I just took a leave from 4th edition to dive into pathfinder. I'm not new to d&d, but I've never used cohorts in my games. Right now the party consists of a witch, gunslinger, barbarian, and a cleric. With only 2 sessions under our belts we have a fairly robust (not entirely original) back story.
The human gunslinger is on the run from members of the cult of secrets who wish to snuff him out and take his gun( he believes he is the only creature on the whole planet that owns such a device). Grudge as he is known was also the captain of a sailing vessel crewed entirely by halflings... This ship was taken, along with his crew by blahhh... You probably dont need all the dirt… where im going with this is grudge wants to get his ship back, and his crew. If he takes the leadership feat his second in command, a halfling rogue will become his cohort (@ 7th lvl) and the rest of the little folk his followers. so...
Do cohorts become a 2nd character for players? I'm just curious on how this has been handled by others. Followers I'd assume remain GM controlled... Not alot is mentioned in the core rules, but I don't have the gamemastery guide. I suppose this is not much different than an animal companion.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Cohorts are a delicate area. Some DMs flat out don't allow the leadership feat.
Animal companion. This is a class feature. You class is assumed to have this or some substitute for balance. In extreme cases, a DM might consider not letting a character control their companion. For example, is a player was making his companion fight in a manner that is way more clever than an int 3 creature should fight, I might intervene, but for the most part, I let them run the companion.
Cohorts are a little different for one main reason. They are characters in their own right, and thus they have their own free will. If a player commands their cohort to go die a terrible death in their stead, a cohort may very well refuse. I let the players run the cohort as a second character, but I make it clear that I will intervene if I feel they are abusing that control.
|
That's entirely up to you, really. Think of it similar to an Animal Companion or a Familiar. Most people I know allow the player to control both, which is fine. However, it is completely within the rules for you to control the Cohort, and have the player/character direct them in game for what they want the Cohort to do. It puts a lot of the effort, record keeping, and work on your shoulders (which is why most people I know tend to like the player to do it), but both are fine, and you can honestly mix and match if you like.
Remember, the Cohort is loyal to the player (because they used a Feat to buy them). With exceptions like temporary magic effects, they remain loyal to the player's character, not the party, not the one they have the most RP with, etc. . . Like with 4th Ed, do what is the most fun, but remember this is a resoure that the one player is buying, so don't screw them to much for it, and don't let it be a party resource without the player's permission.
I think that the group size is manageable enough to allow for a couple of cohorts.
This is going to be geared up to coincide w/ grudge retrieving his vessel "the dead mist"and freeing his former crew from imprisonment.... The general idea is for the party to gain a mode of fast travel w/ a fleshed out crew to take care of the tedious bits of sea travel. Do you reccomend npc classes to curb power, or should I just balance it off w/ more challenging encounters?
Anyway thanks for the warnings and insight...
I think that the group size is manageable enough to allow for a couple of cohorts.
This is going to be geared up to coincide w/ grudge retrieving his vessel "the dead mist"and freeing his former crew from imprisonment.... The general idea is for the party to gain a mode of fast travel w/ a fleshed out crew to take care of the tedious bits of sea travel. Do you reccomend npc classes to curb power, or should I just balance it off w/ more challenging encounters?Anyway thanks for the warnings and insight...
The cohort is always 2 levels lower than the PC, so you really don't need to force them to take NPC classes.
Cool.... That makes it a bit more fun then. I'm going to be writing up the background fluff, and personality traits of the individuals that qualify to become cohorts to the characters.
I just want a modicum of control over the classes and quirks of their new lackeys, and to be able to be the final arbiter when the pc tries to sway their actions too heavily towards "slave" I think that this will be a pretty exciting thing for me too. The cohorts are characters in my world as well, and so I think it will be a boon in the sense that they will be able to deliver clues and depth into the goings on in the realm.
Cool.... That makes it a bit more fun then. I'm going to be writing up the background fluff, and personality traits of the individuals that qualify to become cohorts to the characters.
I just want a modicum of control over the classes and quirks of their new lackeys, and to be able to be the final arbiter when the pc tries to sway their actions too heavily towards "slave" I think that this will be a pretty exciting thing for me too. The cohorts are characters in my world as well, and so I think it will be a boon in the sense that they will be able to deliver clues and depth into the goings on in the realm.
Yes, when done well, cohorts offer tons of new RP possibilities for the Players and GM. Just remember you are walking a fine line between the player feeling cheated because they don't feel they are getting the full benefit of something they paid for and the player basically having 2 PCs at the table.
You may want to talk it over with the players so you can get a gauge on their expectations.
|
|
It might honestly be better for you to just "give" them the NPC's as allies. You are totally free to do that, and never need risk the players getting mad that their Feat is being wasted or not being used to the fullest.
