Leadership Multipliers


Rules Questions


Hello everyone! Ok i have looked everywhere and I need help understanding something.
Lets say for argument's sake that I have 100 level 1 followers due to leadership.
Now assume i am epic levels and mythic for more arguement's sake lol
Here is where the question starts.

100 followers
Alternate Capstone: Boss Minons ×10
Epic Feat: Legendary Comander minions ×10

Magic Item:Suzerain Scepter minions ×2
Magic Item:Ring of the Ecclesiarch ×2

Mythic Class feature: Crusader ×2

Now how does that math work?
Please explain the method if you can. I have looked through the RAW with no luck.

Scarab Sages

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Well I don't think it was ever really intended that you take all those leadership boosting items and abiliities especially since at least one of them is 3.5 edition and not really pathfinder.

That said and assuming they all are just multipliers wtithout other restrictions (I know ring of the Eclesiarch just doubles your followers no mention of it not stacking though its implied you need to worship a diety) the math seems fairly straightforward as they're all multipliers. You'd get . . .

100 x 10 x 10 x 2 x 2 x 2 = 80,000 followers and an annoyed GM.

Like I said individual one smay have restrictions in the items description. I don't know most of them but I do know for example the legendary commander one requires you have a stronghold and your own kingdom or you don't get its benefit. That is I'm empress of Tellaria which has the imperial and Pitax palaces, Newcastle and Glenborn keep plus i have the feat i get 10 times as many followers. I'm princess of Tellaria with a small keep on the shores of the silver lake then I dont get get the 10 times followers benefit because I don't rule my own kingdom. However by raw multipliers to followers just function as normal maths i.e. times X followers per level assuming you meet any internal requirements.


One of my players started a religion with this exact same thing in mind, except instead of Leadership he was using the Thrallherd PrC from Psionics (which are essentially the exact same thing, except with minor deviations for flavor/fluff). We discussed it at length, and together we decided that he would have 100's of thousands of parishioners, but he doesn't get to decide what they do like he would normally get to do with Leadership/Thrallherd. We decided he could have all the normal 100's of followers that he's supposed to get from Thrallherd, and those can be his ranked clergy members like bishops/cardinals/Popes or w/e, but the parishioners themselves would not be his Thralls/Believers.

I think that's about as fair as you can do it tbh, and he's also glad because he's already got 100's of followers and it's a lot of extra bookkeeping.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Multipliers don't follow normal maths in Pathfinder.

CRB common terms wrote:
Multiplying: When you are asked to apply more than one multiplier to a roll, the multipliers are not multiplied by one another. Instead, you combine them into a single multiplier, with each extra multiple adding 1 less than its value to the first multiple. For example, if you are asked to apply a ×2 multiplier twice, the result would be ×3, not ×4.

100* (10+9+1+1+1=)22 = 2,200

Still a lot of bodies...

Scarab Sages

dragonhunterq wrote:

Multipliers don't follow normal maths in Pathfinder.

CRB common terms wrote:
Multiplying: When you are asked to apply more than one multiplier to a roll, the multipliers are not multiplied by one another. Instead, you combine them into a single multiplier, with each extra multiple adding 1 less than its value to the first multiple. For example, if you are asked to apply a ×2 multiplier twice, the result would be ×3, not ×4.

100* (10+9+1+1+1=)22 = 2,200

Still a lot of bodies...

Which book is thay in please?

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
Senko wrote:
Which book is thay in please?

CRB stands for 'Core Rulebook'

The common terms are right at the front.

Scarab Sages

Ah thanks i admit i just tend to skip past acronyms these days as people use them for every little thing and half the time i dont know what they are anyway.

Dont recall that in there I'll need to go back and check what else ive missed.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Senko wrote:
dragonhunterq wrote:

Multipliers don't follow normal maths in Pathfinder.

CRB common terms wrote:
Multiplying: When you are asked to apply more than one multiplier to a roll, the multipliers are not multiplied by one another. Instead, you combine them into a single multiplier, with each extra multiple adding 1 less than its value to the first multiple. For example, if you are asked to apply a ×2 multiplier twice, the result would be ×3, not ×4.

100* (10+9+1+1+1=)22 = 2,200

Still a lot of bodies...

Which book is thay in please?

Core Rulebook. It only applies to rolls, though, not to fixed numbers like how many followers you get.

Edit: Whoops, the first part was already answered, sorry!


There's not a correct answer to this since Pathfinder doesn't have epic level rules or several of those options.

The real answer here is to talk to your GM about how they want to run it.

Personally, as a GM I've always run any use of leadership as everyone but your companion is helpful to you automatically, but they're not going to go out of their way to do things for you.

So no crafting guilds that give you all their profit or things like that.

Leadership is rife for abuse.


Yeah, it says rolls, but it is probably the only example of actually written down rules for applying multiple multipliers to anything.

The Leadership feat is so damn dumb...

If you simply cannot play just one character like everyone else, and you must play two characters in the same campaign, just ask the GM to let you start with two characters.

Leadership just adds complexity and nonsense to what is otherwise the really simple process of adding another character to the campaign.

Followers? A bunch of level one peasants? Who wants that associated with their characters in an adventure? Are they literally following you around like in the Life of Brian? They are, indeed, called Followers...

I get a 46 on my Stealth check... the 87 idiots behind me, all critically fail the check in glorious commotion.

