|
Like a druid or summoner who gets sentient people as companions instead of animals or monsters. Instead of spells, they get a lot of bard-like buffs that apply to all their allies. A good selection of Charisma-based social skills make them good party faces, too.
Class talents let you spec as either more of a front-line warlord (armor, buffs that trigger on Frits/kills, etc) or a diplomat/tactician, directing groups of followers and using connections and wealth manipulation to get things done while in town.
Thoughts?
Sounds like you want the Noble Scion prestige class to be a full class.
I'm one of the few people who seem to like it as it is, but that's neither here nor there.
The issue with having a "Leader" class (As I imagine it would be called) is it makes people feel they can't play a leader type without it.
Cult Leader Mesmerist VMC Bard?
|
|
The issue with having a "Leader" class (As I imagine it would be called) is it makes people feel they can't play a leader type without it.
I see why some might think that, but hey, nobody thinks they absolutely must be a fighter to be able to fight. Maybe the Leadership feat could remain, just get watered way down so other classes can still get limited access to cohorts.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I removed Leadership as feat. Now I put in with the Ultimate Campaign where you need to invest capital to gain leadership.
IMO, all it needs is to be separated into two feats, Leadership and Cohort. The first allows you to have followers, the second allows you to have an npc that follows you around.
Iv seen people that wanted one mechanic, but not the other.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Leadership should be neither a feat nor a class. It should be a natural result of fame, charisma and profligate spending.
I mean, you can already *hire* NPCs. Their loyalty should be something to be earned and won, as well as bought and paid for.
After all, shouldn't assorted servants, mercenaries, artisans, cohorts, henchmen and hirelings be another likely place for jaded adventurers to sink their gold into?
|
|
IMO, all it needs is to be separated into two feats, Leadership and Cohort. The first allows you to have followers, the second allows you to have an npc that follows you around.
Iv seen people that wanted one mechanic, but not the other.
Sort of like this?
|
|
Leadership should be neither a feat nor a class. It should be a natural result of fame, charisma and profligate spending.
I see where you're coming from here, but technically, the same argument could be made for animal companions. You should have to buy and train them yourself using your skills. However, there are quite a few classes in Pathfinder who get them for free, have automatic loyalty, and see them level up along with their masters.
In addition, you can still buy and train all kinds of other animals, from horses to guard dogs. So why not have a Leader class that treats a cohort the same way a druid treats an animal companion, then allow anyone of any class to hire other followers as well?
|
|
The argument we hear a lot is that Leadership, as a feat, is way too powerful. Clearly, it's a part of the fantasy, though, having loyal cohorts and companions to join you on your adventures.
So instead of outright banning (PFS) it or watering it down (Torchbearer), why not go the other direction? Upgrade it even further to the point where it's a full class? Then you can just get rid of the feat entirely and say, "If you really want a sentient humanoid cohort, play a Leader."
This way, the concept of leadership can be balanced against other pet classes like druids and summoners, not other feats.
Leadership should be neither a feat nor a class. It should be a natural result of fame, charisma and profligate spending.
And the natural result of fame, charisma and profligate is Leadership.
All feats are something that you trained or obtained that makes your distinct from someone else, something special about you, some special talent, or a special feature.
If all you want are followers, hire a bunch of npcs, make them work for you. That can be done with downtime rules. As long as you can give them attention every week and pay the initial costs, they should maintain themselves.
The problem arises when their loyalty is in question, those are not people that love your character or have affection towards her. As as soon as they believe they can make a better life elsewhere, they ar gone.
@Headfirst, yes, but that's way too many feats.
You'd want to tweak the low-level follower part of things (make them more like the Vigilante talent that helps), and probably standize the cohort to pick from certain tracks rather than being of any existing class.
|
|
@Headfirst, yes, but that's way too many feats.
Well, the idea is that very few characters would take all nine feats. Most people who want to play a leadership role do it for one of three reasons: to help out their PC allies, to get a cohort, or to get loads of followers for (preferably) some kind of "stay at home" reason (stronghold guards, downtime system, etc).
The modular Leadership system lets you pick this stuff up bit by bit instead of getting one huge influx of a PC class cohort and a boat load of followers all for one feat.
I mean, i don't like the fact that you spend a feat to increase an npc's ability array. IMO, abilities are not something that should be tied to another person's abilities or talents.
I'd rather it be something like: "Hey, here is the NPC Codex, pick someone at 3rd level, he is your cohort".
|
I also have no problem with the Leadership feat. It's a great way to enhance a PC's story and enrich the campaign. Like anything in the game, a player can look for ways to abuse it, but that's really more a problem with the player than the feat.
