| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Remember, the cohort can be a maximum of two levels below the PC. How is an 11th level character outdoing an entire 13th level party, even with buffs? Are their characters really that poorly built?
Also, do your intelligent recurring foes recognize this level of loyalty? What would the cohort do when the bad guys started targeting the PC - especially an underpowered PC since the player is giving his magics items away to the cohort? Or targeting the cohorts family back home? Heck, this can even lead into some good adventures!
I highly doubt the cohort would rebel against the PC, seeing as how wel the PC treats the cohort with fine magical items and strong protection in battle. Remember, cohorts go off the NPC wealth by level table, which is significantly less that the PC wealth by level table. If the PC is investing most of his money into his Cohort, than that makes for a very loyal cohort! I think having the cohort rebel would be a bad choice.
Players using Cohorts is fairly similar to having Monstrous Mounts or Eidolons, etc. It's more powerful, to a large degree, but it's not monstrously an issue.
The problems you're saying are:
1) He's spending all his money on his Cohort.
2) He's making the other PCs buff/assist his Cohort.
The best ways I can say to deal with it are this:
1) Limit the amount of wealth he can spend on his NPC. If your characters are lv13, his Cohort should be lv11, and thus have a Wealth of only 16,350. Since it's a Cohort, you could allow the wealth to be 32,700, but that's still far less than the 140,000gp the party should be walking around with. Let the player know that he'll need to readjust the amount of loot he's got on his Cohort. The other option would be for the 140,000gp to be for both the player AND the Cohort; 140,000gp split between two characters seriously cuts down on the overpoweredness of both.
2) Tell him that, while the party can buff of their own accord, he needs to handle most of the buffs himself. If he plans to do Batman & Robin, then that's his prerogative, but the rest of the Justice League isn't required to keep up his character for him.
If that doesn't work, there's always the possibility of killing off the PC. Not the Cohort - the PC. Just make sure to do it in a dramatic way so that the PC's death is fulfilling/important and the Cohort taking up the mantle, as it were, would make sense. He can then take the Cohort as his replacement character (which should be balanced, since the Cohort will be 2 levels lower than the PC and probably the rest of the party), but just disallow the Cohort to take Leadership.
Do remind him that, if he still wants to do the "tag team" thing there's always Monstrous Mount, or the party can take Teamwork feats; alternatively, there's always multiclassing into Strategist Cavalier or Tactician Fighter, thus focusing on granting the rest of the party Teamwork feats and allowing them to act as a more-cohesive unit.
|
I recomend you limit the cohort to an npc class, i have used this and it works great. Even so its still a really powerful feat. Also remember to track his money as an npc of his level an not a pc of his level, this should limit the brokeness.
NPCs cohorts are still action batteries but due to less class features they are much more easy to control and less problematic.
Dont kill the pc, passive agressive is not good, if the cohort is causing problems have a talk to the player and have the cohort take an arrow to the knee
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Maybe the cohort falls in love and wants to take his money and settle down. Retire from the adventuring life. (The player should be allowed to retrain their leadership feat to something else.)
I wouldn't kill off his character or cohort, just because the other players are jealous.
If your group has a lot of players, you may want to restrict things like cohorts, animal companions, eidolons, and summoned monsters, as they take time from the other players.
I would say, talk to the player and ask him to tone down the fighting aspect perhaps. Make the cohort more supportive than having him on the front lines. The other players asking you to kill off his cohort is definitely going a bit too far. I realize that they're feeling (and being) out-shined, but killing the players cohort because of this is going to feel like a personal attack to that player.
I would also go against controlling him yourself to neutralize the cohort. The most I'd do in this situation is plan a way for the cohort to get kidnapped for a TEMPORARY amount of time, pushing the player to support the group with the buffs and perhaps they can throw in a, "Finally! We never got any support when your pal was around." or something more subtle perhaps. But make sure the cohort is returned.
In the end though, I'd still go with speaking to the player with the leadership feat and telling them how the rest of the group is feeling. They may take offense to this for some reason and may stop buffing altogether, a sort of "if my cohort can't have it, I'm not giving it to them" sort of deal, but speaking to him about it rather than outright manipulating / destroying his cohort is better in my opinion.
2) He's making the other PCs buff/assist his Cohort
Hmm.
He uses his PC's spells to buff up the cohort like crazy and then sends him into fight.
---
I second voideternal's idea. Alternatively, try using greater dispel magic more often.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I guess I almost find it a little selfish that the other players are getting angry at the situation. You had mentioned that he is using the cohort appropriately, building strong RP with the father/son relationship that the two have going... so why would we take something like that away from someone who is so clearly enjoying what he is doing?