When it comes to followers... unless it's going to actually influence the game... there is no difference between 2200 and 80000.

Are you having this crowd follow the character?

Or does the character just have loose control over the crowd's attitudes and actions when around them, but they otherwise stay at home and go about their lives as normal?

Is the character responsible for the safety and wellbeing of their followers?

A dragon just killed 63% of your crowd in a single fly-by breath weapon attack... your popularity is in free fall, you now face a mutiny of the remaining followers turning against you.

But before they can do anything, the dragon flies by and kills the rest with another breath weapon attack. You now have zero followers and still should probably do something about the dragon...

As a GM, if someone at my table took this feat, I would absolutely hold them responsible for the safety and well being of their followers. And their followers would literally follow them everywhere, like crazed paparazzi...


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I see it very differently -

I just wrapped a six player game where four had leadership. They were also building a kingdom, and the cohorts worked as stand-ins for the PCs, taking over responsibilities when they were gone, and followers working in the organizations within the kingdom. None of them worked for free, but they were willing to commit to that little bit of extra effort, and do what they could if requested.

Scarab Sages

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I see it as intended for kingdom campaigns and the like myself. Founding a temple for your god get leadership these are the priests, acolytes and other parishioners you are in charge of. They're not going on adventure with you but they are tending to the spiritual needs of your community while your off on adventures. That cohort is yohr reagent, steward, herald who speaks with your voice while your occupied elsewhere. Those 100 followers are the farmers, forsters and other commoners tending your lands producing goods and profit for you or the guards on your keep. Loyal to you directly as opposed to the kingdoms general army but occupied with protecting the lands and lower level peasants.


I could see it making sense in Kingmaker and the like, but I have seen it brought up in random builds.

I have a really hard time seeing in a dungeon crawl campaign.

And if you are not out building temples or whatever in your spare time as you go, then these followers are following you wherever you go.

These followers sound like the easily manipulated sheeple that become brainwashed religious zealots, so they just want something, literally anything, to distract them from their mundane lives... thus they follow you everywhere.

Rabble, rabble, rabble...
I like his armor.
I like what he does for the community.
I like the color of his eyes.
I believe in the same deity.
I just want to be part of a group.
I hate my family so I'm following you.
Rabble, rabble, rabble...

But in order for you to keep the favor and loyalty of your awesome Cohort (that you probably should have just played as a second character from the get-go) you have to keep your obnoxious entourage of fan-boys safe and fed.

Silver Crusade

I plan to take Leadership with my Dawnflower Dervish Bard in Hell's Rebels. I want to recruit a non-adventuring Cleric of Sarenrae as a cohort, who will be in charge of running the free medical clinic that she wants to set up.

So the feat will be mostly for roleplaying purposes, although the cleric will be able to serve as a recruiter for the rebellion. Instead of followers, the adventure path has rules for bonus rebellion teams from Leadership.

Scarab Sages

VoodistMonk wrote:

I could see it making sense in Kingmaker and the like, but I have seen it brought up in random builds.

I have a really hard time seeing in a dungeon crawl campaign.

And if you are not out building temples or whatever in your spare time as you go, then these followers are following you wherever you go.

These followers sound like the easily manipulated sheeple that become brainwashed religious zealots, so they just want something, literally anything, to distract them from their mundane lives... thus they follow you everywhere.

Rabble, rabble, rabble...
I like his armor.
I like what he does for the community.
I like the color of his eyes.
I believe in the same deity.
I just want to be part of a group.
I hate my family so I'm following you.
Rabble, rabble, rabble...

But in order for you to keep the favor and loyalty of your awesome Cohort (that you probably should have just played as a second character from the get-go) you have to keep your obnoxious entourage of fan-boys safe and fed.

To be honest I've several builds ive not played because they need 2 people, other players have their own character concepts they want to play and I couldnt get a 2nd character/cohort till higher level than a lot of games go. I'd have happily taken a cohort feat at 1st level for those and ignored the other followers. Alternatively there are builds where i took tge feat for flavour and the cohort/followers werent involved they were "just over there"


1 person marked this as a favorite.

We require GM permission to get it at our table. But it's been granted plenty of times, and honestly I don't think the cohorts ever caused a problem. And even when we don't have leadership, we tend to just recruit folks down the road as DMPCs anyways. Because there's always that moment you find a friendly NPC and the party goes "he's so helpful, we gotta keep him!". :P


@Senko
There is no happily ignoring the followers, though. It's literally part of the very same feat giving you your second player (Cohort). You don't get one without the other, it's not fluff text, it's literally spelled out on an official table.

What do you and your new sidekick do with your entourage of fan-boys?

And do you understand that your sidekick's loyalty depends upon your treatment of your entourage?

Leadership doesn't give you a slave, your alignment and your actions matter... such as caring for your followers.

This is exactly why I am a d!ck about this feat.

Either you play it full, or I will haunt you with it.

The feat is dumb... just play two characters at the same time from the beginning if you somehow can't just be one, like everyone else.

This feat is trying to eliminate the need for human interaction. Lol. You said you needed two people to make a certain character work, but everyone has their own ideas... communication is essential.

No, at my table, you must actually interact with THE PARTY... oh my.

Plan accordingly...


If your character NEEDS Leadership to perform, I have no respect for it.

Period...

