| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I have been pondering the idea of how far you can stretch one single NPC.
A single NPC with leadership could be stretched into a small group of enemies, but is this a good way to design small group encounters?
This could be used to model:
A warboss and bandit gang,
A detective and city watch patrol,
A military squad with leader and attached caster.
And my favorite: An underground cult.
I also think it may be possible to fully populate a small dungeon with one npc, recomended WBL, and leadership rules.
Example:
Leader: 8th lv evil cleric
Cohort: lv 6 evil cleric
followers: 8 lv 1 Adepts
Each cleric can cast animate dead and takes control undead as a feat.
Undead (Aproximate, based on a tenuous, in progress build):
Leader: 48HD animated, 8 controlled
Cohort: 24HD animated, 6 controlled
that seems like enough baddies to populate a small dungeon area for a 3rd-4th lv party.
Any thoughts on the matter?
I'm not too certain on what you're wanting to do here. Are you basically wanting to have a dungeon filled entirely by underlings of one BBEG?
Because that doesn't require a feat, most bad guys end up getting followers simply because they usually can promise power and/or wealth (and it's less so needed when you're dealing with clerics [or cults], because usually those people are following the "high priest" simply because they're more in tune with their god/beliefs/magic stick). Leadership is meant for players to gain followers, you don't need to follow its rules for NPCs just for the sake of them having followers. If you're the DM, just write it down.
I'm not too certain on what you're wanting to do here. Are you basically wanting to have a dungeon filled entirely by underlings of one BBEG?
Because that doesn't require a feat, most bad guys end up getting followers simply because they usually can promise power and/or wealth (and it's less so needed when you're dealing with clerics [or cults], because usually those people are following the "high priest" simply because they're more in tune with their god/beliefs/magic stick). Leadership is meant for players to gain followers, you don't need to follow its rules for NPCs just for the sake of them having followers. If you're the DM, just write it down.
it's a thought exercise on the leadership feat. Personally I drop the feat from my games but use the chart as a loose guideline for Players trying to hire underlings.
the idea is technically seeing if one character with "gear" can populate a dungeon in a meaningful way. I also pondered if one spellcaster with recomended wealth by level could animate enough objects for a level appropriate lair. It's not really important unless a player is building a dungeon.
So...if you actually did this, would the encounter/dungeon grant only XP for the guy with the Leadership feat? That seems the only reason to do this...
I hadn't really thought of this, but technically, the minions are a feature of the leader...hmmm
Ah, now I see.
I've never seen Leadership in action, actually. My first DM who taught me to play banned the feat (though he house ruled like crazy, lots of times for what seemed to be no apparent reason and had a history of just misreading spells/rules and denying vehemently that he was wrong). I no longer play with him, but my entire current group learned from him, so we've avoided it out of habit.
I've read over it a few times before, and it definitely seems to hold as much power as what you listed above. It personally wouldn't mind it for maybe one person in the party whom it fits, but it would be simply dumb to allow every member of the party to have it (which is equally dumb, to restrict it to just one player).
Back to the original question: I think a cleric with Leadership who leads an underground cult could very easily fill a dungeon using undead and his followers. I rolled up an Undead Lord at 14th level recently for a one-shot and even without Leadership, there was a dumb number of minions involved. Look at Classic Horrors Revisited, there are variant skeletons/zombies in there that would mix up the enemies enough to not all be basic undead (though they do cost more).
And I wouldn't allow anyone to gain the exp of his Leadership followers. Any undead he summoned, fine.
It give me an idea. in a non-good game I (the PC) could take leadership and create my own dungeon and create a rumor of it's existance so that other adventurers would try to come and try to clean it out for loot. Then the BBEG (me) comes and steps on their heads to collect their WBL.
Most of that is going to be Cleave fodder to make a hack happy Barbarian rage with joy. Seriously this seems like a lot of guys but the vast majority is not going slow down the party appreciably. If you stick to this being an Epic fight the party would be 5th level. Also are you taking the 25 gp per HD out of the villain's gear allotment? 1,800 gp total. Likewise upgrades to the cohorts gear usually comes out of the PCs funds, same general rule should apply when done as an NPC leader.