Having said that, I could certainly see splitting it into some sort of Loyal Followers and Loyal cohort type of feats
Leadership is not only too powerful as a feat, but also rather vague in what a player can and cannot do with their followers.
It feels like it should be a subsystem rather than a class feature or a feat. But I can certainly see a cavalier that gets a squire instead of a mount.
Players getting rulebendy to eke out any possible advantage will always be a thing. When I look at the player and remind them they haven't visited their followers in weeks and as such take a penalty to their Leadership score (inattentive, aloof, pick your poison here) it either makes the group cater to the leadership feat taker, with whole sessions devoted to that players assets (unlikely), or it starts a downward spiral that ultimately makes the feat a detriment.
As a GM you have power. Say after months of abandonment, the followers strike off without their leader. And when a cohort dies, absolutely take every bit of pain out on the player. From time to recruit a new cohort, to alignment penalties, even followers could die without the PC authorizing medical treatment or paying for foodstuffs. On the flip side, giving too much automation to the followers actions could result in corruption - Cash is King, and makes a very solid motivator for anyone.
I've gone the old school route with Leadership. I removed the feat and now have it so that anyone can have followers, allies, hirelings, and cohorts come with them. They don't get to build them unless they have a really good idea and we can build it together. That way, with multiple followers and cohorts, they can take down harder tasks that would normally be out of their level range. Of course, they have to befriend their cohort, or at least pay them enough.
I dislike Leadership as a Feat or Class because I feel like players should be able to bring along trusted allies and friends that they've made through adventuring and roleplaying without the need of wasting a feat.
Also, when you have it tied to a feat, then the players have it in their head that they can make the NPC however they want since they spent the feat slot for it. So if you're not into min maxed NPCs, you'll have to figure something out since the player will feel owed this. So I just removed the feat and I let everyone have the capability of attracting a cohort or hire some henchmen.
The issue with having a "Leader" class (As I imagine it would be called) is it makes people feel they can't play a leader type without it.
Lots of this.
In my games, this is where heavy roleplay comes in. If you have the bearings and behaviors of a leader, then those that are inspired by your ways and motives will follow. Simple as that.
|
|
I dislike Leadership as a Feat or Class because I feel like players should be able to bring along trusted allies and friends that they've made through adventuring and roleplaying without the need of wasting a feat.
Neither the Leadership feat as it exists nor the Leader class I propose in this thread prevent that.
Also, when you have it tied to a feat, then the players have it in their head that they can make the NPC however they want since they spent the feat slot for it. So if you're not into min maxed NPCs, you'll have to figure something out since the player will feel owed this. So I just removed the feat and I let everyone have the capability of attracting a cohort or hire some henchmen.
I agree that the feat (and companion for my Leader class) need more specific details on how to build the cohort, what races and classes are available, what equipment they come with and/or can use, and how much control the player has over them.
|
|
Lots of this.
The issue with having a "Leader" class (As I imagine it would be called) is it makes people feel they can't play a leader type without it.
Out of curiosity, do the players in your games feel like they can't buy a guard dog unless they're a druid or ranger? Do they feel like they can't have a combat trained warhorse unless they're a cavalier? Do they feel like they can't use their bare fists at all unless they're a brawler or monk?
Sorry if these sound sarcastic, but they're honest questions. Just because something is a core feature of one class doesn't make them off limits to other characters.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Lots of this.
The issue with having a "Leader" class (As I imagine it would be called) is it makes people feel they can't play a leader type without it.Out of curiosity, do the players in your games feel like they can't buy a guard dog unless they're a druid or ranger? Do they feel like they can't have a combat trained warhorse unless they're a cavalier? Do they feel like they can't use their bare fists at all unless they're a brawler or monk?
Sorry if these sound sarcastic, but they're honest questions. Just because something is a core feature of one class doesn't make them off limits to other characters.
Beyond a couple of early levels, you kind of can't do any of those things without significant feat investment, or a class designed around it. I say this as a guy who's bought four horses at level three, which all died over the course of three session. Seriously, I lost two horses in one session! I stopped buying them after that because I just couldn't afford it.
Same issue with a guard dog. Hell, even as a ranger, my wolf got nearly killed every fight, and it was several steps above just any old guard dog you can get. That was pretty early in the levels too, like six or so, I think.
Bare-knuckle boxing is a tad more viable for just anyone, but it takes a bunch of investment to actually make usable for someone not designed for it. Even then, you're going to be woefully underperforming compared to someone with a fistfighting class, or someone of your class that had just picked up a weapon.