Leadership should be on the same power level as Additional Traits, it be but flavor, nothing more, nothing less... minor mechanical benefits still being more flavor than gamebreaking.

Leadership is glass-cannon, band-aid b#%%&%#&, munchkin madness, sh!t-show... my convenient Cohort happens to solve my rage-cycling shenanigans, oh my. F!ck you, worm.

Scarab Sages

1 person marked this as a favorite.
VoodistMonk wrote:

@Senko

There is no happily ignoring the followers, though. It's literally part of the very same feat giving you your second player (Cohort). You don't get one without the other, it's not fluff text, it's literally spelled out on an official table.

What do you and your new sidekick do with your entourage of fan-boys?

And do you understand that your sidekick's loyalty depends upon your treatment of your entourage?

Leadership doesn't give you a slave, your alignment and your actions matter... such as caring for your followers.

This is exactly why I am a d!ck about this feat.

Either you play it full, or I will haunt you with it.

The feat is dumb... just play two characters at the same time from the beginning if you somehow can't just be one, like everyone else.

This feat is trying to eliminate the need for human interaction. Lol. You said you needed two people to make a certain character work, but everyone has their own ideas... communication is essential.

No, at my table, you must actually interact with THE PARTY... oh my.

Plan accordingly...

So your saying if you were DMing a game I was in youd rather we both deal with potentially dozens of additional characters over letting me willingly ignore the mechanics of a feat in favour of using the fluff for roleplaying purposes e.g. a fighter with Leadership because they know how to lead armies if they need too?

As i said ive taken it for that kind of purpose no cohort, no followers just an ingame indication my character has experience and ability to lead if they weren't off adventuring, similarly ive taken it and used the followers but not the cohort to populate a parties keep (guards, staff, etc) and i would have taken it to get the cohort at 1st level for some concepts if i could. I couldnt by the way and I'm well aware treatment of all reflects your ability to keep them.

Your talking to someone who once spent several ingame hours and a large amount of fish appeasing their familiar after we both fell into a pit of blood. I will play these things properly drawbacks and advantages but sometimes you want a feat or a skill just because it fits your character concept but don't need or intend to actually use the mechanics. Sometimes you only need part of a feat, sometimes you have to abandon a concept because you cant play two characters from level 1. Most of my GMs have been quite happy to let me make a less powerful character because i dont need the full feat.


first thing i remind any player who wish to pick a broken feat is that any enemy they meet can also take that...

as for leadership itself.
the player should never get to control the cohort or the followers -it's right there in the feat information:
"..A cohort is generally an NPC with class levels, while followers are typically lower level NPCs..."

npc stand for non player character.
so basically this get you a servile npc(s) for a feat. you can do that with RP and high charisma as well.

the player has some control over how the cohort is build but less then i'v seen posted.(like ideas of teamwork feat cohort or crafting cohorts):
"...A cohort can be of any race or class. The cohort's alignment may not be opposed to your alignment on either the law/chaos or good/evil axis, and you take a –1 penalty to your Leadership score if you recruit a cohort of an alignment different from your own...."
..and that's is about as much control over their build as they get - nothing in the feat give the player control over what feats\spells\alt racial abiities the cohort have nor it's ability allotment.
Even the gear it has is only said this:
"The cohort should be equipped with gear appropriate for its level (see Creating NPCs)"
that still doesn't mean the player decide what the gear is ,as an npc (and as directing to the npc creation rules) it is the up to the gm to decide that as well.

to sum it up. taking leadership let you decide on a lower level npc who follow you to help you. you get to decide his class and race. nothing more. the gm decide the rest and should have full control of this character like any other npc, including what he would and wouldn't do for his boss.

btw, last thing to note, nothing in the feat say they actuly like you - the gm can also have them unhappy follow the orders from the king\mob boss etc, as the only reason that they help the player. Along with any of the bickering and disrespect that this might have.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

The rules don't dictate who directly controls a cohort. The text does provide guidelines:

Ultimate Campaign wrote:

How a companion works depends on the campaign as well as the companion’s nature, intelligence, and abilities. In some cases, the rules do not specify whether you or the GM controls the companion. If you’re entirely in control, the companion acts like a subsidiary PC, doing exactly what you want just like a true PC. If the GM is control, you can make suggestions or attempt to influence the companion, but the GM determines whether the creature is willing or able to attempt what you want.

...

Sentient Companions: a sentient companion (a creature that can understand language and has an Intelligence score of at least 3) is considered your ally and obeys your suggestions and orders to the best of its ability. It won’t necessarily blindly follow a suicidal order, but it has your interests at heart and does what it can to keep you alive. Paladin bonded mounts, familiars, and cohorts fall into this category, and are usually player-controlled companions.