I guess it's just a bit curious too that they're playing buff-casting classes but are disgruntled at the fact that they are being spent on 'a lowly cohort' instead of rejoicing at the group effectiveness.
Maybe instead of even entertaining their complaints in a sense that someone has to have something taken away from them in order for other people to be happy... you could challenge them (in a friendly way, of course) and ask instead what you could do as a GM to make -their- playing experience more enjoyable.
It's easier to give something to the disgruntled and help maintain an environment where the table feels as though they can all do what they want to do instead of finding that balance by subtracting from one players experience to make others happier.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
For the time being do not make any changes. we need more information. What class is the NPC?
What are the other players playing ?
How do combats typically go in detail?
Do you normally use one enemy or several enemies?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
read leader ship
"If a cohort gains enough XP to bring it to a level one lower than your level, the cohort does not gain the new level—its new XP total is 1 less than the amount needed to attain the next level." So it can be with in 1 level of you and other party members. Only when recruiting it does it have to be two levels lower then you.
KainPen, you're parsing that wrong. The cohort has a maximum of 1xp less than what he needs to reach the level below yours. So if you are 10th level, he is a maximum of 9th level minus 1xp = 8th level.
All this assuming you had a high enough charisma in the first place to not only get the feat, but get a cohort at your level - 2.
On the original subject, it's really a question of game-table congestion. With fewer than 4 players at the table, one or two cohorts (or animal companions) could be an essential thing. More than 5 players at the table, and the DM might need to rule that all cohorts are off taking a personal day, or visiting their sick grandmother, or doing some other unspecified side-quest.
4 players + 4 cohorts would be a nightmare. Though the way many players use CHA as a dump stat, their cohorts might be far less problematic than they'd like. <g>
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If you are level 13, and the cohort gains enough XP to gain level 12, then he remains 1 xp away from level 12, which keeps him at level 11 until you gain level 14, which then allows him to gain enough xp to keep him one xp away from level 13, which sticks him at level 12. So yes that is two levels behind.
I can empathize with your player KoalaRescue, I have found out about other players complaining about my character with and without Leadership / Animal Companions or whatever for outshining their characters. Years ago one of the players actually teamed up with the DM and got a guy to come in for one game session, the DM tossed in a deck of many things had everyone draw secretly, the guy that came in ended up getting wishes all of which he used to screw me over, kill my familiar (Which at this time AD&D and this familar caused 4 lost levels permanantly), remove all my wealth, magic, and spellbooks to his diety, and attempted to kill me, then used his final wish to teleport to his deity's side, when all this was said and done, the new player left. I tried for awhile to track down the character who had done this, when I would not give up on it the DM told me that my character was too good so they had brought him in for the specific purpose to weaken my character, I left and no longer gamed with them. I did not have the Leadership feat, it was just my character and her familiar, though as I recall the DM had given me a CN Quasit, the character was a Githzari multi-class Wizard/Fighter. This was the most extreme that a group has gone, but I have had issues in other groups with people upset that I play a good character, and sometimes have good dice rolls, the group I am in now, I started noticing something was wrong outside of game by the way this one guy would talk to me and other small things, and found out that he had been for weeks calling the other people in the group and complaining that my character was too strong, and it was making the game un-fun for him. They were finally able to talk him down, we ended that game and started over, another friend and myself, help him ... I mean, we build his characters for him now.
I think people really just need to learn how to play a good character instead of crying so hard about others who play better than them. Leadership can be quite the powerful feat, I have never used it how your player is, my character is always the focal point, I have taken Leadership in a party where we had no healer to take a cleric, we came up with a backstory for her, and the two of us ended up getting married down the road, one of the players would get upset because if my character had damage or a negative condition she would heal / cure me before him, or another party member, unless their life was in more direct danger, in which case she would heal them first.
Now with all of this said, it is chicken**** for a buffer to only buff his cohort and ignore the other party members, he should spread the love so to speak and buff everyone.
Like some others here have said, maybe you could talk to him about it, alternatively you could have one of the other players take Leadership, or you could make an NPC who will run with the other players for awhile and emulate his buffs onto the other PC's, and when you wrap this game and move on, disallow the Leadership feat, or House Rule it in some way, though nothing good that makes sense comes to mind. Maybe make the player promise certain things to keep it controlled? seems a lot easier to just disallow Leadership though. But really its not a lot different from a druid who buffs their AC and sends them in, or a summoner doing the same.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The issue seems to be gametime/attention, maybe even more so than the combat stuff.