Lots of this.
The issue with having a "Leader" class (As I imagine it would be called) is it makes people feel they can't play a leader type without it.Out of curiosity, do the players in your games feel like they can't buy a guard dog unless they're a druid or ranger? Do they feel like they can't have a combat trained warhorse unless they're a cavalier? Do they feel like they can't use their bare fists at all unless they're a brawler or monk?
Sorry if these sound sarcastic, but they're honest questions. Just because something is a core feature of one class doesn't make them off limits to other characters.
Beyond a couple of early levels, you kind of can't do any of those things without significant feat investment, or a class designed around it. I say this as a guy who's bought four horses at level three, which all died over the course of three session. Seriously, I lost two horses in one session! I stopped buying them after that because I just couldn't afford it.
Same issue with a guard dog. Hell, even as a ranger, my wolf got nearly killed every fight, and it was several steps above just any old guard dog you can get. That was pretty early in the levels too, like six or so, I think.
Bare-knuckle boxing is a tad more viable for just anyone, but it takes a bunch of investment to actually make usable for someone not designed for it. Even then, you're going to be woefully underperforming compared to someone with a fistfighting class, or someone of your class that had just picked up a weapon.
Pretty much this. And in Pathfinder, after a while, it's fairly true. A bog standard guard dog that isn't an animal companion will get wrecked by foes at higher levels. That's why I like that the Animal Archive exists, because having animal companions is pretty fun.
It seems like all of your players take their mook army into the dungeons. Each mook that dies is -1 leadership score, meaning mooks desert while they're still alive.
Have any of you read the Downtime rules? It says pretty clearly how followers can be used during that aspect of the game. And they're what, level 0 or maybe a few at 1 or above, in a really Leadership focused build.
It sounds to me like most people see it as a one-feat army, without considering exactly how useless a level 0 NPC is in combat when the APL is 7-10, much less higher than that. You don't want to deal with the Mook Horde? Fireball. From literally any caster on par with the PCs. I personally fail to see the OPness of the feat, it's actually really easy to manage as a GM.
Lots of this.
The issue with having a "Leader" class (As I imagine it would be called) is it makes people feel they can't play a leader type without it.Out of curiosity, do the players in your games feel like they can't buy a guard dog unless they're a druid or ranger? Do they feel like they can't have a combat trained warhorse unless they're a cavalier? Do they feel like they can't use their bare fists at all unless they're a brawler or monk?
Sorry if these sound sarcastic, but they're honest questions. Just because something is a core feature of one class doesn't make them off limits to other characters.
Honest answer: the players can certainly do so. But as others had mentioned, it may be harder to work with (or at least make feasible). Again, it comes to roleplay.
I simply feel like "Leader" is simply a personality characteristic rather than, say, a hard-to-reach character option. The fact that the Leadership feat has basically no prerequisites enforces the idea that anyone can be a leader.
However, this character class you have in mind might be appealing if it had extra options for Mass Combat. I would find that highly interesting.
|
|
Okay, so a lot of you probably don't agree that Leadership should be a class, not a feat. Please don't fill up this thread with comments about how much you disagree. I mean no offense, it's just not productive. If you like how the Leadership feat works, you banned it in your home game, or you have your own ideas of how it should work, that's fine.
That being said, here's my first stab at the Leader class. Feedback would be most welcome and appreciated!
Some people are just born leaders; there’s no other way to describe it. Either through force of will, magnetic presence, or birthright, a leader attracts loyal followers and companions. The skills he relies on to lead others in and out of battle also benefit his equals, aiding party members in all sorts of situations.
Role: Depending on his selection of leadership style and commands, as well as how he chooses to design and outfit his companion, a leader could be anything from a front-line warlord to a scheming tyrant who sends his allies into danger in his stead.
Alignment: Any
Hit Die: d8
Starting Wealth: 4d6 x 10gp (average 140 gp), plus an outfit worth 10 gp or less.
Class Skills
The leader’s skills are Appraise (Int), Bluff (Cha), Craft (Int), Diplomacy (Cha), Handle Animal (Cha), Heal (Wis), Intimidate (Cha), Knowledge (Local) (Int), Knowledge (Nobility) (Int), Linguistics (Int), Profession (Wis), Ride (Dex), and Sense Motive (Wis).
Skill Ranks Per Level: 4 + Int modifier.
