they didn't use magic while grouped. That in itself could make for some interesting roleplay, as the Warlord could decide whether he wanted to drag along an effectively useless shaman or illusionist. That also would still serve the purpose of isolating Warlords from magic use, which I believe was the intended effect.
As for the deathmarking those who prey on the weak, I rather like the idea. I think it adds another element of honour to the Warlord code--not just honour for oneself in battle, but the honour of defending others who cannot defend themselves. No complaints about that change.
The change I have the most trouble with is one that hasn't been mentioned yet, which is an automatic smiting for a Warlord who attacks without a deathmark or challenge. This I think contradicts the idea of protecting the weak, as it effectively means you cannot defend a groupmate who is attacked (or if you do, you get smited, which means in all likelihood you will die soon after). It also means you cannot quickly respond if the cabal is attacked, since you have to wait to deathmark the intruders. I think this change cause considerably more harm than good--I didn't see much of a problem with the old way, where non-challenge attacks were dealt with on a case-by-case basis.
Overall, I think the changes are a step in the right direction, and a sign that the Warlord cabal is not stagnating. We shall have to wait and see how it all works out.

[Malrakh]

If they detest magic so, why do they continue to use magical weapons?

Will THAT ever change?

[Mind_Flayer]

Since when do warlords use magical weapons?

[Nuonorp]

[Louis]

warlords can't use enchanted weapons. they fall out of their hands. the only "magical" use of weapons are weapons that fall under the "magical" damage type ~ meaning elemental (fire water lightning etc) and holy/unholy. they already can't use special damage types like "magic" (marmalade orb) or "kiss of death" that don't pertain to a specific racial vulnerability.

don't expect warlords to use 7/7s. anyhow warrior types now have the option of using favoured weapons that gives them those bonuses (that don't seem to stack with outside enchantments).

[Baer]

Seems to me, that forsaking magic, should mean forsaking magic wherever it is found, including weapons that do magic-type damage. Seems kinda hypocritical that they'll shun grouping with mages of any sort, only to pick up an icicle and go kick some fire giant tail. This means, they should lose the ability to use weapons with the "magic" flag. After all, it says right there, it's *magical*.

[divsky]

Dragons are magical creatures.

Red dragon eq is made from dragons.

Seems kinda hypocritcal that we let warlords use red dragon eq.

(I was being sarcastic)

[Matthais]

Oh no!

This means all you little bitch mages out their won't have warlords to be your winter tanks!

Oh my!

Maybe ranking a mage will become challinging again and make that 0 xp penalty worthwhile!

*cough cough*

All this will do is make warlords attract decent players instead of the crappy people who know how to train. Paladins, Shamans, and Healers will probably become more and more popular and the poor little necromancer will be for the stout of heart. Perhaps even better, reaching 50 will become a little more challenging and therefore more rewarding.

These are the best changes that have occurred in a long time.

[Louis]

hah well i guess the point will always be gameplay. no need to gimp a cabal (with no red dragon, no vuln weapons, etc) when people actually want to take the time to practice and apply and follow guidelines for it. of course we could just make a whole bunch of non-magical sounding eq and separate dam types into vulns as opposed to magic armor class and etc etc, but 1, we don't need to (come on gimme a break) and 2, no one has the time or thinks it urgent to code it in as opposed to all the other awesome stuff in the works. of course in the future when AR has evolved into the most popular multiplayer game on earth (which it will) then it may become a bigger issue.

[Insom]

I'm not sure how relevant this is but....going full blown anti-magic is not an original idea for a cabal. CF BattleRagers came first and they are completely anti-magic. I suggest finding a different niche for warlords than anti-magic.