Director of Brand Strategy
|
One of my players in Rise of the Runelords just took Leadership, which I think is awesome because I get to give the party a cleric now as his cohort (they really needed one!). But I'm not sure what to do with all the 1st level followers.
So I ask you, fellow Paizonians: What do you have your followers do? Craft items for you? Maintain your stronghold/base of operations? Carry your phat l00tz? Run into the dungeons first to "scout for traps"? I don't want them to get in the way of normal gameplay, but I also want them to actually exist within the story and play what small role they can.
Any advice is appreciated.
|
Honestly, I have pretty much outlawed the leadership feat from my campaign. My players are such number monkeys that there is no way that they could be stopped from ruining the play balance. However, if I were to allow them, they would either be spear carriers or they would lay back and guard the character's base of operations. By the time that players reach the point where they can start getting followers and cohorts they should be settling down and setting up shop somewhere. They will need someone to keep the lights on and the fire going while they are gone.
It really depends on how leanent you want to be. As a player I never take the followers into normal battles. I use them to watch the home front, get supplies, find out information you know the more mundane stuff. I have seen some poeple want to use them as an information network pnly to get shot down by the DM. At that point he just forgot about them (he had like a 100 or so too).
I love followers, but have never really had an opportunity to play them out. From a GM’s perspective, they make great hooks.
“Hey, where is Joe Bob?”
“Oh, he said he was going to check out that spooky looking temple over there when he had some time off.”
I would use them to gather information and establish contacts within the operating city. Use them to purchase supplies which could turn into another good hook.
“Hey, where is Joe Bob and the 2,000 gold pieces I gave him to buy those potions?”
Although I would be very cautious about abusing this one. Use it sparingly and make sure the PCs eventually recover their gold or they will never sent poor Joe Bob off again.
Any information you want to feed the PCs by GM fiat you can feed through the followers.
“Didn’t Joe Bob mention he thought the count was acting kind of suspicious?”
Use the followers to reward the PCs in game.
“Joe Bob said it really touched him that you risked your life for him. He said he would now gladly give his for you.”
One of the players in our RotRL game also has leadership, and the followers pretty much watch over the home base, run the business (we built a lumber mill), do research, and otherwise stay out of the way of normal gameplay. It frees up the characters to go off and deal with the adventuring stuff without worrying about who's taking care of things back home. I've got no issue with the followers. The cohort on the other hand can get occasionally a bit wonky...
watch over the home base, run the business (we built a lumber mill), do research, and otherwise stay out of the way of normal gameplay.
This has, IME, been the most efficient use of followers. Having followers run a business and have the player occassionally step in and help out provides the players a constant stream of income that the DM didn't have to give them through normal game play. He could be stingy on gold or give us encounters with creatures that don't have gold (summoned extraplanars, constructs, undead). Work out well for us. And we always had a reason to go back to the home base from time to time.
I really like to see my players use hirelings and followers to handle issues such as carting around loot. If they go to a dungeon or ruin or the like and come out with several ancient and valuable suits of armor, or a collection of statuary, etc., etc., who's going to carry it? The game provides weight limits, and a strong dwarf usual can, per the RAW, manage all that. I also almost always come down in favor of the RAW over "realism" when there is a conflict, but this just stretches things too far for my believability. The players need porters to carry such things, perhaps leading pack mules. The may very well need a supply wagon for long trips, with people to man it. How about a cook? If the entourage is big enough, they may even need extra low-level guards to help defend against unsuspected attacks.
A note on that last point: just as it is folly to actively take followers and hirelings into a combat, it is also folly to walk around with them if there is a strong possibility of encountering dangerous monsters on the road. I, personally, don't like to throw more than wolves and bandits in for typical random encounters, for this very reason and as an explanation of how all the merchant NPCs and their low-level caravan guards actually make it from place to place in one piece, thus allowing the world's economy to, you know, exist. I save all the "monstrous" encounters (even usually things as "mundane" as ogres) for more remote locals, such as lonely mountain passes and the like.
