...assume the risk...
Risk means there's a CHANCE of something going wrong, your definition seems to be more a 'guarantee' of a messy end, inevitably rendering the Feat useless for an undisclosed period of time at some unknown (presumably early) point, that can only be countered by expensive and punitive systems (such as rezzes).
I know that there's no way I'd touch it in your campaign, and frankly, if you take that sort of view towards the NPC's perhaps you'd be doing those guys more of a service by just saying 'dont spend the point, I'll give you some plot devi...er...cohorts'... :p
Anyhow, as you say, just gonna have to agree to disagree :)
I tend to use the Leadership feat a LOT in my games, both as a player and DM. Back when we first started 3.0, I just really wanted to run a second character. Through the years I've found specific uses for the feat, that do NOT include power-gaming; more-so a means of adding a new character to the story, with some plot-relation to a specific existing character(the one who took the feat).
Essentially, it's an in-game mechanic to justify the addition of an "apprentice" level character. It's tricky, because if a DM isn't careful, there is a lot of room for abuse and munchkinery. The DM should be directly involved with rolling up the cohort, but I feel the player should be allowed to run it. The DM can step in with the dialogue and decision making, but the player should be at the wheel with the dice. They are essentially part of the PC's story directly. IMO, I agree whole-heartedly with the previous posts that say it should be role-played, but I disagree about banning the feat entirely. I feel that doing it entirely in role-play leaves too much room for abuse. What's to stop a player with a maxed-out diplomacy from attracting a cohort who is a higher level? A brilliant and sneaky 5th level rogue could easily talk a slow-witted and dumb 8th level barbarian into joining him, for example.
Attracting a cohort should be both the use of the feat AND role-play. The feat simple gives credence and numbers, the player should still do the attracting. Like I said earlier, I've used Leadership a lot in my games as a story building mechanic. It's always bothered me when players and DMs, old school and new school alike, draw a dividing line between Role Playing, and Game Mechanics; they should be working hand in hand. Here are some examples of Leadership for story purposes, that worked out well mechanically:
-An adventuring Ranger PC is visited by his younger sister, a Druid, who brings news of their family's village having been attacked, many of the family is slain, and other survivors were taken captive. The Druid is a capable adventurer herself(only 2 levels lower than her older brother), so the Ranger convinces her to join the party as they go to try and rescue the hostages and avenge their slain family.
-A Kensai PC is left to watch over a young princess after the royal family is slain in an attempt to subvert the throne. The Kensai had sworn an oath to the king that he would protect the princess and restore glory to the throne. The Kensai is older and much more experienced, and is played by the PC. The princess has some clerical training, so she tries to help the Kensai with healing along their travels as he attempts to garner support for her city-state. Otherwise she has no other adventuring experience, so she mostly stays in the background; also to hide from enemies of the state who might assassinate her.
-A Knight PC brings a squire, or knight-in-training, along for adventures and experience. This scenario can be played out by any class that might have an apprentice, such as wizards, clerics, rogues, etc, who seek to teach their trade.
-A military commander Marshal PC brings his First-Lieutenant Fighter, or conversely a well-trained field medic, as they seek to draft soldiers to their army...
...And a tried and true favorite of mine for use directly as NPCs, is the old Villain, Chief Thug, and Lackeys route. Common examples in media are Cobra Commander and Destro, Megatron and Starscream, Shredder and Bebop/Rocksteady(sorry, I was an 80's kid). Any one of these characters could be individual characters in their own right, but the context in which they are presented to the audience and to their adversaries makes more sense to me in the Leader/Follower route.
None of these above examples were for the purposes of "power-gaming" or "munchkinizing". They actually helped propel plot points forward and give the campaigns more depth. Sometimes, in more shallow plot based games, we use cohorts to do the "dirty work" so that we can make the kinds of character classes we actually want, and not soley what the party needs. If we all want to make fighters, we use cohorts as healers and wand/scroll repositories.
|
I wrote a bit of an opinion piece on cohorts, but didn't feel that the overall feeling of the writing would fit in, at least not in this thread, anywho I put it over here, in case anyone is interested.
Final Edit: All Systems Nominal!
Attracting a cohort should be both the use of the feat AND role-play.
This. In a perfect world.
If the players don't make an in game effort to attract a particular type of person (good deed to the Church* for a Cleric, forming a Thieves Guild etc) then why do they magically just get said NPCs?
|
Well I can see how the leadership feat might not require the PC to go out and look for a cohort. I mean by the time they can take it typically they should have accomplished a bit and might have a rep. So i could see someone having heard of them wanting them to be their mentor etc. Of course if they don't go looking for one, then who knows what they will get.
Shifty I disagree.
