World Domination Plot (ANDREW STAY OUT!)

[Major]

Alright, so I've got a character I posted about earlier. They are a blind Battle Dancer. Moving on my charisma is bat **** insane. Now then, I lack eyes so getting healed isn't much of an option though DM offered grafts.

Just cuz I liked the backstory and such I doubt I'll accept the grafts and will play the blind character (I do have tremor sense 30ft). Anyways, moving on my character is insecure in their blindness and as such wants power just to be like "There, I'm awesome even without sight."

So, I decided I want to take over the world (at the very least the country). Now then, they are doing a campaign based on 'Hereos of Might and Magic' (I think that is what it's called). Anyways we are 'Dungeon' which is Drow, dark elves, etc.

Anyways, so the DM said since this is a war campaign they would allow leadership, but due to war campaign my cohorts and followers might die which would hurt my leadership score.

In conclusion, I'm plotting to take rulership as well, maybe extra followers. I figure with a cohort being a warchanter all those 300 something followers would have my highest attack (I got full BAB).

Now the problem is level...To get a cohort of that level I'd need to be 16 minimum. (Bard 1/ fighter 4/ Warchanter 10 is 15, with the improved cohort feat that means I can be 16).

Is there any way to make my legions deadly before 16? Taking a dip in fighter would mean I could be a ruler and have extra followers by 9, but they'd be super weak and mostly useless...How can I use this small army to either take over my own country or take over an enemy country and rule it.

[hivedragon]

IMO leadership is a very clunky mechanic which does not illustrate the minion-leader dynamic all that well.

How many servants does the local king possess? Way more than leadership could provide him with.

You need to find people who are unhappy with current leadership and prove to them that you would make a superior leader.

[TroubleBrewing]

IMO leadership is a very clunky mechanic which does not illustrate the minion-leader dynamic all that well.

... This is a troll, right? Or sarcasm?

[Major]

Hey, I'm just telling you what I'm working with. Leadership might not be the best, but its what I got.

[137beth]

... This is a troll, right? Or sarcasm?

He has a point in that leadership does not give a monarch a realistic number of followers, and that to take over a country you would need more than the leadership feat. A monarch is assumed to have more followers than leadership grants them, as that is not what leadership is intended to do. I don't see anything wrong with his claims.

[Ravens_cry]

Thrallherd (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/prestigeClasses/thrallherd.htm) is one way to get lot's and lot's o' minions. You could fluff it as extreme leadership and personal charisma, like Winston Churchill, it IS an Extraordinary ability after all.

[Major]

Agreed, but I figure leadership is just the close up followers anyways. Every person in the kingdom isn't reflected, but one could argue that the amount would be close personal, guards, palace personal, etc.

Anyways, besides the point on the usefulness of leadership...ways to take over somewhere. If people can figure out all these other loops and trolls, I'm sure we can figure out a way that with Rulership, Leadership, and Extra followers we can make an army. Hell, with a Warchanter all those grunts have max BAB.

Edit: See, I'm not psionic and don't want to dip thrallherd and my DM allowed Leadership but made it clear I can't use my cohort to leadership chain. Thrallherd is pretty close to Leadership looping so I doubt he'll allow that as my cohort.

[hivedragon]

... This is a troll, right? Or sarcasm?

:smallconfused: alright if if you think that leadership is such an accurate simulation of rulership lets think about this for a second.

What are the probable stats of a king? He's probably a level 5 aristocrat with a healthy charisma bonus, how many followers would he have according to leadership? He'd be stuck with about zero

[TroubleBrewing]

He has a point in that leadership does not give a monarch a realistic number of followers, and that to take over a country you would need more than the leadership feat. A monarch is assumed to have more followers than leadership grants them, as that is not what leadership is intended to do. I don't see anything wrong with his claims.

That's not the issue. The issue is this:


IMO leadership is a very clunky mechanic which does not illustrate the minion-leader dynamic all that well.

Emphasis mine. Leadership is hardly clunky. There is a specific list of things that add to your Leadership score, and any questions a player has about the list can be answered with a "yes" or "no" answer from the DM. It's streamlined, sophisticated, and probably the easiest way to totally break D&D.

[Eldest]

In the heros of might and magic game, there are heros that act as generals and run around with large numbers of troops that do all the actual fighting. My guess would be that is what the leadership feat is meant to represent, at least in part. Not sure if that helps any.
You might need to just have a really good plan and get some allies. Find power-hungry nobles around (they are always there) and get their help, then backstab them before they do the same to you. Not terribly helpful, but it's what I got.

[TroubleBrewing]

:smallconfused: alright if if you think that leadership is such an accurate simulation of rulership lets think about this for a second.

Right, because it says very clearly in the feat description that all kings are kings because of this feat and only this feat.

Leadership isn't meant for kings. It's meant for PCs.

Furthermore, if a DM wanted to assign Leadership to a king, he'd be more than within his rights to grant a circumstance bonus to said ruler's Leadership score, you know, given that he's the frakking king.

[Major]

@Eldest I agree that fits why he allowed Leadership, but my hope was to somehow laugh evilly (with his set limit of no looping) and take over one of the countries and rule it myself.

[hivedragon]

I will concede that leadership has some uses
-the crew of a (sea/air) ship
-guards of a fortress where you keep your goodies
-network of information gatherers

However this feat is ill suited for command and conquer.

[Major]

Normally, but with all the D&D rules and tricks, and sneaky tactics I'm sure a way could be discovered. At the very least a way that a bunch of low levels would be a threat.

I can get over 300, but right now Warchanter seems to be the only way to make them even somewhat of a threat. What are other ways? I mean sure, having max BAB at level 1 even with a bow would be a crap ton of 1d6, but that doesn't help that much especially if DR comes in.