The one guy is roleplaying two different characters, and it sounds like each of those two characters gets at least their fair share of gametime and attention. This understandably annoys the other players, who get to sit back and watch this guy's show.
I think you should talk to the player and make sure he understands that everyone needs to be able to participate evenly. If he's playing two characters, they should each talk about half as much as anyone else's character. Purposely take a backseat and let the others players get their time.
Additionally, he should (if he is not already doing so) make sure his turns are planned out like clockwork before he goes, so he's not taking up twice as much combat time as everyone else.
As a GM, if he doesn't tone down the amount of attention he requires, you also have the power of selectively ignoring things he tries to do, or spotlighting things the other players try to do. If someone else is taking a back seat, give them their own time to shine.
tl;dr: don't let him take twice as much gametime as everyone else
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
Something is weird here.
First, although I let the players run their cohorts as they see fit (within reason), I build the cohort. They give me the generalities of what they are looking for (or sometimes they hire someone they've encountered). And I build to that but I use 5 less on the point buy unless they want an NPC class. I build a decent character, but I don't optimize it to the absolute limit.
This cohort is already in play so you're kinda stuck with it. But consider this for the future.
Second, there is no way a cohort at least 2 levels lower (even with extra buffs) should be making the entire party look bad. In PF, 2 levels is such a bump in power that it is sometimes difficult to keep someone 2 levels lower alive. Let alone out shining multiple characters 2 levels higher. That doesn't make sense unless the rest of the party is really poorly made.
Sounds like the rest of the party needs help building an effective character? Maybe come to the advice forums for some build advice and give them a discount on the retraining rules so get their PC's up to snuff.
{{ Note: I don't see anything in the OP that says he is making the other players buff his cohort. I see that first in chbgraphicarts' post. }}
Third, is the grievance really combat effectiveness or is it spotlight time. If it is spotlight time, it can probably be handled best by a private conversation with the player. "Hey with 2 characters you're using a bit to much of the table time and it's bothering some of the others that can't get enough table time for their character. Try to have both sets of actions planned out a faster so they don't have to wait twice as long."
Also you as GM can make a point of asking the other players what their characters are doing and asking for more details.
Fourth, maybe you need to talk to the other players and find out whether 2 or 3 really applies (or maybe both).
Fifth, Please, please, please do not intentionally kill off the cohort, have it betray him, or have it run away! This sounds like one of the very few players that is really doing a good job of role playing with his PC being kind and loyal to his cohort. That behavior should be rewarded not punished.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think you've got the right idea for sure. Killing his cohort is a terrible idea, and frankly the rest of the group should be admonished for insisting on such a thing. Especially since I have a tough time seeing an alchemist, magus, and wizard (all at level 13!) being outclassed by a paladin two levels below them unless there's some serious munchkinning going on by the cleric.
That being said, I completely understand where they're coming from if their BUFFER AND HEALER isn't willing to BUFF AND HEAL them. Ignoring another party member who is dying "just in case" is a baaaaaad policy for the party healer. Bad feelings all around, there. Sounds like y'all need to sit down for a chat about it - encourage and reward his (apparently exceptional) roleplaying of Leadership, but ask him to fill his party role more efficiently when it comes to other players. That should ease tensions somewhat.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Thank you all so much for your responses.
I think basically... I suck, LOL. I agree with a lot of you, I probably am not doing a good enough job challenging them and giving the other players their own spotlight time. It can be hard for me because the player with his cohort is so much more vocal than the others.
The group dynamics are 4 PCs. An alchemist, a magus, a cleric (who has the paladin cohort), and the fourth is changing at the moment but it was a wizard.
They are all pretty effective, everyone has been playing Pathfinder and D&D before that for quite some time. Perhaps the problem is that I'm not giving them each enough time to be at the forefront and shine on their own.
I think the main problem here is that people are tired of the cleric not being willing to help them. An example, they were in a tough fight and the wizard was done, in negatives/bleeding out and the cleric wouldn't cross the battlefield to help him. He wanted to stay near his cohort who was getting low on HP, just in case the cohort fell and needed to be healed.
Thanks again for all of your really great suggestions. I guess I just needed another person to talk this out with. So, I am going to change things up and see how it goes. I'm glad that most of you are against the idea of me killing the cohort. I really didn't want to believe that was a good idea!
None of those classes should have problems being effective in combat. If they can't get a spotlight moment it is likely due to the way they are playing the classes or the combats are accidentally catered to the paladin. I am not at the table so I can't say which it is.
