|
So how did said player CAUSE the Cohorts death?
He has to CAUSE it to suffer the penalty, he doesn't suffer if the cohort simply dies.
Now I see whey you guys are struggling.
I can just see it now; given that a party member took Leadership, the less scrupulous players begin killing the cohorts off to far them for loot - they know five minutes later a fully equpiied replacement will come along with fresh treasure for the pile.
You didn't make it sound like it was an accident.
Of course, realistically word will get out that the party is a perilous group to work for, and so future employees will demand hazard pay and death gratuities and the like.
So how did said player CAUSE the Cohorts death?
He has to CAUSE it to suffer the penalty, he doesn't suffer if the cohort simply dies.
Same as if he got him into a fight that got him killed. If the cohort is killed doing what the PC tells him, then the PC is responsible for his death. If the PC tells him to come there, when the PC knows his comrades are going to kill him (or just throws him into fight after fight until he dies), then the PC is responsible for his death. I'm not sure how this is confusing to you in the slightest.
Now I see whey you guys are struggling.
Not struggling at all, it's very clear. You, on the other hand, seem to have some troubles.
Failing to equip your Cohort would fall under 'Leaders reputation, Aloof'.
No, a reputation for aloofness is just that, a reputation for aloofness. It means you don't show compassion for anyone, making it more likely that you are not concerned about your cohort's health and safety.
Equipping your cohort with more gear than you 'should' would be 'fairness and generosity'.
This at least is agreeable. If you equip him with more equipment than he already has when he shows up then yes, you are being generous and if you don't blame him everytime something goes wrong that he had no control over, then you are being fair.
I dont need to give chapter and verse, its all on the same page you have already referenced and are currently reading from, go have a look at the sidebars.
Anyhow have FAQ'd it.
Its pretty clear to me, but hopefully an 'Official' response might clarify the point.
Again, we agree, it would clarify the point. However, I seriously and sincerely doubt it is us who will be enlightened if a dev does bother to respond. I seriously doubt anyone will, unless it's SKR stopping in to read the riot act over people not reading the plain meaning of the rules.
Edit : As an additional note, when I do cohorts in games, they are not faceless strangers. They have families, loved ones, etc, just like most of the people in the world. That NPC equipment they come with is usually sent on to their survivors. Or else, someone comes asking after the jerk who got Uncle Willie killed and then looted all his stuff. I would then affect the PCs reputation negatively for Aloofness (he stole the last cohorts stuff instead of sending it to his relatives).
Getting into a fight that ends in a Cohort being killed is not 'causing the death of a Cohort'.
Being responsible, and 'causing' is not the same thing.
Fighter Cohorts are going to die at the hands of the enemy, its an accepted occupational hazard on behalf of the Fighter - if you were reckless and negligent when you sent them out, well that WOULD be your fault.
Roll on SKR.
And if you think people are going to continue to work for you without a considerable death payment, you're crazy. Thus solving the problem of 'free loot for all'.
Sadly, the rules are silent on Veterans Affairs entitlements.
|
Getting into a fight that ends in a Cohort being killed is not 'causing the death of a Cohort'.
Being responsible, and 'causing' is not the same thing.
Fighter Cohorts are going to die at the hands of the enemy, its an accepted occupational hazard on behalf of the Fighter - if you were reckless and negligent when you sent them out, well that WOULD be your fault.
Roll on SKR.
You are responsible for your cohort's lives. If you get in a fight that end up with them being killed, you were careless.
And whatever the situation, you will still be remembered as "the guy who wasn't capable of leading his men in this fight without losing them", hence the Leadership malus.|
|
And if you think people are going to continue to work for you without a considerable death payment, you're crazy. Thus solving the problem of 'free loot for all'.Sadly, the rules are silent on Veterans Affairs entitlements.
"Hey, that guy just took his squires family armor and sold it for a diamond ring! And didn't even pay for the man to be raised! What an oaf!"
You are responsible for your cohort's lives.
Indeed you are, but the penalty is when you CAUSE their death.
Once again, being responsible for someones life (passenger in your car) does not mean you CAUSED their death (When a drunk driver crashed into you both as you were travelling together).
So, how much dold does a Monster Cohort come with?
Whats the starting wealth of my cohort Blink Dog?
Yes it does. It says to multiply the result of (cohort level divided by PC level) by the number of XP the PC received. Then add that number to the cohort's XP total. It doesn't say take the XP from the PC and give it to the cohort. Indeed, you can't take it from the encounter total, because you've already divided it up among the PCs.No it doesn't.
it does not specify that he has to participate in the encounter. It states that a cohort does not take a piece of the party's xp, instead he gets xp as determined by yours and his lvls.