Base Attack Bonus: Medium
Good Saving Throws: Will
Special
1 Companion, Leadership Style
2 Command
3
4 Call Target
5 Leadership Style
6 Command
7
8 Improved Companion
9
10 Command, Leadership Style
11
12 Greater Companion
13
14 Command
15 Leadership Style
16 Legendary Companion
17
18 Command
19
20 Leadership Style
Weapon and Armor Proficiency: Leaders are proficient with all simple weapons. They are proficient with light armor and shields (except tower shields).
Companion: Leaders begin play with a companion, a willing ally who must be of a core race and use one of the NPC classes. The companion’s ability scores are assigned using the basic NPC array: 13, 12, 11, 10, 9, and 8. The leader must purchase any equipment the companion needs and must also provide for his or her lifestyle, including meals, travel expenses, sleeping arrangements, and other costs.
As the leader gains experience, his companion increases in levels, too, using standard progression for NPC classes, though he or she is always equal in level to the leader. A companion’s alignment may not be opposed to his or her leader’s alignment on either the law/chaos or good/evil axis.
If slain or abandoned, the companion can only be replaced in areas where a suitable replacement could be found (usually only in settlements), and requires an entire day plus 100 gp per level of the new companion.
Leadership Style (Ex): Leaders have access to different styles, beginning play with one but learning a new style at 5th level and every 5 levels thereafter.
Advocate: You count as flanking with an ally as long as you’re both adjacent to the enemy. You provide an additional +2 bonus when using the aiding another action.
Coercer: You can use a move action to give a second command each round, though the second command only lasts for 1 round. You gain a +2 bonus on all Intimidate skill checks.
Comrade: While adjacent to an ally, you and that ally gain a +2 bonus to AC and saving throws.
Overlord: Any commands you give your companion last for a number of rounds equal to twice your Charisma modifier. You benefit from soft cover when adjacent to any of your allies.
Vanguard: You gain proficiency with medium armor and all martial weapons. Whenever you succeed on a skill check, all of your allies within 30 feet gain a +2 morale bonus on the same skill check made within 1 round.
Command (Ex): As a standard action, a leader can give a command to his companion, granting a benefit that lasts for a number of rounds equal to his Charisma modifier. He may only have one command active at a time.
Charge: Your companion gains a +1 morale bonus on attacks and damage while charging and can charge through difficult terrain. This bonus improves by +1 at 5th level and every 5 levels thereafter.
Stand: Your companion gains a +1 morale bonus to AC and against bull rush, overrun, and reposition maneuvers when moving 5’ or less. This bonus improves by +1 at 5th level and every 5 levels thereafter.
Defend: Your companion gains a +1 morale bonus on aid another rolls and the bonus granted using aid another to improve AC. This bonus improves by +1 at 5th level and every 5 levels thereafter.
Outflank: Your companion gains a +1 morale bonus on attack rolls while flanking and +5 movement speed. This bonus improves by +1 at 5th level and every 5 levels thereafter.
Regroup: Your companion gains a +1 morale bonus on saving throws and can end this effect to reroll a new saving throw as a free action. This bonus improves by +1 at 5th level and every 5 levels thereafter.
Call Target (Ex): At 4th level, the leader may designate one enemy within 60 feet as a move action. For a number of rounds equal to his Charisma modifier, all of his allies gain a +1 competence bonus on attack rolls, and increase the DC to save against their spells by 1. These bonuses improve by +1 at 8th level and every 4 levels thereafter. The leader may only have one target designated at a time.
Improved Companion: At 8th level, the leader’s companion immediately adds +2 to an ability score.
Greater Companion: At 12th level, the leader’s companion immediately adds +2 to two ability scores.
Legendary Companion: At 16th level, the leader’s companion immediately adds +2 to three ability scores.
Okay, so a lot of you probably don't agree that Leadership should be a class, not a feat. Please don't fill up this thread with comments about how much you disagree. I mean no offense, it's just not productive. If you like how the Leadership feat works, you banned it in your home game, or you have your own ideas of how it should work, that's fine.
That being said, here's my first stab at the Leader class. Feedback would be most welcome and appreciated!
Play a commoner on 20 levels, you must take Leadership as a feat ...
Here is my opinion ...
Great start!
Given the BAB/Skills/Saves, I would say there is more room for other types of abilities to help flesh out the table, akin to Talents/Powers. Maybe some teamwork options like the Hunter, but more in-depth? (since a humanoid companion is more intelligent than an animal companion)
And maybe a way to boost spellcasters in some fashion? We see plenty of ways to boost charge/aid another/etc, not that it goes unappreciated. Perhaps a way to increase rolls against Spell Resistance, or increase certain variables of spells (range, # of targets, etc). Or, dare I say, metamagic.