The benefits to this would be that, for the players, they are getting this for free (said player gets that Feat back, or can still choose Leadership if they want). That you, as a DM have total authority over the NPCs, so if the party treats them poorly, there is no problems with you taking them away or the NPC's getting mad and turning traitor at the worst moment. It's more of a reward that they earned. No chance that the players would want more control over the NPCs that you do not want to give, or really wanting something from the Cohort you are not too keen on.
Bad sides (maybe) is that it would be both a party resource and something the players do not have any direct control over, which might be the two things that the player is seeking (or not seeking). Puts all the work on the GM's shoulders. Players might feel less sure about trusting the NPC, as they are not specifically loyal.
|
My personal way of handling it has always been that the cohort and followers are those who have heard of your exploits as an adventurer or whatever and wish to add to your glory, etc, etc. Also, while I do let the player have input into the type of people he wishes to attract, I make them myself and limit them to NPC classes only.
As far as control of the cohort? During combat I allow the PC to make the rolls and decisions for the cohort, with the allowance that I can veto an action if I feel it is inappropriate. Outside of combat, I control and roll for cohorts and followers (who do not participate in combat, unless it is a mass combat/war situation) and decide what actions they take and what they say/think, etc.
The cohort is always 2 levels lower than the PC, so you really don't need to force them to take NPC classes.
Even with 2 levels difference, I find the limit of NPC classes to help keep them from stealing the spotlight from the other PCs or from slowing down the combat turns. If they have limited class features and less feats, the decision of what to have them do becomes much simpler and more on scale with an animal companion.
...Animal companion. This is a class feature...
Halflings make great animal companions. They fit comfortably in most bags of holding, and once you teach them a few tricks, it's almost like they're intelligent!
If they take it, they warn the DM in advance (story wise fit)
If they take it, they tell me what role they should fulfill (support, melee, archery, skillmonkey)
DM makes the character (and class/feats/...)
DM plays the character (and quirks)
Player can tell the character what he wants done in combat, or can tell him to "do whatever you think is appropriate".
This is how we do it, and it works.
The cohort usually readies until he is needed (spell, arrow, ...) because that's what the Player wants ^^
I have a player making a rogue cohort for my Kingmaker campaign for this Sunday, so I find this conversation interesting.
In my 3.5 days I have both played in a party with cohort(s) including my own, and have DM'ed cohorts. It just takes communication. The general rule was, players make the cohort, control the cohort and RP the cohort, but the cohort cannot steal the spotlight. He/she is a support character. The cohort shouldn't talk more than the PC. That's the way we play it anyway. It works for us.
My experience with leadership/cohorts/followers has been in 3.x but it hasn't changed that much.
I have a few basic houserules I use.
1) Cohorts can but don't have to accompany the PC. Followers do not except in the most unusual circumstances. Player taking his adept followers to help with the plague in neighboring city. Player taking aristocrat follower on a diplomatic mission to be introducted as his rep for most business transactions. Climactic final battle of the war for survival. Etc...
2) Usually works best if the PC wants to recruit a current NPC that the PC has already met and got along with. If not, the PC states what they are looking for in general, but I build. And I won't build a horribly complex 4 class muchkin. "I want a half-orc, barbarian, meat head, great axe specialist."
3) Cohort can't be something that upstages or manages the PC. Had a player that totally gimped all his mental stats, then made a cohort that was all mental/social. "My cohort will stop me before I do anything bad in social situations..." Basically outside of combat the cohort was the leader.
4) Cohorts have to be a simple/quick to run. Especially no summoners/animators. Had a PC druid who used SNA with a conjurer using SMx. Play basically ground to a halt every time it came to his turn while he figured out the actions and rolls for a multitude of creatures. Was it effective? Yes. Was it enjoyable? Not for anyone else at the table. A simple tower shield body guard, buffer bard, or blaster sorc helps but doesn't bog down the game.
5) I let the player run the cohort, but i reserve veto if he has him doing stuff way out of line.
6) I greatly discourage the leadership feat if the player is one that already has a hard time managing his own PC or is very slow when it is his turn. If he is constantly going back to the book to look something up during combat, he doesn't need more decisions to make.
7) We usually only use the leadership feat at 3 or fewer players or if the campaign is expected to be exceptionally tough for our numbers/levels. Or if the group is exceptionally lacking in some skill. For example no trap finder, front line combatant, healer, etc...
Another thing I have heard of but never tried. If you have more than 1 person with the leadership feat. Let the players run each others cohorts. That supposedly limits having them act out of character.
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
The thing to remember about cohorts (IMHO) is that they have their own opinions and possible agenda.