The point was driven home when I foolishly rolled a young green dragon as random encounter for the party one time, and actually used it. The PCs easily dispatched the beast, but not before its breath killed the two dwarf hirelings and wiped out half the band's horse.
Honestly, I have pretty much outlawed the leadership feat from my campaign. My players are such number monkeys that there is no way that they could be stopped from ruining the play balance. However, if I were to allow them, they would either be spear carriers or they would lay back and guard the character's base of operations. By the time that players reach the point where they can start getting followers and cohorts they should be settling down and setting up shop somewhere. They will need someone to keep the lights on and the fire going while they are gone.
This has been my experience as well, but even more so. In my expereience, it is simply better to have a player play a second character. The cohort is always a couple levels behind, and therefore unless they are a pure heal-bot, arn't up to snuff for what the party is fighting; this is espically true for fighters and rogues. In fact, a rogue cohort I had was the worst. She really, really needed the two levels of skills, AC, and BAB to be anything other than a target.
Further, there is the issue of jealousy, especially if your players are immature. I once had a cleric that I took as a cohort simply because the party needed a healer. When I pointed out that it was unfair to expect me to pay for him / equip him totally out of my share of the loot, I got yelled at by a couple people. When I pointed out that I nerfed my own char. to do so (using a feet, giving him part of my share, etc.) - for the good of the party - those same players looked at me as I was speaking to them in Klingon.
As a result of these two situations, I now never take the leadership feat (even if I can) when plaaying, and have banned it from games I GM. It is much simpler to just have people play two PC's. rather than having one player with two nerfed chars, neither of which are what they could be without this feat.
And as for followers.... They are known as "targets." what good are they in a campaign when the party is 7th level or more? "Yeah, I have these 8 people who follow me around. All they do is get in the way when we fight, becuase they simply can't stand up to what we're fighting these days without getting killed. I try to tell them to go home, but they just follow me around. And then they expect me to pay them! Sheesh."
An even more broken part of a broken feet. Even when I allowed the feat, I did away with followers.
|
Guard bases, of course if you're a ranking member of your clergy, perhaps they are all young clerics...now that's a lot of downtime healing for your party,
better yet, leave them at home to cast heals for donations...
Of course, you could always leave the levels 1s at home, and take the level 2s with you at the upper levels, yes, some will die, but more followers will join...
At 25 leadership score, you gain 7 3rd, 4 4th, 2 5th and 2 6th level followers...now those are pretty useful spell casters. (If you are a spell caster.)
Followers are also great as Wilhelms..."ala Wilhelm Scream", use them as dramatic deaths..."A Purple Worm bursts from below the ground, instantly swallowing Fritz! NOOOOO, Not Fritz, he just had a baby girl!"
From what I've played, I think the funnest use of followers was to "stock" up a brothel the players had come into ownership of. While adventuring, we came across the deed to an old run down inn, so we invested a bunch of gold as a group, and turned it into "The Platinum Wench"... Our Bard took leadership and recruited the ladies as his followers. His cohort ran the business end of things while we were out adventuring, and we even had a monthly gp income from it. All in all it made the campaign very interesting...
It is a wonder any of these followers stay around when they are treated as little more than pack animals. It saddens me to see such wonderful role playing opportunities ignored.
One of my players had a business which they ran while he was out adventuring. They might also be used for other errands, but I only allow the cohort to rag along, unless there is a good in-game reason
|
|
It is a wonder any of these followers stay around when they are treated as little more than pack animals. It saddens me to see such wonderful role playing opportunities ignored.
In a previous game I ran, the one PC had taken Leadership. While the PC was adventuring he would convince the rest of the party to hide the items (in a cave sealed with 'stone shape')and secretly use a 'sending' spell to tell his cohort/followers to pick them up. When the party returned to get the items and dound them "missing" they were convinced someone was scrying on them and looting them.