We agree. It seems you read the question differently than I did.
"Hey, that guy just took his squires family armor and sold it for a diamond ring! And didn't even pay for the man to be raised! What an oaf!"
Hence the Aloof modifier :)
You are responsible for your cohort's lives.Indeed you are, but the penalty is when you CAUSE their death.
Once again, being responsible for someones life (passenger in your car) does not mean you CAUSED their death (When a drunk driver crashed into you both as you were travelling together).
So, how much dold does a Monster Cohort come with?
Whats the starting wealth of my cohort Blink Dog?
The same as any other cohort of the same level unless there is rule saying blink dogs never have equipment. In which case I would have to scour the rules to see which one takes precedence.
The probable good news is that "should" will be changed to a more definite word.
Shifty there are AP's where you can take NPC's as your cohorts, and they already have gear. Are you saying the AP's/Devs are breaking their own rules or are you saying the GM should magically make the NPC lose all of their gear before agreeing to follow the party.
Curse of the Crimson Throne comes to mind.
| 5 people marked this as FAQ candidate. Staff response: no reply required. |
Wouldn't be the first time an AP writer had a 'moment' :p
Anyhow all I ask is those who think I am wrong to stop typing and go hit the FAQ button.
If I it turns out they are right, then by all means they can be happy.
Hopefully the word 'Should' will be cleared up to something more prescriptive. On the other hand if it turns out it IS instructional, then I will certainly be pleased.
Either way we will all be better off.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
For equipment, the cohort comes with his own equipment. A PC is not going to look for a level 4 or 5 or higher cohort that can't manage to put together basic gear on their own. That being said, it is NPC level gear, so it is truly basic gear. If you want them to have more than that, you have to give it to them yourself or give them money so they can buy it. So there is no "free loot" if one should die, because it's all either basic stuff, at least to the PCs, or stuff they technically paid for.
The whole "causing their death" thing has always bothered me. If you want to take a fighter cohort, you may as well plan on not making much use of the feat for more than a level or two because a fighting cohort will die, no matter how you try to protect them, and if you take a strict, literal reading of the feat, than after 2 cohorts, you will effectively have no cohort of any use, despite the fact that your previous cohorts died doing their job, knowing that death was a risk to that job. Now if you sent them in on an obvious suicide run with no plans to back them up and there is no benefit to the cohort sacrificing himself, that is a different story entirely, but simply dying in combat shouldn't be enough by itself to hurt your leadership score. How your character behaved before, during, and after that combat should ultimately determine whether you take a hit to your score or not.
That being said, the best use of the leadership feat isn't to have a combat buddy, although is small parties, it can be used for that to fill gaps; it's to expand your character's footprint in the world without having to physically be everywhere. Use the followers to establish a guild, business, school, or some other such organization. The cohort can bounce between offstage and onstage actions as needed to tell the story, but it isn't constantly in danger; after all, the dangerous part is what the PCs are for. This helps both the DM and the player. The DM gets a new story hook, and another way to legitimately share the details behind the world he worked so hard to create with the players, and the players are more likely to be interested and engaged in that world because their character is a part of it instead of someone floating through it, colliding with certain elements on occasion.
The whole wealth thing is easy to deal with. Sure, the cohort can make you a lot of money and provide a lot of resources, but its not going to be resources easily turned into ready cash or immediately available for use. It can be used to increase offstage influence with the rest of the world, and provide important contacts, but gear wise, it won't really help you much in most cases. If you try to abuse it to get excess potions and such, I would start enforcing weight encumbrance, and make it clear that extra dimensional spaces, while useful, do have limits. Also, throwing in a variety of encounters in a variety of settings can make over reliance on magic items a dangerous thing for the party.
Wouldn't be the first time an AP writer had a 'moment' :p
Anyhow all I ask is those who think I am wrong to stop typing and go hit the FAQ button.
If I it turns out they are right, then by all means they can be happy.
Hopefully the word 'Should' will be cleared up to something more prescriptive. On the other hand if it turns out it IS instructional, then I will certainly be pleased.
Either way we will all be better off.
This was the suggested intent by Mr.Jacobs not a freelancer who got one by(although accidentally) like the paladin that worshipped Asmodeus.