Scarab Sages

zza ni wrote:

first thing i remind any player who wish to pick a broken feat is that any enemy they meet can also take that...

as for leadership itself.
the player should never get to control the cohort or the followers -it's right there in the feat information:
"..A cohort is generally an NPC with class levels, while followers are typically lower level NPCs..."

npc stand for non player character.
so basically this get you a servile npc(s) for a feat. you can do that with RP and high charisma as well.

the player has some control over how the cohort is build but less then i'v seen posted.(like ideas of teamwork feat cohort or crafting cohorts):
"...A cohort can be of any race or class. The cohort's alignment may not be opposed to your alignment on either the law/chaos or good/evil axis, and you take a –1 penalty to your Leadership score if you recruit a cohort of an alignment different from your own...."
..and that's is about as much control over their build as they get - nothing in the feat give the player control over what feats\spells\alt racial abiities the cohort have nor it's ability allotment.
Even the gear it has is only said this:
"The cohort should be equipped with gear appropriate for its level (see Creating NPCs)"
that still doesn't mean the player decide what the gear is ,as an npc (and as directing to the npc creation rules) it is the up to the gm to decide that as well.

to sum it up. taking leadership let you decide on a lower level npc who follow you to help you. you get to decide his class and race. nothing more. the gm decide the rest and should have full control of this character like any other npc, including what he would and wouldn't do for his boss.

btw, last thing to note, nothing in the feat say they actuly like you - the gm can also have them unhappy follow the orders from the king\mob boss etc, as the only reason that they help the player. Along with any of the bickering and...

A feat doesn't have to be broken unless you play it to be broken.

I have to say if I took leadership and expected my cohort to be a friend/companion/ally only for the GM to tell me they hate my character and are only following them because they were ordered to. I'd (a) take it as a warning sign this may not be a game I want to play and (b) tell them to leave and start looking for a new cohort. Someone that powerful and close to the PC should at the very least be someone you get along with, preferably a friend and probably someone you spend your own money to get better gear or equipment as you can. Not someone who bickers with them and is only there because they were ordered to be I get enough of that in real life.

You want to control them as an NPC fine go ahead it makes it a little more real to me if they're making their own choices rather than me making them for them but I would not pick a companion like that if I didn't get along with them because in real life I've been with groups who thought it "funny" to just drive off and leave you several kilometers away from something your meant to attend I don't need it in my games.

Lets say for the sake of argument my mage took leadership with the intention of their cohort being another mage who would run the magic school they want to fund for the lower classes while they're adventuring for money. They'd look for someone powerful yes but also someone they got along with (general personality), someone who's attitudes reflect their own (alignment), skills are suitable (class and skills). They they'd hand it over to the DM to play for when they were in town to deliver funds, hear about any problems they might be able to solve.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
leadership wrote:

...and how many followers you can recruit. ...

...or follower you are trying to attract)...
.

You don'y have to recruit 'em.

Also worth noting that followers follow different rules to cohorts regarding death.

leadership wrote:

Followers have different priorities from cohorts. When you try to attract a follower, use the following modifiers.

...Caused the death of other followers -1...

There is no cumulative clause like there is for cohorts. Doesn't matter how many die - still just a -1 penalty..


VoodistMonk wrote:

This is exactly why I am a d!ck about this feat.

Either you play it full, or I will haunt you with it.

VoodistMonk wrote:
The feat is dumb... just play two characters at the same time from the beginning if you somehow can't just be one, like everyone else.

From these two statements, I don't think the feat is the actual problem, here.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Going to ignore the "is Leadership okay?" side conversation, because it's not worth arguing.

I will note that everyone has their own GMing style, and, though I like Leadership (as both player and GM), it's not for everyone.

Just like some people hate letting wizards have fabricate or simulacrum* as spells they cast with normal rules, some just don't like Leadership - and that's okay; everyone has to determine when to follow the RAW and when to follow what's best for their table.

* Even ignoring the iconic "snow cone wish machine" silliness, a number of GMs hate the spell simply because it unbalances action economy and brings up a whole host of unanswered questions (including how much the simulacra knows about its real life). I love the thing, but I do understand drinking the haterade.

So, now back to the actual question.

Garion Beckett wrote:

Hello everyone! Ok i have looked everywhere and I need help understanding something.

Lets say for argument's sake that I have 100 level 1 followers due to leadership.
Now assume i am epic levels and mythic for more arguement's sake lol
Here is where the question starts.

100 followers
Alternate Capstone: Boss Minons ×10
Epic Feat: Legendary Comander minions ×10

Magic Item:Suzerain Scepter minions ×2
Magic Item:Ring of the Ecclesiarch ×2

Mythic Class feature: Crusader ×2

Now how does that math work?
Please explain the method if you can. I have looked through the RAW with no luck.

Let's look at each of these:

Boss Minions wrote:
I actually can't find this anywhere. Can't comment on it.

"The Boss" alternate capstone is an exceptionally obscure ability. It apparently comes from Chronicle of Legends, a player companion book that I honestly didn't know about until now, and still haven't read. Also, Legendary Commander is from 3.5 edition which Pathfinder is backwards compatible with, but requires an entirely different set of search results and epic is an entirely different can of worms. So I'm skipping these both for now. We will come back to them at the end.

So, to help us out, let's go for a "real" example.

Leadership: someone takes the feat. They manage to push their score up to 22 or 23 somehow (the closest to "100" followers) - maybe a sorcerer Cha 17+2 racial for 19; +1 at 4, 8, 12 and 16 puts the Charisma at 23 (+6) modifier; +6 plus level 16 plus 1 trait bonus = 23; it could be higher, but I like how easy the math is for 23 who puts their talents to work!

A 23 leadership will provide up to a 16th level cohort (but since we're 16th level, it can only be 14th level), 90x 1st level followers, 9x 2nd level followers, 5x 3rd level followers, 3x 4th level followers, 2x 5th level followers, and just the one 6th level follower.

All told, 90+9+5+3+2+1=99+8+3=107+3=110 followers.