I will tell you why with an analogy. Atheletes play sports knowing full well that sometimes they will get injured and sometimes these injuries will effect them for life (occasionally they even die), however, they assume the risk of getting hurt and continue to play.
My players know full well that their cohorts will be on borrowed time (after 20 years I assure you they have figured it out). When they take the Leadership Feat they know they have assumed the risk of having a benefit from that feat "get itself perished". [Cohorts are in many ways nothing more than a bag of healing, a selection of skill sets or a meat shield anyway because it is difficult for players to play more than one character and usually they are not made to duplicate ablities already possessed by the party].
If they are willing to assume the risk of having a cohort then they must be ready to deal with the consequences, which is horrific death. Also, like I said before, its not like the characters can't pick up another victim... I mean cohort or raise them from the dead if they really liked the one they had. (The refund on this feat is that it does not permanently go away). Dirty Harry had a new partner every movie despite the fact that his partners constantly died, perhaps I should have been a co-writer on those scripts...
Plus Leadership grants a two pronged benefit (1) a Cohort and (2) Followers so the temporary loss of the cohort does not make the feat obselete.
Now if a player took Weapon Focus Longsword and then I cut off their hands in a way that did not allow them to regenerate so they could not use a long sword anymore then I agree THAT would be unfair.
I think we will agree to disagree on this one. :-)
Its hard to explain how many ways i disagree with you.
1. A good dm should be upfront with his players about stuff like that. Like killing/kidnapping cohorts? Great. Your players enjoy the hooks? Great. But you should always tell them this preference, because it would/should affect their choice of the feat. They should not have had to learn from experience. Just because your players have learned over the years what your whims are doesnt make you right, or a good dm, it just means you have tollerant players. Or perhaps you are the only person in the group who consistently likes to dm. But certainly keeping players does not automatically mean you are a great DM.
2. Athletes do indeed take a risk when playing sports. And sometimes the unfortunate happens. But for the most part, the ones at risk of serious injury are not doing it simply for fun. They are not playing a game for the game itself. It is a passion, or they are looking for a career. People who play for fun, play at a much lower intensity, with a much smaller chance for injury.
A game in which people are just out for fun, such as a roleplaying game, should not include significant chance of incapacitation on the players. Because a crippled character likely means a player is not having as much fun as he could be. This to me is an attrocious practice of a power hungry dm.
You even said, the player who lost his tower was unhappy with the turn the story took, for years of actual time. You seriously dont see a problem with that?
As dm its your job to see that everyone has a good time, not just most of the players. You were clearly not considering that with your story arc. Just because you are willing to give it back at some time in the future doesn't mean its acceptable practice. If a player is spending multiple sessions without a cohort, he is wasting the feat.
3. Followers do not make the feat useful. I also find it literally impossible to believe you dont kill them too. Not to mention they are little more then the equivalent of an alarm/unseen servant spell to a high level character.
4. By killing a cohort you are actually permanently weaking the character, killing a cohort reduces the leaderships score. So dirty harry should get progressively lower level partners. It is entirely possible for you to have a cohort die, raise him, and then be unable to keep that same cohort due to a reduced leadership score.
So in short, add me to the list of people who wouldn't touch your game with an 11 foot pole.
personally I wouldnt add it to the list DM's should never ever do, I might do anything to promote a story and blanced gameplay, if someone is doing a munchkinXtreme with his henchmen I'd have no problem pulling a Nodwick and roll up a new handmade henchmen for him.
Only real rule is that the DM should have fun and share the fun with players, I would be utterly shocked if my henchmen got soul trapped and taken away by a powerful demon.. but I wont instantly attack the DM for messing up my character.
Usually a good DM eventually balances things out, roleplay is moreimportant than an extra 'plus' on my charactersheet though, so I can see how many would disagree ;)
Interestingly, apparently in the very very very old school approach (IE: guys who gamed with Gygax), it was generally assumed that you'd hire a slew of mercenaries to help you do stuff, whenever possible.
In fact, in a thread with one of them, he was surprised and shocked to find that the rest of us assumed that hiring a bunch of guys was somehow 'cheating' or not in the spirit of the game.
For what it's worth.
Attracting a cohort should be both the use of the feat AND role-play.This. In a perfect world.
If the players don't make an in game effort to attract a particular type of person (good deed to the Church* for a Cleric, forming a Thieves Guild etc) then why do they magically just get said NPCs?
They shouldn't. As a DM, make it known that this sidekick doesn't magically appear, a little effort should be involved.
The player might not have any ideas on how to do it. Sometimes it's just laziness/sense of entitlement, but sometimes the player just can't think of how to go about it. The DM should work with the player, maybe come up with a situation, maybe a side quest. Maybe the PC's are well known heroes, and the cohort is someone who has heard of them and wants to join up, or at least follow and admire. Maybe the cohort is an NPC who needs rescued, and in return swears an oath to help the party.