Remember... you can't take a cohort till, at the earliest, 6th level, so this isn't a worry till after the second adventure ends, pretty much.THAT SAID.
Yes. We are setting up Trinia as a cohort possibility. She gains a few levels between now and then, though, and the adventure doesn't suspect she'll be a cohort until the fourth adventure, when she's reintroduced to the party and the adventure sets her up as being a cohort.
You can certainly have her become a cohort earlier though. You'll need to do a few adjustments to where she goes and what happens to her, though.
a cohort is an extra set of actions or resources that gains seperate XP based on it's master's level.
a cohort takes up a share of the loot, just like a PC
killing the cohort causes penalties
they require a great deal of time to design
they require a feat tax to utilize
they are limited in level by that of thier master
they aren't always gauranteed level appropriate gear nor stats
some concepts demand an extra PC
i would gladly give a newly arriving Cohort both PC stats and PC wealth for thier level, in fact, i would even give them the full PC treatment.
they cost a general feat, which is a highly limited resource
any resources spent on the cohort's upkeep are resources not spent on that of the PC who took the feat
the cohort is a whole 2 levels lower than the PC who took the feat to get them
taking the cohort with you is a major risk that could affect your PC, both in power and in reputation
there are other ways to increase your number of actions, many of which are a great deal cheaper than the amount of feats, gold, and game time spent making the cohort.
such cheaper ways include Familiars, Animal Companions (and thier class specific derivitives), Summoned Creatures, and Eidolons. none of these really need much wealth to truly be effective at thier intended roles.
and does a spellcasting cohort really matter? such a character is extremely likely to end up delegated to a support based role. like providing healing, short duration buffs, or utility. sometimes even face, or scout if they have the right abilities to accomplish it.
a party who works together as one unit is going to be far more effective than a bunch of lone wolves with sidekicks
really, i beleive cohorts aren't really that overpowered, even if they start off with PC wealth, PC stats and the Full PC treatment. the fact they take a share of the wealth balances itself out in the end.
Then let us press the dreaded FAQ button and summon the Gods.
Let us hear their thunder :P
Then let us press the dreaded FAQ button and summon the Gods.
Let us hear their thunder :P
I see no need to press the button. Many times taking a known NPC as a cohort instead of creating one is suggest by official channels like my last quote showed unless the Pathfinder thinks it is ok to just ignore the rules in AP's only, which is not the same as an oversight. The same advice was given in another AP also.
AP's saying do it like this I suggested and the fact that nobody is agreeing with you, along with the fact that the people who don't agree with you are normally right doesn't seem like you will get this one.
From my PoV we have experienced posters and official adventures saying you are doing it wrong.
So why should I hit the FAQ button?
Really?
You'd type all that, yet you wouldn't actually go to the miniscule effort of hitting one button?
Thats pretty amazing.
Why are you so afraid to push the FAQ button? Whats the worst that happens?
I am also wondering how there people with class levels have no gear? They had to have some way to survive while gaining those levels. :)
Really?
You'd type all that, yet you wouldn't actually go to the miniscule effort of hitting one button?
Thats pretty amazing.
Why are you so afraid to push the FAQ button? Whats the worst that happens?
I typed all that so you could see that the odds are not in your favor, and I seriously doubt 95% of the gaming world including the company that makes the rules has been doing it wrong. That is what would be amazing to me.
I am also wondering how there people with class levels have no gear? They had to have some way to survive while gaining those levels. :)
Press the button then, and all will be revealed.
I find it amazing you'd 'see the need' to press hundreds of buttons to tell me I am wrong, yet so far you guys seem reticent to press one button to prove you are right.
Go on, you know you want to...
I am also wondering how there people with class levels have no gear? They had to have some way to survive while gaining those levels. :)Press the button then, and all will be revealed.
I find it amazing you'd 'see the need' to press hundreds of buttons to tell me I am wrong, yet so far you guys seem reticent to press one button to prove you are right.
Go on, you know you want to...
Will thou bow down to the glory and knowledge of the Wraithstrike once the truth is revealed or will thou reject the truth.
I have shown ye the way yet you continue to doubt. Do not doubt, but believe. Follow me, follow me, for I lead you to truth.
I'm picking up what you are putting down, but I am not smoking what you're rolling.
So far I appear to be the only one willing to get the 'Official' word here and press the FAQ. Odd that.
[edit - now there's two brave men, the rest are ducking]
|
|
I'm picking up what you are putting down, but I am not smoking what you're rolling.