But first, let's get there. I will be describing things in "story order" instead of "hypothesis order".

A young sorcerer, one of celestial heritage has traveled to the World Wound - his reasons are his own, and, though exceptionally charismatic he's inexperienced and has not really understood the true potential that lies within him since he was captured so long ago. A natural born leader, he quickly finds several friends as he is drawn into a battle to save the world. Through incredible trial, he begins to unlock impossible potential!

He begins to find himself thrust into leadership positions working to root out evil, and he becomes quite influential. Eventually establishing a base - a bastion of holiness - inside the wicked land itself, he finds himself running a city - and establishing a semi-independent city-state. He sets about taming the desert and establishing more settlements secured by his power and blessing.

Deciding he needs ever-more devotees for his burgeoning empire (and/or business ventures), he decides to declare himself a suzerain, and acquires a Suzerain Scepter.

Suzerain Scepter wrote:
If the wielder of a suzerain scepter has the Leadership feat, she may attract double the normal number of followers for her Leadership score; however, if the rod is out of the wielder’s possession for more than 1 week these extra followers leave.

Now, this is rather straight forward: Instead of 110 followers, the newly-crowned suzerain has 220: 180x 1st level followers, 18x 2nd level followers, 10x 3rd level followers, 6x 4th level followers, 4x 5th level followers, and just the two 6th level followers.

During his many travels and trials, he finds he earns trust readily and easily, and leads multiple people to victory: slowly he is almost become the face of the crusader itself!

Crusader (Ex) wrote:

Your prowess and ability draw countless followers to your banner. You gain followers as if you had the Leadership feat. In addition, you add your tier to your leadership score when determining the number of followers you gain. Whenever you are within 100 feet of such followers, each follower can use the surge ability once per day without needing to expend mythic power.

The followers use the same die type as your surge ability.

If you have or gain the Leadership feat, you gain followers from both this ability and the Leadership feat (in effect doubling the number of followers gained).

As it turns out, "countless" is actually rather well-counted. We did so before, though he hadn't quite reached those heights, at the time (though he has now): it's 110 (220 with scepter). Now comes our first real "rules interactions" between two effects, but it's still very straight forward (or at least it can seem to be on first blush).

Crusader provides a set of followers; it says "in effect doubling..." but that doesn't mean actually doubling; it is only "in effect" because you can draw from both (and both happen to be equal). Instead, it explicitly notes that you gain "followers" and nothing else "as if you had the leadership feat" and notes that you can gain followers from both this ability and the feat.

What this means is that you've now got two leadership scores (or the same score, but two pools of followers) so simply apply the same effect to both: you now have a pool that provides 220 and another pool that provides 220. That's a cool 440 followers! ... and one cohort!

As an example of why it might work this way, let's say you start with a water bottle half full. You then gain another that is also half full. Now you have two water bottles, both filled to the same level. You could say that you've "effectively doubled" your water - which you have - but (hypothetically) you can have each filled differently. If you then "double" each of them (filling them all the way) you have two water bottles that are now filled all the way.

--------------------------------
>incoming potential divergence<
- because English (and most languages, really) can be exceptionally vague, at times, even with clear, concise language, it is possible to have a different take away, which should be addressed.

The 'scepter specifically references having the Leadership feat. Some may, then, argue that the RAW dictates that it does not also apply to the Crusader ability; however, the Crusader ability provides an implicit (and fundamentally necessarily) Leadership score (else you could not attract followers "as if by the Leadership feat" - you have to calculate the score). This, in turn, means that you have both Leadership scores calculated. The 'scepter, then, probably allows you to apply itself to both the Crusader (effective) score and the actual feat's score. Thus, it should apply to both scores. It should be noted, however, that it is not wrong to suggest that the phantom (undisclosed) "leadership score" from Crusader doesn't really exist - I find the argument unconvincing, but that does not make it invalid, merely a different way of looking at the situation.

The second argument against is one that holds more water and uses the exact same language. The 'scepter states, "she may attract double the normal number of followers for her Leadership score" and some may argue that this is exclusive and absolute language, rather than inclusive and additive language. Thus, it could be read (validly) as meaning "the scepter allows you to (at maximum, ever, regardless of circumstances) attract up to twice the number of followers one Leadership score provides." I find this argument to fall flat (in my opinion) because the sentence also uses the distinct pronoun "she" and, if we're going to be retentive about wording, we should at least be consistent and that consistency means that the 'scepter cannot be utilized by anyone who doesn't identify as "she." While there are cursed items under which such a magic item could be filed, the 'scepter is, by all indications, not meant to be one of them.

In general arguments about exceedingly specific linguistics are usually not extremely persuasive and that cuts both ways; I've used some here, but only because I can't find any other possible angle to approach it, and I attempt to back that up with other elements, if only because the rules (as several developers have stated publicly) are not meant to be a rigid and inflexible codex of absolutes. While this idea hasn't always borne itself out, it's a good thing to keep in mind when running through the game - the developers mean the language to be mostly conversational and "common sense" (though always put an asterisk there, 'cause everyone has different "common sense."
--------------------------------

With 440 exceptionally loyal people bowing to his whim (and a powerful 14th level servitor), under the pressures of looming demonic apocalypse the suzerain begins to grow a bit... ah... "eccentric" (read: delusional). He has commissioned for himself a bejeweled ring and declares himself ecclesiarch of a new church, a new faith, and his ring thus is made into the ring of the ecclesiarch.