If the player isn't willing to invest any RP into acquiring their cohort(or even just explain how they meet), then maybe give them a crappy one(poor stats, no gear, spend all their skill ranks on Profession:Baker and Craft:basket weaving). If the player whines about their cohort not magically appearing, explain to them why people don't just magically appear in the first place.
@Kolokotroni:
Have you ever read the Batman comics where the Joker kills Robin? That was some intense story telling. If it propels the story forward, cohorts can die just as easily(in fact moreso) as a PC can. A crafty villain might even identify the cohort as a weaker member of the party, and purposely go after them or use them to draw the party into some trap.
Basically, I see your points and Dennis Harry's as valid, but I do think you came across a little harsh on someone else's DM style you've never gamed with.
interesting thread so far. i have a personal experience i would like to share. I'm in a player heavy campaign, currently 7. of those 7 only 2 ppl remain of the original grp, the others have died or disappeared. As such everyone gets to build new characters, which is my personal joy of the game. anyway, i approached my gm and said i am tired of playing the healer. i get to have no fun. He said that if my character left the story was over b/c nobody else had drive to finish the plot line. So here i am, stuck playing healer. at lvl 8 i am responsable for the church in town being wiped out (evil cult) and am rebuilding it for the NG god which i worship. i approach my gm again saying that since i am stuck being the heal bot, why not let me take leadership. he grumbles and says he will think about.
next week, as i turn lvl 9 i take leadership. overjoyed at the chance to play a fun character. My gm build me a wizard. divination. that hates combat in any form and is only good for searching for info. doesn't even have craft skills. so i'm sittin there with followers rebuilding my church, and a cohort i don't want and can't enjoy at all. in general, i'm sorta depressed and considering leaving the game.
any advice for me as a player? (btw game started out lvl 1 with an epic plot to save and/or kill gods, which was exposed to us verrrrry slowly)
why did he build your cohort for you without asking?
heres some ammunition for you!
Druids get to choose thier own animal companions
wizards get to choose thier own familiar
paladins get to choose thier mount
summoners get to choose how they construct thier eidolon
why can't i choose to construct my own cohort?
all these other classes get that right, so should i.
choosing your own minion is a right
i know what it's like being stuck as the healbot, buffbot and trapbot, the trapbot i can handle if i make it a certain little asian girl in a black kimono. a clone of my online namesake, a character i made in grade school for easy english credit. Shuriken Nekogami, i made her back when i had practically no understanding of anime and thought Shuriken meant shooting star, Nekogami i new meant cat god for a long time and was added as a family name later (around middle school when i needed more extra english credit)
Damn it! One of them is revolting quick get the DM stick and administer beatings. Rights! they think they have rights! Whats next treasure? XP?
Mr. Fishy says let the player write the Cohort but check it just like a PC character.
Mr. Fishy says let the player write the Cohort but check it just like a PC character.
that part i agree with. and was what i intended.
not let the DM write your cohort for you without your permission. as a player, you took the feat tax, so you should have the right to have the freedom to construct it. also it keeps an unneccesary job off of the GM's shoulders.
a few things gm's shouldn't do
Pregenerate PCs and force them upon the players
Pregenerate familiars, animal companions, cohorts, etc, and force them on the players who "Paid the Tax". if you pay the level based tax, you should have the right to utilize as you see fit.
i'd reccomend, if a pc willingly chooses to actively be a healbot without party influence in any form, that they get a free 2nd pc of the same level. without having to burn a feat to do so.
Most players want rules that work within the framework of the system. Crafting does not work. If it did players would put ranks in it for reasons other than fluff. Now I am not saying crafting can't ever be used for a real benefit*, but I have never seen it taken with the intent of actually being used.
*There are times when weapons are armor does get damaged
next week, as i turn lvl 9 i take leadership. overjoyed at the chance to play a fun character. My gm build me a wizard. divination. that hates combat in any form and is only good for searching for info. doesn't even have craft skills. so i'm sittin there with followers rebuilding my church, and a cohort i don't want and can't enjoy at all. in general, i'm sorta depressed and considering leaving the game.
Ok well aside from the above example serves as a glowing illustration of what NOT to do to your players...
IN MY LITTLE WORLD:
* I wouldn't be letting you build the NPC, nor picking it's class or any other real involvement, as you don't indicate anywhere that you had been actively pursuing specific cohort members other than spending a Feat.
* Based on this, the only thing 'In game' that you have done of significance would really be the Church building crusade, which would have had me pick between Clerics or Paladins joining your crusade, or maybe a well intentioned Fighter.
Pretty much you'd be getting what you are given as you hadn't put in the spade work.
On the OTHER HAND is a totally different conversation around your enjoyment of the game.