I've used followers to further plot in areas where my character wasn't going to be, allowing the DM to craft a global narrative. I've used followers to extend my character's influence politically. I've used followers as a proxy for my players' influence upon the world. (You are ____ famous and respected.) I've used followers as red shirts. I've used followers as backup in big battles, especially those in anti-magic zones. (Yay for tanglefoot bags!) I've used followers to help players create more lasting connections to the world they're trying to change or save. I've used followers as comic relief and as fodder for melodrama.
|
|
I've used followers to further plot in areas where my character wasn't going to be, allowing the DM to craft a global narrative. I've used followers to extend my character's influence politically. I've used followers as a proxy for my players' influence upon the world. (You are ____ famous and respected.) I've used followers as red shirts. I've used followers as backup in big battles, especially those in anti-magic zones. (Yay for tanglefoot bags!) I've used followers to help players create more lasting connections to the world they're trying to change or save. I've used followers as comic relief and as fodder for melodrama.
I like some of those, my 9yo twins are each going to have Leadership in the Shackled City game, this will give them lots of fodder, so I don't have to kill them off, since they're only 9...heh...
And this campaign will grow with them as they age.
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
I had a battle sorcerer who used them as crew for his ship, with his cohort being the captain. He's a warlock.
If i'd played Shad to Leadership (Or thrallherd) his followers were going to run his orphanage/train little psions for him. Yes, the LE guy ran an orphanage, and actually took good care of kids.
I encourage my PCs to use followers in any reasonable way they can. I have seen (and approved) the following.
Guarding home. Rewarded the PCs by having the followers catch a theif attracted to their riches, although one follower was badly wounded in the fight.
Guarding friendly allies. Rewarded by having an ally escape to a safe location wounded but alive, although two followers were badly wounded and one died (PCs raised the fallen follower, who is now even more loyal.)
Managing "loot". Rewarded by not having to deal with the number crunching of loot (I take over) and getting items sold/bought quickly in game (diplomacy, gather info, etc). Occasional money "skim" due to embezzeling, or paying bribes or black market contacts.
Working a buisiness. I use the DMG2 Buisiness rules, and followers often make for cheap labor, if the buisiness is directly related to the PCs interests (a beastmaster running an exotic animal farm).
Archiving information. Experts with knowledge skills and clerk training may biograph the PCs exploits, taking detailed notes from interviews with the PCs after they return from adventures. Rewarded by having the follower bring to their attention a clue they missed. Also used as adventure hooks and such.
Regarding Cohorts, I have seen the following classes make excellent cohorts:
Marshal, Bard, Cleric, Healer. Great for buffing and or healing.
Warlock, Scout. Good for ranged damage.
Fighter, Paladin, Knight. Great as "bodyguards" for a caster.
Other classes can be harder to make use of, but all can serve some purpose. A barbarian who takes destructive rage and other feats could be a "doorbuster" for the party, when lockpicking fails. A wizard specialized in divination can be exceedingly helpful if used correctly. A rogue with excellent stealth can likewise be very useful.
Basically, cohorts work best if you look at them as "how can he help me to acheive victory" rather than "how can he help acheive victory". Simple damage dealing is often the worst thing to assign a cohort to.
Followers - the other white meat.
Yes, the LE guy ran an orphanage, and actually took good care of kids.
This will probably threadjack into yet another Alignment debate, but…
The way I look at it is that XG means that your ultimate goal is the good of others, XE means your ultimate goal is for the good of yourself and XN means your ultimate goal is the good of everyone, including yourself.
Also CX does not mean you are random man. CX just means you prefer not to be constrained to a formal structure. Just as LX does not mean you are incapable of breaking laws.