So far I appear to be the only one willing to get the 'Official' word here and press the FAQ. Odd that.
[edit - now there's two brave men, the rest are ducking]
The second "brave man" is me. Just wanting to see you interweb face when you'll be proven wrong. :B
I'm picking up what you are putting down, but I am not smoking what you're rolling.
So far I appear to be the only one willing to get the 'Official' word here and press the FAQ. Odd that.
[edit - now there's two brave men, the rest are ducking]
I have already given you the "official" word. I just don't have one of those funky name tags.
The second "brave man" is me. Just wanting to see you interweb face when you'll be proven wrong. :B
Practicing that now.
Also practicing my victory dance.
Glad to see another person has the cojones to put their answer in the spotlight, and let the dice fall where they may.
The rest are ducking so hard I feel ashamed on their behalf.
Too bad the thread has degenerated into a discussion what the word "should" means.
As for me, yeah, I see Leadership as overpowered. Could be because it just so happened that two characters took it in my last campaign ( CotCT ) and they got a bard and a cleric, two important NPC's, to join. As the group did not have those classes in the group before, the two cohorts tilted the power level substantially towards the party, which in a pre-written module is quite powerful.
I have to add that leadership breaks nearly every convention there is for how your write feats and the kinds of things they should be able to do.
That said, there aren't any other character build mechanics where it makes a ton of sense either so I can't entirely fault the game for it but it sure is weird from a design standpoint.
I've never used it in a game or had a player use it but I think if someone wanted to I would let them. Its the sort of ability that you really need to have some involvement in as a game master and it can also be a great tool for story elements and the like.
I think I would work collaboratively with the player to "share" the story and behavior of the followers and cohort. Most of the time the player gets to direct them but I can step in and take the reigns from time to time for the sake of story telling or if the player is somehow abusing his minions.
Yes, pressing a button is 'brave'. :P
Aww come on, it's what pressing that button might set in motion that is the real point here.
If these guys are so dead sure about it, then they'd happily put it to official scrutiny. Yet they don't seem to be.
Perhaps they realise that if it turns out that 'should' is misleading then I am guilty of being misled. If it is instructional then they are flat out wrong after carrying on like pork chops.
|
|
I've never seen a player take Leadership. And if they asked, I would probably say no.
I'd tell them to roleplay it out. Attract a cohort. Gather followers. Earn the feat, don't spend a slot on it.
Aww come on, it's what pressing that button might set in motion that is the real point here.
If these guys are so dead sure about it, then they'd happily put it to official scrutiny. Yet they don't seem to be.
Perhaps they realise that if it turns out that 'should' is misleading then I am guilty of being misled. If it is instructional then they are flat out wrong after carrying on like pork chops.
Well, I'm one of those guys. And I really don't care to have the issue settled. I just like the arguing. :)
Am I right in understanding that you say a 19th level character taking Leadership would find a 17th level cohort with no gear?
Cohorts come with gear. Your leadership score does not take a hit unless your character is somehow directly responsible for their death (you murdered him? Penalty. Sent him on a suicide mission? Penalty. He died protecting you from a monster? Free pass.).
And just because I love arguing with EVERYONE, anyone who disagrees with the above two statements is an idiot. :P
I like the arguing too! It's rather entertaining and if anything gives us all a better understanding of how rules stick together.
Anyhow RD, I dont disagree with the above two statements, I just disagree with one of them, so I'm ok apparently.
Anyhow, talk is cheap...
Man up and press the FAQ.
|
|
In my game, we've got three elite soldiers NPCs in our group, selected beforehand by two PCs ("Minister of Justice" barbarian and "Master Archery Instructor" ranger), trained by the Imperial Army, and who officially rejoined us for training and gain of experience. The two PCs are their mentors for future General jobs, and they have to pay for everything outside of the basic weapon/armor/shield, from nourriture to healing potions (only way to patch ourselves outside of natural healing and occasional temple where you sell a kidney to get back to full HP). The funniest part is that the DM didn't even think about the Leadership feat before doing this to the point these NPCs don't use any predefinite rule from the rulebook, and that fights still are actually challenging-to-lethal, even if the three NPCs add themselves to 5 players + a DMPC. That's effectively 9 characters in game, and there is no cheese. Guess I'm lucky.