I actually worked this out once, but decided against it.
BBEG Sorcerer : Level 11
Leadership, Score 16
Cohort : Sorcerer : level 9
Leadership : Score 14
Cohort Cohort : Sorcerer : Level 7
Leadership : Score 11
Cohort Cohort Cohort : Sorcerer : Level 5
Minions :
1st Level : 46
2nd Level : 3
3rd Level : 1
So, a battle trio that averages out to level 9, and 50 minions led by a 5th level cohort. :)
And after you wade through 50 minions and 1 cohort, you get to fight a trio of nasties, and when you get done with all that, you get credit for one CR 11 creature.
I decide, reluctantly, not to do it, as I had a player at the time that might actually have had a cerebral hemmoragh when he found out. :)
Most of that is going to be Cleave fodder to make a hack happy Barbarian rage with joy. Seriously this seems like a lot of guys but the vast majority is not going slow down the party appreciably. If you stick to this being an Epic fight the party would be 5th level. Also are you taking the 25 gp per HD out of the villain's gear allotment? 1,800 gp total. Likewise upgrades to the cohorts gear usually comes out of the PCs funds, same general rule should apply when done as an NPC leader.
In 3.5 I nearly TPK'd a group of level 9's with 50 level 1 goblins.
They all had bows, and were scattered around at 150 feet apart in a grassland. They'd pop up and fire then next round duck down and run. Then pop and fire, duck and run. One attack each round. :) They only hit on a 20 for the tank, but if I roll 50 attacks, I get 2 or 3 hits. And the AC 17 wizard was a porcupine shortly after the fight started.
The last 3.0 edition game I ran, we did this concept with the badguys.
Badguy was a high level vampire cleric with leadership.
Zombies and skeletons from animate
Ghouls and Shadows from create
then the Ghouls each had their own squad of ghoul spawn, same for shadows
Then he had Leadership, and picked a younger vamp cleric. Who also had leadership, etc, all the way down. Also each had created undead, some of which also had spawned undead under their control.
We built an antagonist pyramid several thousand deep, and marched it around the campaign, taking over cities and swelling the undead ranks, all within the confines of the existing leadership mechanics. Then the PCs had to figure out how to combat it with gorilla tactics.
I've read over it a few times before, and it definitely seems to hold as much power as what you listed above. It personally wouldn't mind it for maybe one person in the party whom it fits, but it would be simply dumb to allow every member of the party to have it (which is equally dumb, to restrict it to just one player).
DISCLAIMER: In this post I will specifically focus the majority of my attention on the FOLLOWERS part of Leadership, not the COHORT. Assume that if I do not state otherwise, any use of the pronouns they, them, their, etc refer to the low level NPC followers granted by this feat.
I wonder how many players actually want a mob of 1st level commoners following them around, and I wonder how many of THOSE players expect them to be of any use for the vast majority of things that adventuring parties do. The section on leadership even notes that a penalty applies to the leadership score for moving around a lot, which many adventures lead PCs to do. Also, if the PC is placing these people at risk constantly, then they are less likely to follow him.
I've never thought it to be a feat that you take so that you can have a small village follow you everywhere you go, I always imagined it to be a way for you (Batman) to get a side-kick (Robin), maybe a guy to do your laundry and set up camp (Alfred) and then the rest of the followers stayed somewhere to give you circumstance bonuses for a local area (Commissioner Gordon, Lucius Fox, any number of other of Batman's usual contacts in the underground).
"But Foghammer, Leadership doesn't say that your followers have to stay in town. You're dumb!" No... And I wouldn't force it to be played that way, but NPCs are simulated people, and those people have families to care for, jobs to do, and other loyalties to keep. Nowhere in the feat does it say that any of these followers are beholden to you (unless your DM makes that so, but that's GM fiat, neither here nor there). They follow you, presumably, out of respect for some perceived quality or trait.