To use a TV reference think of Zoe to Mal in Firefly. She was loyal to him, and followed orders, as long as he didn't put her into a conflict with her wants. (War Stories is a good example of this). Now by agenda I don't mean "Get along with the PC until they can knife them in the back." I mean, "I'm working under Wally Wizard, but I have a wife and kids."
Palmer to Ducky from NCIS might be another good analogy. Abby to Gibbs might be a better one, though.
I'd also look at the whys of the cohort, and how they fit organically into the world.
Some examples of cohorts I've used.
Cohorts are an excellent way to 'plug holes' in groups (Like if you are missing knowlege X skills, or a dedicated healer) or balance out a weakness (Fighter keeps leaving wizard vulnerable? Wizard takes Leadership and gets his own figher*). They also can help with flavour. (Fighter wants to be a general? voila!) Also they can help tie a PC into the world a bit more. (PC gets cohort cleric? Going to be tied to that church a bit more. Cohorts have their own backstory, why is the cohort rogue so eager to travel with the party?)
Now they can be abused, especially if they're casters and 'on stage' a lot. I'd veto anything with a companion of its own. (No summoners or witches, wizards have a bonded item, not a familiar, etc.) The 'daisy chain' effect** can eat up a table, and that detracts from Matthew's first rule. Everyone has fun. Also make sure you try to see how the cohort will affect your campaign world. If you don't have a 'magic mart' for example, but allow crafting feats, then you need to be aware of how a cohort wizard, specializing in crafting, will change your party's gear. ("We can't find a set of matching flame tongues for the rogue? No problem, Carl the Crafter can make a pair!")
A note on cohorts as plot points. Be careful about abusing the cohort. If the wizard is always having his cohort fighter charge the bad guy, yeah, you can feel less guilty about killing him. If Carl the Crafter is always left in the fortress of solitude, crafting away, kidnapping him once makes for a good adventure. Doing it over and over again makes the player wonder why he took the feat. (Also, the cohort kidnapping can make for an interesting night of gaming. Let the player play Carl, and then the other Players play the underlings. It becomes an interesting night of gaming, especially if it's a shared lair. "What? The badguy set that painting on fire? That's my painting! Stop buring my crap!")
*
**
I have players who have made extensive use of cohorts in 3.5 (the party has 5). The rules are sufficiently unchanged in PF that I don't see any significant differences, so here's what I observed:
Cohorts close to the party's level are a significant addition. Ones with lower levels aren't nearly as much. So you'll find you spend less time sweating over the effect of cohorts of low-charisma characters than high.
I let my players run their cohorts in combat. It gives me less to manage and gives them much of the benefit they're looking for - a companion with whom they can closely coordinate.
Any time the cohort needs to make a decision out of combat, I make it. The PC gives the orders, the cohort generally says "Yes, sir!" and does what he can to accomplish the task. But given a task with different ways to resolve it, I'll decide how it is done. If the cohort is sent to find out some info, he goes off screen and eventually comes back with his report. I don't have the player run him as another PC. The cohort does what I consider to be his honest best given the personality outlined by the player when the cohort is made.
Players and I share the task of making the cohort. I may provide some guidelines, they may make suggestions what they're looking for, and between the two of us we'll work out details.
I don't add treasure to the game to accommodate cohorts. It's up to the PCs to decide how to divide things up. Most usually require the bulk of a cohort's compensation and equipment to come out of the leadership character's share.
I will add monsters to the mix to accommodate the extra power cohorts bring. I'll add mookish ones if the cohorts are weaker than the PCs so they continue to have useful things to do. I'll add stronger numbers to the mix if the cohorts are on the tough side.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
This. I always let cohorts come in on NPC wealth for their level, but after that their funds come from the party (usually cast-off magic gear when somebody gets something better.) Once in a while I might throw a bone that's clearly meant for the Cohort, though a PC might still snatch it up depending on the way the person is playing that character.
I don't add treasure to the game to accommodate cohorts. It's up to the PCs to decide how to divide things up. Most usually require the bulk of a cohort's compensation and equipment to come out of the leadership character's share.
This as well. The PC has an obligation to the cohort. To use the Wizard PC/Fighter Cohort example the gold/items he's spending on keeping the fighter alive may seem to reduce the wizard's power, but the lack of being hit as often makes up for it.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
[Except all the times the bad guys just ignore the meatbag to go after the real threat :P
Well if you're going to get technical...
Aside, I'd be really leary about allowing a primary caster to take a primary caster as a cohort, unless it was meant as 'stay home and craft' cohort. I learned that lesson when I took the above mentioned Battle sorcerer/warmage cohort along for a trip.