Ring of the Ecclesiarch wrote:
If the wearer has the Leadership feat, she may attract double the normal number of followers, and her followers’ zealous devotion grants them a +4 morale bonus on Will saves against enchantment spells and effects.

Now we get to our first real sticky wicket and the actual crux of the matter: what stacks, how does it stack, and why?

There are, of course, several possible interpretations:

(1 > you multiply the "x2" effect to the various total numbers of followers

(1.5 > you multiply only those followers from the Leadership feat, not those from the Crusader mythic power we will cover this in a moment; also see the similar concept, in 2.5 below

(2 > you add the multipliers together this is the "most correct" and I will explain why in a minute

(2.5 > you add the multiplier only to those followers from the Leadership feat, not those from the Crusader mythic power we will cover this in a moment; also see the similar concept, in 1.5 above

(3 > you are capped off at double the number of followers, total. see the previous "incoming potential divergence" section for this argument; it is the same as the scepter, and the same logic for or against it applies

First, let's address 1.5 and 2.5... though, actually, we already have addressed this, just as part of a different item. This is, fundamentally, the same argument applied to the 'scepter insomuch as it applies to the Leadership feat; though the wording is slightly different, this one is even more permissive. In this (unlike the suzerain scepter), it flat-out states that you may recruit "double the normal number of followers" and does not reference a Leadership score at all. While this may well be taken to point back to the Leadership feat (a valid and reasonable interpretation of the sentence), the specific wording is more broad, allowing it to apply to all instances of gathering "followers." While the same caveats of arguments based on overly-specific wording apply, as English is a loose language, either interpretation seems valid (and we're not actually disagreeing with the 'scepter interpretation we came to above).

Now the real question is whether we follow response one, or response two. At first, given how we handled Crusader, it may seem like the first one is the most internally consistent logic, but it really isn't. Again, the Crusader special ability notes that it gives you followers "as if" you had the Leadership feat and it noted that you draw from both the Crusader ability and the Leadership ability. The "two pools" analogy.

There are several points at which increasing multipliers is discussed.

For example, taken from here, but found on page 194 of the Core Rulebook,

Quote:
Double Movement Cost: When your movement is hampered in some way, your movement usually costs double. For example, each square of movement through difficult terrain counts as 2 squares, and each diagonal move through such terrain counts as 3 squares (just as two diagonal moves normally do). If movement cost is doubled twice, then each square counts as 4 squares (or as 6 squares if moving diagonally). If movement cost is doubled three times, then each square counts as 8 squares (12 if diagonal) and so on. This is an exception to the general rule that two doublings are equivalent to a tripling.

At long, daggum, last we have a general rule.

So, barring any evidence to the contrary, it seems that (if the Leadership increases stack) you're getting: Leadership feat x3 and Crusader ability x3.

How do you qualify this? Ignore the "double" language for a moment, and presuppose it discusses "base value."

If you have something that increases the base value of x by doubling it, and you have another that does the same thing, here is what that looks like:

[all of thing x] [thing x doubled] [also doubled]

That nets you three sets of the same thing, rather than x2 x2.

This is the general rule, which means that exceptions can (and do) apply and, in fact, an exception to that rule is how we found it, but the fact that said rule explicitly gives us the general rule as well is stupendously handy.

So at this august point in his career, our little sorcerer that could now has:

Leadership (score 23 grants 110 followers; scepter increase by 110, ring increase by 110)
Crusader ("score 23" grants 110 followers; scepter increase by 110, ring increase by 110)
> total: 660 followers (and one 14th level cohort).

But here is not where we're going to leave it - oh, no, we're going the full miles!

As it turns out, it's relatively straight forward, if we look at the rules we've already established.

If we follow the alternate capstone (apparently from Chronicle of Legends), you get this:

The Boss (Ex) wrote:
At 20th level, the character has become more than just a lone hero—she has become one of the senior figures of her field, with powers and responsibilities to match. The character becomes one of the leading figures in some manner of group or organization, as appropriate to the campaign and the setting. A wizard might become the dean of an arcane university or mages’ guild, a fighter could command a mercenary army or a city guard, a cleric might lead a major temple or her own sect, and so forth. The player and the GM should work together to determine the specifics. The character gains the Leadership feat if she does not already have it, and the number of followers that the feat grants is multiplied by 10 (although depending on the campaign and setting, the position may grant other powers as well). If multiple characters in a party select this capstone, the GM may consider pooling them to grant the players a particularly large and powerful organization, such as a small kingdom. Characters of any class can select this ability.

This, of course, follows the straight forward path - there is no wording to atler the general rule, here (though the PC maybe should consider - temporarily - retraining out of the Leadership feat before getting this captstone, just to get the full benefits), so it's straight forward... except for the part where this references the feat in a way that our other multipliers do not. Specifically, it notes, "the number of followers that the feat grants is multiplied by 10" which more or less slices out the Crusader ability by a restrictive reading (of course, a GM will have to determine which is more "specific" in the ever-raging battle of "specific v. general" so it's a bit questionable).

There is some argument to be made about "(although depending on the campaign and setting, the position may grant other powers as well)" perhaps expanding the basic covering, but it's ambiguous and intintionally reliant upon a given GM to interpret; further, it's not so much, "it applies to all things universally" as "the position of power you've found yourself in may grant unique abilities" so it's unclear if loyalty from more people would ever be part of that - though there are ways.