I love Leadership! O, let me count the ways.
|
|
The followers in my group tend to vary based on the need. Our rogue/wizard has a cleric of Olidamara who mostly supports with healing buff magic. My character (a fighter/cleric of Kord) has a barbarian follower who supports mainly as someone to get right next to a bad guy and occupy the attention of/absorb damage from.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
Yes, the LE guy ran an orphanage, and actually took good care of kids.This will probably threadjack into yet another Alignment debate, but…
** spoiler omitted **
Reply, well rambling musings, moved to here
It is a wonder any of these followers stay around when they are treated as little more than pack animals. It saddens me to see such wonderful role playing opportunities ignored.
I don't know if this was inspired by my thread, but we had a lot of adventures that derived from our business. There were rival brothels trying to steal customers, there was the occasional evil "John" that had to be disposed of, not to mention a number of other illicit operations going on there. The Platinum Wench wasn't just a business, it became our base of operations. People looking to hire us for adventures always knew where to find us, and enjoy themselves as well. We reinforced the building, and made extra effort to make sure our ladies were well taken care of. For example, we kept a cleric of the Goddess of Love/Lust on hand to cast "Remove Disease" and "Cleanse" regularly. So, all in all they were far from pack animals. They potentially lived better lives than most of the populace of the city, ya know, aside form the corrupt nobles and all.
Here's a thread from the WotC archive which lists LOTS of uses for followers.
Thanks for the link! Even after sorting through the illegal and/or absurd stuff (6th level characters with 6th level cohorts, followers with PC classes, halflings who live in backpacks, etc.) there are still some interesting ideas there.
Bit of a thread drift…
Even after sorting through the illegal and/or absurd stuff (6th level characters with 6th level cohorts, followers with PC classes, halflings who live in backpacks, etc.) there are still some interesting ideas there.
Emphasis mine.
Just because I went through this myself, allow me to point out that followers can have PC classes in 3.5. Or, more accurately, the restriction on followers only having NPC classes doesn't exist in 3.5.
That was only in 3.0.
This threw us for a loop for a while, since we had been so used to followers having npc classes. It just made sense to us, since, ya know, they were npcs and not pcs. But, the 3.5 did make things a lot easier if there were specific followers a player wanted. I usually just stuck with the npc classes voluntarily because they didn't take an active role in adventuring, and our DM never made a big deal of their skills unless we tried something off-the-wall.
I allow leader ship and find it useful, but I don't let a crapload of followers stick around. If someone just wants a cohort they take leadership and don't have to worry about it after that.
If someone wants to run an organization, have a castle, etc. then they MUST take leadership. I use their leadership score as a general indication of how strong the organization whould be. There is no hard and fast translation of just what a leadership score means in terms of the organization, but it gives me a nice guideline to look at.
I created a squire cohort for my PC knight. I loaded him up with feats to enhance the knight in combat including a feat that allowed him to swap places with me if I was about to drop. The rest of the followers were tending to my lands, representing me at court while I was away, and spying for me.
In games I've GM'ed the followers became a spy network across the continent. An underground resistance cell. Guild members.
I love followers! They enhance the believability of the game world no end when used properly. Last campaign, the SCAP, I had a paladin/cleric of heironeous and he bought the leadership feat. If you look at the profile, you'll see the CHA on this guy got to be a little whacked out, and he had a stronghold, had a special power (smoking eye - which I managed to spin as a 'good' power), was fair, generous and of great renown (eventually) which meant I ended up with the maximum number fairly quickly.
During the pivotal large scale city-based rescuing part of the path
I had additional issues in that while I was out saving the world, the DM was not afraid of busting my crib. After Zenith Trajectory, I had a certain body at my temple, and paladins keeping watch. They both died that night... that caused me real pain, but I returned the favour later in the path :->
My cohort was a favoured soul, partly so I could see what it was like to play one, partly to keep it simple, and mainly to act as healer so I could concentrate on my buffs. She also married my PC ;-)
In our current game, our DM Snorter allows the feat, but also states that good roleplay obviates the need for it. The only reason to pick the feat is so you can choose what cohort you get, as opposed to just whatever turns up...
