Anyone up for a little competition? [1-2 slots available]

[Bound Birdie]

Direwolf1994

if paladins were meant to do everything it would not be necessary to have other classes

PAH LOTS of classes are interchangeable I have a VERY good game going where It's just myself a Druid (Powerhouse) and a Bard (healer) >.<  

[Rain Yupa]

Direwolf, be careful, because you are getting out of line. It's one thing to be dissatisfied with having another person of the same class. It's another to start slinging insults around over it.

If you and him play CE paladins of the same race, same build, same powers, same feats, same GOD (really an important factor for divine types), then I can see why you would want it to be different. But I would say if at least half of those things are different, then its an entirely different character.

You guys are on the same team, so treat him like your teammate and work out the differences. Or just make a new character already and let it drop.  

[Durgress]

Even if you still want to play a paladin, I only took defending abilites, so you can either take a healing route or a damage route and still play completely differently from me. Plus, I only have the PHB, I have all of 6 classes to choose from, and I NEVER play paladins (or bards for that matter). So I mixed it up and decided to play a class I dislike. Regardless, it wouldn't hurt to have two defenders.  

[WingedDemonVM]

True, that. If anything, it would be awesome to have two paladins. Think of all the Lay on Hands you have available between the two of you! Awesome heal times, here you come!  

[Bound Birdie]

*MWAHAHAHA* I can see it already well be invincible >.<
We just need one good side player huh? *is anxious to play* Come on one person! xd  

[Arc Vembris]

I've never witnessed paladins to be awesome healers. Awesome as compared to a fighter maybe.

Also, PHB has 8 classes, not 6.  

[joe-dude667]

Yeah but Paladin and Warlord both suck so they don't count.

[/troll]  

[WingedDemonVM]

Hey now... Warlords make nice heal-bots... Not the best in combat, but my warlock enjoyed using the group's warlord as a meat shield.  

[iDragow]

'Ey! I like Warlord... crying

True, Vylal hasn't done much, but I've got a good feeling about Grashuk...  

[Psychofish]

I've always liked warlords, but I've yet to actually look over their powers sufficiently.

I always came off with the impression they'd be terrifying in a heavily melee based party. Two defenders and a rogue or something, and having an extra body in that mess dispensing heals and buffs and free attacks could do a lot. Of course, I guess that'd begin to beg to soak up the AOE damage too...

I guess what I'm trying to say is that warlords seem like they depend on the party's build a lot more to be successful, where as most leaders could do pretty swell in any given party.  

[Arc Vembris]

Most leaders have the up close weapon build and the ranged implement build, or can balance between the two. Warlords are all melee, much like Shamans are all implement.

For me, they just never catch my imagination. If I've got a combatty-guy, he's probably better served as a fighter. The cheerleader aspect isn't really what draws me to most leader classes, and the warlord doesn't seem to have a lot else going for him.  

[Psychofish]

I've only played with one once. I had a level 1 fighter, and he a level 1 warlord, testing out a program for playing in real time online.

As it turns out, when your fighter is a monstrous offensive build, being granted additional bonuses to attack and damage AND extra free attacks... well, Tarak killed stuff fast.  

[Rain Yupa]

I personally <3 Warlords. They are my favorite class by far.  

[joe-dude667]

Warlords are your favourite? That's so weird. I mean I can see why people like them when I don't, but you actually think they're better than say a cleric or a fighter? Or best yet a fighter with a couple Cleric multiclass feats?  

[Rain Yupa]

When I was planning ahead for Biological Warfare's game, I had a cleric multiclassed as warlord. They have a lot of similar powers (though the cleric has more ranged ones, whereas warlord is all melee).

But the Warlord's melee ones are always better, and the warlord has so many more powers that help allies in combat. + to attack rolls is an AWESOME ability.

Clerics are much better healers, and I won't argue that point. But Warlords compare fairly well to Fighters for damage, and they have very useful powers that help kill things quicker.

The problem is, you almost need the right kind of party for a Warlord. Clerics are always useful. Warlords are better in parties that are heavily melee.