Non-Animal companions

[Totally Not Gorbacz]

I guess I'm going to chalk it up to failing the "no wtf dude I would never own slaves this is like ugh badwrong on so many levels, and if I would own them, I'd let them free ASAP!!!!" test, thanks for playing along.

[WWHsmackdown]

I think hirelings should be a gm controlled mechanic, not a pc controlled one. The PC can give them commands but the gm provides autonomy/free will.
Pc: "Bob, walk down that booby-trapped corridor.....beer's on me tonight."
Hireling: "Three weeks pay right now or I find a new gig."

[Verzen]

WWHsmackdown wrote:

I think hirelings should be a gm controlled mechanic, not a pc controlled one. The PC can give them commands but the gm provides autonomy/free will.

Pc: "Bob, walk down that booby-trapped corridor.....beer's on me tonight."
Hireling: "Three weeks pay right now or I find a new gig."

Perfect. Let's also make PCs GM controlled. After all, we can't trust PCs to make good, moral, and ethical decisions according to the replies on this OP, Especially when they are in control of fictitious characters.

[Verzen]

Kelseus wrote:

This is obviously baiting. Just Flag and move on.

Yeah claim im baiting and flag it because some yahoos decided to turn it into something it's not. Brilliant. *eyeroll*

[Totally Not Gorbacz]

The fact that you're at the point of hysterically losing the plot in this thread is not the best advertisement of your capacity to make reasoned decisions at a gaming table, doubly so when handling sensitive material.

[siegfriedliner]

I think there is some room for basically having simple template characters that could be gm or PC controlled when you want to round up a small group to 4. These would count as another player for encounter balance.

You could then use these as underlings for the party in games with small parties or gms who are happy to run larger encounters.

[Castilliano]

siegfriedliner wrote:

I think there is some room for basically having simple template characters that could be gm or PC controlled when you want to round up a small group to 4. These would count as another player for encounter balance.

You could then use these as underlings for the party in games with small parties or gms who are happy to run larger encounters.

Don't those exist? There are many NPCs available w/ viable and simple combat statistics plus some iconics have stats too.

Add on an appropriate backpack of miscellaneous gear and they should be good to go, albeit w/ narrow breadth.

[The Raven Black]

Iconics.

[nephandys]

Verzen wrote:

nephandys wrote:

Verzen wrote:

I find it incredibly interesting ya'll are complaining about the morality of having a squire/sidekick to help in combat when every group anyway devolves into monty python inspired murder hobos.

Not once has anyone complained about the morality of having a squire or sidekick. What they have said is that the minion subsystem is poor and lacking when it comes to representing something like a squire or sidekick. They also pointed out that due to the terminology involved it could easily be abused by those acting in bad faith which is a concern given the existence of PFS. Not only that but they offered alternatives that really aren't that different than the one you're so deadset on using.

Maybe.. here's a novel idea... that if someone is acting in bad faith, we should remove the player acting in bad faith rather than blaming the system?

Or we could design a better system? Especially since we're talking about a subsystem not the PF2e system itself. It's not a big ask, pretty much already exists, and if it didn't there are good recommendations in this thread. Or IDK lose the plot entirely and start talking about how if you're allowed to kill people in the game you should be fine with a an entirely disconnected system that leaves the door wide open for bad actors when it could be easily adjusted to avoid that problem.

[Jonathan Morgantini]

This thread has devolved from the original intent of the poster and will remain locked.