I know in 3.0 followers could only be Commoners, Experts or Warriors, but all it seems to say in 3.5 is that "they're generally low level NPCs".
Apparently, allowing PC classes has become the dominant way of interpreting it, although I always read the 3.5 quote "low level NPCs" to mean "characters with low levels (as shown in the table) and with NPC classes," much as in 3.0 (but expanded beyond Warriors, Experts, and Commoners to allow Adepts and/or Aristocrats as well, if that's your thing). Otherwise, the types of cheese that are attainable quickly snowball beyond the bounds of reason, or at least of good taste (see linked thread for examples).
I know in 3.0 followers could only be Commoners, Experts or Warriors, but all it seems to say in 3.5 is that "they're generally low level NPCs".Apparently, allowing PC classes has become the dominant way of interpreting it, although I always read the 3.5 quote "low level NPCs" to mean "characters with low levels (as shown in the table) and with NPC classes," much as in 3.0 (but expanded beyond Warriors, Experts, and Commoners to allow Adepts and/or Aristocrats as well, if that's your thing). Otherwise, the types of cheese that are attainable quickly snowball beyond the bounds of reason, or at least of good taste (see linked thread for examples).
Check a bit more carefully. I know that somewhere in the DMG it specifies that they are commoner/expert/nobel normally. It does say that they can have a PC class isntead, but at lower level than they would otherwise be.
Check a bit more carefully. I know that somewhere in the DMG it specifies that they are commoner/expert/nobel normally. It does say that they can have a PC class isntead, but at lower level than they would otherwise be.
If someone could find this, please inform me.
I know I scoured the 3.5 material (beyond even the DMG) and saw nothing like this.
Yeah, all I see is, "Followers are similar to cohorts, except they’re generally low-level NPCs."
That tells me (a) no PC classes except maybe in very rare cases, and (b) those cases don't seem to be spelled out, making it strictly a DM call.
Yeah, all I see is, "Followers are similar to cohorts, except they’re generally low-level NPCs."
That tells me (a) no PC classes except maybe in very rare cases, and (b) those cases don't seem to be spelled out, making it strictly a DM call.
3.5 DMG page 104 (2nd column, 2nd paragraph of Allies section)
"Allies come in two types, ... and those who actually travel with them on adventures. ... The[y] ... function as party members and earn a full share of experience points and treasure just as any other character does. Essentially, these ... allies are adventurers who just happen not to be controlled by players. They differ from cohorts and hirelings, who work directly for the PCs."
Cohorts are explicitly detailed in this same section, while hirelings are fairly clearly described as fixed-in-level NPCs. (Higher level ones can be hired at a correspondingly higher pay rate.)
Page 105: "Followers don't earn experience and thus don't gain levels. However blah blah blah, inferring that followers that survive advance in level when the character's leadership score indicates gaining of higher-than-1st level followers."
I do hope that this mess gets cleaned up in PFRPG! ^_^
Classified as adventurers seems to equate to non-NPC classes and PrC eligibility if they're good enough.
Although I can see some people might not agree, this seems like the most sensible interpretation to me.Yeah, all I see is, "Followers are similar to cohorts, except they’re generally low-level NPCs."
That tells me (a) no PC classes except maybe in very rare cases, and (b) those cases don't seem to be spelled out, making it strictly a DM call.
I'm not disagreeing, but I do want to point out another interpretation. One that I don't think is much of a stretch.
"Followers are similar to cohorts, except they’re generally low-level NPCs."
Tells me that, since cohorts are (usually) run by the PC - pseudo PCs, if you will - that followers are usually run by the GM. Without any further context, there is nothing in that statement that backs up "usually NPC classes," rather than "usually GM controlled."
But it is a mighty large hole, either way.
I had one deck of many things follower. I got him to draw more cards from the deck.