I think you have the right idea. It can be difficult as a GM to share the spotlight when one player is much more vocal than the others. But it can definitely be done, through some combination of prompting the other players, making the social encounters especially interesting to the other PCs, talking to the "problem player" and let him know he's using up too much game time, and if necessary, ignoring him a bit when he tries to hog the spotlight.
As for combats, if the paladin is overshadowing the other PCs, maybe try to use fewer evil enemies. I don't know how feasible it is in your campaign, but if more of the enemies could be neutral it would take the wind out of the paladin's sails and let the other PCs shine.
(As a minor issue, if you are afraid of the "cleric is too far away to heal the dying PC" thing happening again, you could maybe drop a Rod of Reach Spell. But maybe that was a one-time thing, and clearly it's too specific of a solution to help the rest of the problems.)
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Thank you all so much for your responses.
I think basically... I suck, LOL. I agree with a lot of you, I probably am not doing a good enough job challenging them and giving the other players their own spotlight time. It can be hard for me because the player with his cohort is so much more vocal than the others.
The group dynamics are 4 PCs. An alchemist, a magus, a cleric (who has the paladin cohort), and the fourth is changing at the moment but it was a wizard.
They are all pretty effective, everyone has been playing Pathfinder and D&D before that for quite some time. Perhaps the problem is that I'm not giving them each enough time to be at the forefront and shine on their own.
I think the main problem here is that people are tired of the cleric not being willing to help them. An example, they were in a tough fight and the wizard was done, in negatives/bleeding out and the cleric wouldn't cross the battlefield to help him. He wanted to stay near his cohort who was getting low on HP, just in case the cohort fell and needed to be healed.
Thanks again for all of your really great suggestions. I guess I just needed another person to talk this out with. So, I am going to change things up and see how it goes. I'm glad that most of you are against the idea of me killing the cohort. I really didn't want to believe that was a good idea!
This post is evidence that you're a good GM. You may not be the best, but you're willing to learn and listen to others. Most importantly, you're willing to change your game for the benefit of everyone at your table.
Keep up the good work!
I say talk to the cleric and have him be more generous with helping the party. I do feel from what you've said that his only real problem is going overboard with cohort protection. Assuring him that you want mercilessly slaughter his cohort if he helps other PCs could help.
As someone who likes cohorts I feel a lot of the options presented are awful. People don't like when others change or mess with their feats especially invested feats so I see leadership as no less than them, nor do I like giving control of my to someone else. You wouldn't like the gm telling you how much to power attack for would you?
...
That being said, I completely understand where they're coming from if their BUFFER AND HEALER isn't willing to BUFF AND HEAL them. Ignoring another party member who is dying "just in case" is a baaaaaad policy for the party healer. Bad feelings all around, there. Sounds like y'all need to sit down for a chat about it - encourage and reward his (apparently exceptional) roleplaying of Leadership, but ask him to fill his party role more efficiently when it comes to other players. That should ease tensions somewhat.
Ok, that has nothing to do with the cohort. I would quite literally tell them to stop complaining about something that isn't really the problem. It is impossible to resolve an issue by fixing something else that isn't broken.
Entire group was mad at one player and was trying to get me to punish him or kick him out for cheating and betraying the group. when I didn't, they ended up going PvP and shooting him with poisoned arrows.
Cheating - He used 3 javelins in a combat but had not written on his character sheet that they were kept in a quiver or anything like that. So they said that meant he had to have them been buried in his back pack and he didn't have time to get them out. I've never required any players to put down the container that things like javelins are stored in. Some players do and some don't. Not even all of the players accusing do so. But he was a traitor for doing so.
Betrayal - His LN fighter decided to enter the competition in the arena. The others came up with a plan for him to take a dive and themselves make money betting against him. He very clearly and repeatedly told them he would not do something as dishonorable as take a dive so they could profit off it. They bet against him and he won the match. They were incensed at losing their money from betting against him. They kept saying he had betrayed them. I would have played the PC the exact same way. I think most of them would have played a LN fighter the same way. But was a traitor for doing it.
Player quit the group and the campaign imploded at about the same time. It wasn't until repeated questioning weeks later that they even started to say they were upset about unpleasant things he was doing completely outside the game and group.
They had legitimate disagreements and problems with the player. But they had absolutely nothing to do with the things they were complaining about in the game.
You can talk to the player some. Does he really thinks in-character that what he is doing is correct? Did he agree to be the party buffer and emergency medic? If so, this might be best served by an in-character discussion between the PC's (in other words NOT the gm).
"Mr Holy Roller, you are not fulfilling the agreement. When you joined the group, you said you would use your god's power to strengthen the team and save us from death. But you are only strengthening and saving Jimmy-Joe-Bob who is beholden to you." Or something like that.