In my RL group once we reach level seven I'll be taking this feat, and also I'm allowing it in the PBP I GM. I don't think it's broken, but I did think the WBL would count towards your cohort - if it has 2000gp worth of gear, that's 2000gp I/my players won't be seeing. So yes, I guess it does matter to me whether or not the gear comes with the cohort (which I would have to rule as being 'in addition to the WBL') or whether it's part of the cost of decking out said cohort (which slots nicely in the WBL). The latter was what I believed after reading the leadership rules.
As the rules lawyer for my group, FAQ'd for the future.
An excellent and erudite post Dan.
In my RL group once we reach level seven I'll be taking this feat, and also I'm allowing it in the PBP I GM. I don't think it's broken, but I did think the WBL would count towards your cohort - if it has 2000gp worth of gear, that's 2000gp I/my players won't be seeing. So yes, I guess it does matter to me whether or not the gear comes with the cohort (which I would have to rule as being 'in addition to the WBL') or whether it's part of the cost of decking out said cohort (which slots nicely in the WBL). The latter was what I believed after reading the leadership rules.
As the rules lawyer for my group, FAQ'd for the future.
Don't join the dissenter. :)
They are trying to silence us Dan.
They fear the FAQ, they fear the light.
Resources that originate from feats and traits do not count against WBL, so the argument that the cohort's equipment should reduce the player's WBL is false. Especially since it's not his equipment, it's the NPCs. If he leaves, he takes it with him.
Example : Rich Parents gives 900gp at 1st level, you don't reduce the character's party treasure by 900gp between 1st and 2nd level to compensate.
Example : Heirloom weapon gives the character a MW weapon (+300 gp of wealth) at 1st level. You don't reduce his WBL for it.
Example : Bonded Weapon for a wizard gives them a MW weapon at 1st level, you don't decrease his WBL to make up for it.
Example : Gunslinger get's a pistol at 1st level, you don't reduce his WBL to compensate.
I'm sure there are some more out there.
Yet at any stage you can 'borrow' the cohorts item.
So how is that not the same?
Yet at any stage you can 'borrow' the cohorts item.
So how is that not the same?
At any point in time you can borrow the other PCs equipment. So obviously, the WBL should be considered a cap for the team as a whole, not by individual.
Besides, you seem to be assuming that the NPC has all sorts of fabulous treasure.
At 7th level, he has a sum total of 2,400gp worth of equipment. The most expensive piece of which can only be 1000gp, which is for armor/shield. This is compared to the PC who has 23,500gp. In other words, 10 times what the NPC has.
At 20th level, the cohort can have at most 75,000gp worth of equipment. The most expensive piece of which is a weapon at 24,000gp. The PC by contrast has 880,000gp, or more than 10 times the wealth. I submit that the PC at level 20 is not going to be interested in a 24K weapon, it's the type of junk he normally tosses if it's too heavy, or just takes to town and sells.
Your argument comes down to "ZOMG it's broken! A level 7 PC might get a set of MW Breastplate for free by stripping his cohort at sword point! BROKEN!"
Your argument comes down to "ZOMG it's broken! A level 7 PC might get a set of MW Breastplate for free by stripping his cohort at sword point! BROKEN!"
No its that it says 'Should', not 'Does'.
Please at least have the decency not to deliberately misrepresent an argument, I have been very clear about what the wording issue is, and now you are trying to throw off and change the debate.When you are done, press the FAQ button.
Thank you.
Cool, but this is a debate about taht word and what it may or may not mean in this context... let them press and be judged.
I take it by the distinct apprehension to do so that they have shown they aren't so sure, so I'm just going to have to accept they are surrendering.
Its a bit like the kids that pick a fight in school, and then at 3 o'clock they dont arrive in the yard, but have instead caught the early bus home.
Personally, my take on Leadership is that the cohort is equipped (you know, 'cause that's the rule, sorry Shifty) - but also, controlled by the GM or another player. One thing I have always hated is the idea that by taking a feat (or an animal companion) you suddenly get a perfect mindlink with your cohort/companion such that you can direct them and have them do things without needing to tell them.
Also, the cohort is loyal to you, but that doesn't mean that he's going to be mindless.
So: You get the cohort, he's loyal to you and will (almost always) do what you *tell* him, but someone else implements the actual *doing* of those things.
So far, I find it's worked pretty well -- also, it encourages more than one party member to get a cohort, so that each of the people with the feat controls the other guy's cohort (and now has even more of an interest in playing this one well..)
Also, I tend to think the "caused the death" thing is removed (or at least mitigated) if you have the cohort raised and remove the negative levels... if you don't, then, yeah, you get the rep as the guy who keeps leading idealistic kids into battle and leaving them there.