Either way, we've (unfortunately) got to increase our numbers; now that the character is 20th level, that autiomatically pushes us to "over 23"... exceeeeeeeeeeeept it doesn't have to! Because, of course, while our dear sorcerer has gained four levels, he's unfortunately lost 8 charisma (and thus 4 modifier those succubuses, yo; they rip one little profane gift out of you and suddenly you've just lost just about everything), and the status quo is maintained! Woohoo!

If you accept that Crusader's "as the feat" trumps the text, you're left with two sets of followers like so:

Leadership (score 23 grants 110 followers; scepter increase by 110, ring increase by 110, the boss increase by 990)
Crusader ("score 23" grants 110 followers; scepter increase by 110, ring increase by 110, the boss increase by 990)
> total: 990+110+110+990+110+110+110+110= 1100+1100+220+220= 2200+440= 2640 followers (and one 14th level cohort).

If, on the other hand, you say The Boss excludes effects like Leadership, you're left with:

Leadership (score 23 grants 110 followers; scepter increase by 110, ring increase by 110, the boss increase by 990)
Crusader ("score 23" grants 110 followers; scepter increase by 110, ring increase by 110)
> total 110+110+110+990+110+110+110= 220+1100+220+110 = 1320+330= 1650

Story-wise, we now return to (one of) our hero(es):

Having survived the harrowing travails of the Abyss, destroyed a powerful demonlord, and felt the call to ascension, he found himself unable to continue - unable to ascend to the heavens. Perhaps it was the taint whose power he had absorbed so long ago, but instead of ascending to the heavenly, he found himself thinking of the terrestrial. Instead of moving to what lies beyond, he finds himself bound to the people - a people who call for him, who need leading. And so he returned to them, and they embraced him, as ever more became his loyal followers, adopting his faith, his regency, and his commands. But his faith - the entirety of his power - was built on a foundation: the foundation of destroying demonkind. Though one demon lord had fallen, several had made themselves his enemy, and his people - loyal crusaders to the last - would follow him into the Abyss to wreak true devestation upon the wicked spirits, there. Impossibly, his armies only grew, and he became a fierce force for the destruction of the demonic within their own realm.

And so, in these epic times, our sorcerer has arrived at the epic levels. You see, on page 406 of the Core book, the section, "beyond 20th level" exists on the right hand side. While the rules for Mythic were intended to replace Epic, that section has never actually been redacted. Hence, epic levels.

Though he takes Epic Leadership, that only really applies at 25 or higher leadership score, and, unfortunately for our man, his self-sacrificial nature means that he slowly loses charisma even while he gains levels (and somehow maintains that 23 score) nevermind he couldn't take the feat otherwise and he toally has that plus more, by now! Having restored his charisma, and even boosting it beyond (+1 at 20th, yields 24 charisma with a +7 modifier and +1 at 24th and 28th levels yields 26 charisma with a +8 modifier), he has successfully become a diplomatic powerhouse note, though it says it requires 30 ranks, Pathfinder expects that you reduce skill prerequisites from older materials by 3 to adjust for the Pathfinder skill system instead of the 3.5 one; either way, he's a 30th level now, with full ranks in Diplomacy so there!.

Eventually, he retired back to the material realm where he settled into his kingdom and home base full time, taking good care of those who showed loyalty to him - and, indeed, all of his citizens - exceptionally generous, and exhibiting mythical powers none can readily explain. He married the love of his life, and the two ruled with grace and peace.

+2 great renown, +1 fairness and generosity, +1 special power, +2 has a stronghold; lvl 30 + cha mod 8 + modifiers 6 = score of 44.

In the end, that 44 leadership would grant... more math.

Score of 40 allows for a 25th level cohort; 1000 x 1st level, 100 x 2nd level; 50 x 3rd level; 25 x 4th level; 13 x 5th level; 7 x 6th level; 4 x 7th level; 2 x 8th level; 1 x 9th level; no 10th level (but possibly coming).

Per +1 after 40th, you gain +1 maximum cohort level every 2 points above 40th (so +1 max cohort level at 42, and again at 44 means a 27th level cohort). Additionally, per +1 after 40th, yu gain 1st level followers +100. At 44, this means you have +400, or 1st level followers x 1400. You've got 1/10th as many 2nd level followers (140), half that many 3rd level followers (70), half that many 4th level followers (35), half that many 5th level followers (18), half that many 6th level follwers (9), half that many 7th level followers (5), half that many 8th level folowers (3), half that many 9th level followers (2), and half that many 10th level followers (1).

That's 1400+140+70+35+18+9+5+3+2+1= 1540+105+27+8+3= 1645+35+3= 1680+3= 1683 total.

Now we look at Legendary Commander.

Legendary Commander wrote:
Multiply the number of followers of each level that you can lead by 10. This has no effect on cohorts.

Whee! Fortunately, though we don't have the same numbers as before, we can easily get the new ones.

SO...

Leadership (score 44 grants 1683 followers; scepter increase by 1683; ring increase by 1683; the boss increase by 15,147; legendary commander increase by 15,147)
Crusader ("score 44" grants 1683 followers; scepter increase by 1683; ring increase by 1683; the boss increase by 15,147; legendary commander increase by 15,147)
> total 1683+1683+1683+15147+15147+1683+1683+1683+15147+15147= 3366+1683+30294+3366+1683+30294= 5049+60588+5049= 10098+60588= 70686

If you don't allow it to apply to Crusader (because presupposing requiring the feat limiting it to the feat) reduce the over-all humber of followers accordingly.