Edit: wait, I see what you did there for Call Target. Perhaps some Talent/Power that could augment it in some fashion.
|
|
Given the BAB/Skills/Saves, I would say there is more room for other types of abilities to help flesh out the table, akin to Talents/Powers. Maybe some teamwork options like the Hunter, but more in-depth? (since a humanoid companion is more intelligent than an animal companion)
Seeing as the Leader's companion isn't limited to level-2, I thought it would be too much to pile on a bunch of class abilities. In effect, this class is more like a summoner than a druid - the companion is the main event, you're just there to feed it buffs. Although, instead of spells that can also help the Leader's party, he gets other buffs that do the same.
And maybe a way to boost spellcasters in some fashion? We see plenty of ways to boost charge/aid another/etc, not that it goes unappreciated. Perhaps a way to increase rolls against Spell Resistance, or increase certain variables of spells (range, # of targets, etc). Or, dare I say, metamagic. Edit: wait, I see what you did there for Call Target. Perhaps some Talent/Power that could augment it in some fashion.
Good catch. I did have some other spellcaster-related powers in there, but then I realized that I kind of want to encourage (but not require) Leaders to build martial/skill based companions. Spellcasters are so powerful already that it seemd odd to stack even more buffs on for them.
Thanks for the feedback!
1. That's true. I hadn't realized that. Still, just some minor abilities, about in power-wise of Social Talents from Vigilante.
2. I thought it would be interesting. Across all of 3rd edition, there are not a whole lot of ways to aid someone else's spellcasting (that are worth your time anyway). Maybe this could be a good chance.
...3. Slight archetype idea: a "Marionette" controller, who can issue his commands to a construct/mindless companion. Probably changes the companion more than it does the Leader.
|
|
Guess I could have worded it better... Most of the leadership style abilities affect all allies, not just the leader's companions. The commands are just for the companion.
And I did have a capstone, but removed it just before I posted this. It gave the leader a 2nd companion, but only at level-2. That seemed a bit too powerful, though. Any ideas on something better?
|
|
For me the thing that really brings the class down is the leader's companion has NPC levels, which for me means that after level 5/7, it and by extension you start to become a liability to the party. You just lack power and effectively are two NPC's hanging around the party waiting to get killed. Maybe have a later class feature let you swap those levels out for pc class levels at your level-2.
Or at level three your companion can start taking pc levels but can't retrain his NPC levels. Then slowly start collecting more companions as you level, up to your CHA modifier who can only be half your HD in NPC levels. I.E your level 10 with a CHA of +5 so your main companion is 2NPC/8PC and your 5 extra companions would be 5NPC.
An idea could be an ability to share feats, not just teamwork feats as a cavalier but for longer and more times per day, along with bonus teamwork feats. I think it would play into the idea that your this amazing leader who can turn a group of farmers into a formidable fighting force over night.
I think Leader should be a prestige class not a full class. Most leaders in fiction (and real life) don't get much of a following until they gain some experience and achieve some tangible results.
And it should be the kind of prestige class where it is worthwhile for a fighter, wizard etc. to take a one level dip in order to gain an apprentice.
I think Leader should be a prestige class not a full class. Most leaders in fiction (and real life) don't get much of a following until they gain some experience and achieve some tangible results.
And it should be the kind of prestige class where it is worthwhile for a fighter, wizard etc. to take a one level dip in order to gain an apprentice.
Actually I can see something like a modified version of the Evangelist working well for that.
Good idea! I was thinking something similar to Battle Herald but more generic (open to more character types),
Pathfinder/D&D - at 7th level, I can get a cohort with leadership
Exalted - With an advantage or power, I have an army at character generation!
Most games have always allowed ways to gain minions, some make the leadership feat look tame.
I think Leader should be a prestige class not a full class. Most leaders in fiction (and real life) don't get much of a following until they gain some experience and achieve some tangible results.
And it should be the kind of prestige class where it is worthwhile for a fighter, wizard etc. to take a one level dip in order to gain an apprentice.
There's the Noble Scion prestige class.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Leadership doesn't need to be either class or feet, all you need is Ultimate Charisma and everyone can not only gain cohorts, followers, but use leadership as a rules mechanic.
It is without a doubt smoothest, most balanced, easiest, and most believable way of handling leadership without going through the hassle of trying to make a class focused on leadership.
Again, let me reiterate, get Ultimate Charisma! When it comes to leadership, using psychology in battle, and even making use of antagonize there is no better resource to have.