Imagine for a moment that everyone on this forum is considered a follower of one of Paizo. We support them and want them to succeed at their job and we are willing to provide our aid (be it feedback for products, or the purchase of their products, or voting for their products in some award running, etc), however, not all of us are satisfied all of the time, to the contrary. The crowd is always split to varying degrees, but still we remain loyal because ultimately we believe in what they are doing, even if we disagree with some of the "little things" in the "big picture." This analogy works with politicians as well.
Those low-level NPC followers can be blacksmiths and adepts and such, and can provide a lot of crunch benefit if they're abused, sure, but that's only if the DM lets them be abused. It's not necessary for all of them to come from the same town/city/area, nor is it necessary for all of them to follow the PC around. They SHOULDN'T follow the NPC around, because their lives are going to be put at risk needlessly, and if the character they are following cares one whit about them (as a good leader should, else he should lose their trust) then he will struggle to maintain their safety.
A good movie to watch for reference to what I'm talking about is "Defiance." Daniel Craig plays a Jew who hides out in the wilderness following German hostilities and ends up taking on other refugees and has to make a lot of hard decisions. It's a true story, too. I recommend it.
I wonder how many players actually want a mob of 1st level commoners following them around, and I wonder how many of THOSE players expect them to be of any use for the vast majority of things that adventuring parties do. The section on leadership even notes that a penalty applies to the leadership score for moving around a lot, which many adventures lead PCs to do. Also, if the PC is placing these people at risk constantly, then they are less likely to follow him.
Not for very long. :) The people in my games that take them usually ask for ideas on what to do with them after having to rescue them from bad guys.
I had one person use them to staff an embassy in a foreign country they were in at the time. Another had his follow a day or two behind, with the cohort running messages back to them as needed. He had them do things like assist with rebuilding the village that got attacked by orcs, or help with getting the crops in before storms hit a region, or do other emergency services type things. The followers got paid more than they would working in a city (about 3 times more I believe, it was a small amount of what he was getting in game, like 1% of his wealth).
The best use for the Leadership feat is, IMHO, to shore up weaknesses in party roles. A cohort can make an excellent herald (i.e. face), a personal sage, a wilderness scout, nightwatch, barterer, or a healbot (back at camp). In my experience, Leadership only becomes problematic when the DM lets it.
The last 3.0 edition game I ran, we did this concept with the badguys.
We built an antagonist pyramid several thousand deep, and marched it around the campaign, taking over cities and swelling the undead ranks, all within the confines of the existing leadership mechanics. Then the PCs had to figure out how to combat it with gorilla tactics.
That sounds great. My thoughts was using my proposed build for a small monastery of Urgathoa, but that just takes it to eleven!.
[quoye="mdt"]In 3.5 I nearly TPK'd a group of level 9's with 50 level 1 goblins.
Never underestimate tiny enemys in large numbers. ;)
I'd like to add another lil tidbit to my rant above...
A quick assessment of the number of followers available to a character with this feat will show you that you can very quickly build a private army of level 1 followers by mid-high levels. Playing to maximize your leadership score is relatively easy and several dozen followers can be accumulated by 10th level.
What stat block do you use for them? One of the NPCs from the GMG? Does the PC leader know any of their names? The PC with leadership may not have to know that the blacksmith in his group is named Hershel to call him out to mend a rusty blade, but Hershel probably wants the PC to know his name, especially so that the PC will quit yelling "Where's the blacksmith?" instead of "Where's Hershel?"
[Random Thought: You know what would be awesome? A four bard party each with leadership. A band with an army of groupies and roadies.]
I think to help deter abuse (there's no telling if it would stop it of course) I would require each follower the PC wanted to make use of to have a character sheet. Example: If you want a courier to ride off to a town you don't feel like traveling to for a message delivery, you better have a character sheet for Dustin the Mail Boy so I can determine whether or not he survives the trip.