It is now after midnight and I've been doing this far too long. I've made mistakes, but I'm basically asleep while typing. Yeah, that was with my eyes closed - hard to open them. So! Stopping here for the night. Peace out, and good night! And, regardless of who you are, I hope you're having a great life and a great time at your table with your friends!

Scarab Sages

1 person marked this as a favorite.

So every songle person in a mettopolis could be his follower. Interesting.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Senko wrote:
So every songle person in a mettopolis could be his follower. Interesting.

Two metropolises, in fact!

(Or just one; or any of a number of arrangements - depends on how they're distributed!)

((You're just one small city shy of three metropolises, however - alas!))

... of course, that's only if you allow two sets of optional rules, and access to two third-party feats requiring one of those optional rules.


My eyes kind of glazed over at your long post, Tacticslion.

I have a similar long post (with links!) which details nearly every way to get leadership and improve it. Classes, archtypes, domains, feats, magic items, and so on. You can go nuts with t if you want.

At the end of the post is a table with # followers at cohort levels 25 to 100 should you hit that high. [I have.]

As to the multiplier question, I think you should follow the doubled doubling rule. I.e. x2 twice gets you x3 and x10 twice would be x19.

/cevah


The one time I wanted to take Leadership, it was so I could get a an intelligent, magical mount as a cohort that would then be able to level up with me so as to not become useless.

Kingmaker type campaign would also be a wonderful use for this often abused feat.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

You can populate a city, nice, but you will always have the number and levels of followers determined by your Leadership score. They don't gain levels, or, if they gain them, they go away and are replaced.
Useful if you want to play some kind of lord with a retinue, not particularly interesting for a common adventurer.

BTW, they are no slaves, so they will not work for you for free. They will help you and even donate some work, but they will live their life and work to eat and live. You will have loyal servants, way more loyal than a hired servant will be, but you will still have to pay them if they work for you.

Scarab Sages

Diego Rossi wrote:

You can populate a city, nice, but you will always have the number and levels of followers determined by your Leadership score. They don't gain levels, or, if they gain them, they go away and are replaced.

Useful if you want to play some kind of lord with a retinue, not particularly interesting for a common adventurer.

BTW, they are no slaves, so they will not work for you for free. They will help you and even donate some work, but they will live their life and work to eat and live. You will have loyal servants, way more loyal than a hired servant will be, but you will still have to pay them if they work for you.

I'm not so sure that last applies if your going with a ruler approach as they'd be working for protection. That is they grow crops, herd animals, etc thus maintaining your city/country estate. In exchange for a tax on that population (may be gold, may be X eggs/meat/other a quarter, may even be 2 day's labour a month for you) you provide a powerful adventurer to protect them in times of need. Yes they aren't slaves but I imagine the cost both way's is equitable like it would be for a normal farmer, forester, guard, etc.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Senko wrote:
Diego Rossi wrote:

You can populate a city, nice, but you will always have the number and levels of followers determined by your Leadership score. They don't gain levels, or, if they gain them, they go away and are replaced.

Useful if you want to play some kind of lord with a retinue, not particularly interesting for a common adventurer.

BTW, they are no slaves, so they will not work for you for free. They will help you and even donate some work, but they will live their life and work to eat and live. You will have loyal servants, way more loyal than a hired servant will be, but you will still have to pay them if they work for you.

I'm not so sure that last applies if your going with a ruler approach as they'd be working for protection. That is they grow crops, herd animals, etc thus maintaining your city/country estate. In exchange for a tax on that population (may be gold, may be X eggs/meat/other a quarter, may even be 2 day's labour a month for you) you provide a powerful adventurer to protect them in times of need. Yes they aren't slaves but I imagine the cost both way's is equitable like it would be for a normal farmer, forester, guard, etc.

Exactly what I said, read the bolded part.

I am simply pointing out that will not spend all their time for you for free.

Scarab Sages

Diego Rossi wrote:
Senko wrote:
Diego Rossi wrote:

You can populate a city, nice, but you will always have the number and levels of followers determined by your Leadership score. They don't gain levels, or, if they gain them, they go away and are replaced.

Useful if you want to play some kind of lord with a retinue, not particularly interesting for a common adventurer.

BTW, they are no slaves, so they will not work for you for free. They will help you and even donate some work, but they will live their life and work to eat and live. You will have loyal servants, way more loyal than a hired servant will be, but you will still have to pay them if they work for you.

I'm not so sure that last applies if your going with a ruler approach as they'd be working for protection. That is they grow crops, herd animals, etc thus maintaining your city/country estate. In exchange for a tax on that population (may be gold, may be X eggs/meat/other a quarter, may even be 2 day's labour a month for you) you provide a powerful adventurer to protect them in times of need. Yes they aren't slaves but I imagine the cost both way's is equitable like it would be for a normal farmer, forester, guard, etc.

Exactly what I said, read the bolded part.

I am simply pointing out that will not spend all their time for you for free.

Fair enough I'm 9 day's into an 11 day work week and its starting to tire me so I'm missing things.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Leadership Multipliers All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.