If you are over playing a 'Healbot' then the solutions are:
* "handwave handwave GM FIAT/ACT OF GOD - you are now a Paladin on the crusade to rebuild"
* GM lets you roll something else, and then tries to rebuild his campaign - perhaps your Character becomes an NPC and the Party are now a group carrying out his will.
* GM ask you to tough it out, but then gives you some time to shine OTHER than being a Healbot.
* GM packs up his campaign, rolls a character, and now its YOUR TURN to run a campaign for the next several years :p
I think the feasible solutions come down to you providing the capacity to make the story work, not just dumping it on him and saying "I'm bored - fix it".
And as an aside to people above who suggest that the GM needs a players 'permission' to do something in game - erm, no.
Shifty, i have been playing in this campaign at least once a week for about 9 monthes now. my character has done much more then overthrow a church in 9 lvls. i've stopped a blight from spreading throughout nation. saved a daughter of my god from sacrifice, journeyed to a military stronghold that was jumping through time. made a pact with the 2nd most evil entity on my plane. saved my town at least 4 times. as for attracting cohorts, ppl have come to the town to avoid the tyranny of the church i overthrew. i actually asked for someone that i could enjoy in combat and maybe had great ties to my underground church. and i have been trying to find followers of my faith since lvl 3. there is alot that this character HAS invested in the story but she is at the point of not enjoying combats. the story itself is fun, just not my role in it.
there are many other details that i haven't told you, and i thought ppl would be smart enough to understand that WITHOUT having to spell it out. apparently i was mistaken
Shifty, i have been playing in this campaign at least once a week for about 9 monthes now. my character has done much more then overthrow a church in 9 lvls. i've stopped a blight from spreading throughout nation. saved a daughter of my god from sacrifice, journeyed to a military stronghold that was jumping through time. made a pact with the 2nd most evil entity on my plane. saved my town at least 4 times. as for attracting cohorts, ppl have come to the town to avoid the tyranny of the church i overthrew. i actually asked for someone that i could enjoy in combat and maybe had great ties to my underground church. and i have been trying to find followers of my faith since lvl 3. there is alot that this character HAS invested in the story but she is at the point of not enjoying combats. the story itself is fun, just not my role in it.
there are many other details that i haven't told you, and i thought ppl would be smart enough to understand that WITHOUT having to spell it out. apparently i was mistaken
i have a 10 question survey about your healbot!
1. is she an Aasimar?
2. Is her name Flonne?
3. does she make nonstop speeches about the power of love and/or friendship?
4. Is her weapon of choice a Staff And/Or Bow?
5. Does she dress in all white, or even mostly white?
6. is healing in any form, all she does?
7. is she goodie goodie to the core?
8. is she a pacifist?
9. does she lecture the party on how stealing, murder, etc, are all wrong?
10. would you consider her heart pure?
if you said yes to at least half of these questions, then you may have a properly portrayed healbot and might want to focus on it.
GMs "rule" a group because their Players let them. A gaming group is a democratic republic, not a democracy but neither a dictatorship.
Sure, but the GM has to run the game as he sees it. If he feels that in order for there to be a balance etc, then its his prerogative to make any call he feels he needs to make to maintain balance/status quo etc.
As a player, your democratic right (if you fee so offended) is simply not to participate. Of course just talking to your GM about why he has made X call might go a long way to resolving difference, but that's a big departure from saying what 'rights' he has.
Shifty, i have been playing in this campaign at least once a week for about 9 monthes now.there are many other details that i haven't told you, and i thought ppl would be smart enough to understand that WITHOUT having to spell it out. apparently i was mistaken
Well you see it's not up to us to fill in the blanks about what you have or haven't done, you asked for more information - and based on what you said, it was provided.
The story you posted above is a far cry from your initial post, so you might want to consider that when getting all up in arms.
If what you are saying above is true, then go tell it to your GM, as he would be well positioned to take it on board - in which case some of the points I made as possible solutions would come to pass easily.
Getting in a tizz because you failed to make your point clearly and thus misdirecting others is nothing to get upset at THEM about.
I like having the cohort do things for me while I adventure. If it is a caster: then research a subject, fighter: protect my hideout, Rogue: Gather info for the next quest or this quest, Cleric: spread the word of our god/ideal, Bard: Spread the word of my great deed. If we happen to be in the same place at the same time then great we get to fight together, but in most situations in a dungeon no two turns per player but I still get something out of my NPC. By the way it is a great feeling to get back from an adventure and have a parade in your honor all ready to go when you walk into town laden with riches. Had a wizard who would use sending to keep in touch with a bard that would tell the towns folk of our adventures and we eventually became so famous that anywhere we went people knew of our exploits thanks to my leadership feat.