Lesser Leadership

[Cipher Stars]

Lesser in this case meaning less game smashing.


Lesser Leadership:
Requirements: Character Level 3
Benefits: This feat functions as Leadership for the purpose of granting a Cohort, but does not grant Followers.

[Hiro Protagonest]

The cohort is the game smashing part. The followers aren't worth much, except maybe as GOD-type casters that sling around buffs and battlefield control, or people who craft stuff to sell.

[Cipher Stars]

The cohort is the game smashing part. The followers aren't worth much, except maybe as GOD-type casters that sling around buffs and battlefield control, or people who craft stuff to sell.

135 followers isn't game smashing? Yet a spare NPC party member who is two levels behind you is game smashing?

[Hiro Protagonest]

135 followers isn't game smashing? Yet a spare NPC party member who is two levels behind you is game smashing?

135 followers all 6th level or lower at 20th level. Compared to an 18th level full caster.

[Adamantrue]

The cohort is the game smashing part. The followers aren't worth much, except maybe as GOD-type casters that sling around buffs and battlefield control, or people who craft stuff to sell. So, what would be a good way to handle this? Reduce the Cohort level? Only have Followers?

As far as the initial idea...would the Apprentice/Mentor Feats from (is it the PH2 or DMG2?) fill the role you want for this Feat, or are you trying for something different (like get a follower with a much different set of abilities)?

[Circle of Life]

135 followers isn't game smashing? Yet a spare NPC party member who is two levels behind you is game smashing?

Pretty much. It depends on what exactly the DM lets you get away with ("okay, I want to attract a wizard" can mean either "here's a blank character sheet, use X method to generate stats" or "here's a pregenerated wizard cohort, his name is Bob, treat him well"). If you get the first option, it's a feat for a second party member, and that's broken no matter how you slice it. If it's the second option, then it's still a feat for a wizard.

The 135 followers can occasionally do interesting things like be adepts and torch countrysides with Burning Hands, but for the most part people just end up ignoring them/sacrificing them for rituals/whatever.

[Morph Bark]

So, what would be a good way to handle this? Reduce the Cohort level? Only have Followers?

One feat that grants only followers.

One feat that grants a cohort at half your level max.

[Cipher Stars]

As far as the initial idea...would the Apprentice/Mentor Feats from (is it the PH2 or DMG2?) fill the role you want for this Feat, or are you trying for something different (like get a follower with a much different set of abilities)?

actually it was just to give me something at the moment as well as cause an opening for someone to point me to a feat that hopefully does what I wish: AKA: Thanks!

Morph: Or just make the cohort 4 levels lower if its a spellcaster... no Wishes or Gates... Which seems to be what everyone's complaining on.

[Tyndmyr]

Lesser in this case meaning less game smashing.


Lesser Leadership:
Requirements: Character Level 3
Benefits: This feat functions as Leadership for the purpose of granting a Cohort, but does not grant Followers.

This is already a thing.

D20 M breaks out the cohort and the followers into separate feats.
It doesn't make it balanced at all, really, but hey.

[Yitzi]

So, what would be a good way to handle this? Reduce the Cohort level? Only have Followers?

My idea was to have Leadership give followers only, and then Greater Leadership gives the cohort. That assumes no flaws or other ways of getting bonus feats that can be used for those; otherwise, you'd probably want a few others in the chain as well.

Of course, that'll still only work when the game is based not only on number of actions but also on their power and chance of success (and 2 levels difference makes for a character only half as powerful); otherwise, there's no way to fix cohorts.

Minimally customizable cohorts (race, class, alignment) that are played as NPCs (not under the PC's direct control, although they'll listen to him) would also help somewhat, and is RAW.

[Shadow Lord]

135 Wizards all casting Magic Missile is broken anyway you slice it, as well.

[Halna LeGavilk]

Yeah, leadership is insanely broken. The best way to play, and the way I always play it, is that the followers and possibly the cohort are always off-screen, and never really have a huge in-game impact, so it's more of a fluff feat than anything.

[druid91]

Yeah, leadership is insanely broken. The best way to play, and the way I always play it, is that the followers and possibly the cohort are always off-screen, and never really have a huge in-game impact, so it's more of a fluff feat than anything.


Or you could simply treat it like real organizations of such massive scale. Make it so that if they want to use your followers you have to deal with the hassle of actually communicating with them all, organizing them, dealing with setbacks over a massive battlefield... And while they do that in notes talk to the rest of the party about the adventure.

[137beth]

How broken leadership is depends on the GM. If the GM allows you to have a wizard that YOU build fully optimized AND control, then that is out of whack. Of course, that has more to do with the wizard being overpowered than the leadership feat...
Of course, attracting a cohort of a particular class gives a penalty to your effective leadership score, and the player shouldn't get total control over their cohort. Assuming the cohort in question is a reasonably balanced character, then leadership doesn't end up being terribly game breaking. That's also considering the fact that your cohort won't always be only 2 levels below you, unless you invest a lot in boosting your CHA.
Now, if the GM allows the player to have full control over their cohort, who happens to be a wizard in a game with no house rules/wizard nerfs, then that is completely game breaking, but at that point, you are handling cohorts incorrectly. And, of course, if you are allowing wizards without any sort of nerf to casters, the game balance is already toast anyways.

[Volthawk]

Eh, followers-wise, the level you get them, the majority are just cannon-fodder, since anything you'd be fighting at those kinda levels can easily kill them (remember, the vast majority are level 1), and they'd only do anything on a nat 20, so really Magic Missile would be the only really effective method. Any area of effect abilities the enemy has can easily kill them (Blasphemy for example is around at the level you need to get an amount of followers around 135 - using Venerable Dragonwought and a +6 item, you need to be level 14 to get the 24 leadership score needed for 133 followers, barring special conditions, I guess - and it will annihilate most your followers outright, leaving the rest crippled, since they would all come under the 'up to caster level -5' section - and they take up space that you may need to operate (if you're in any places with enclosed spaces, you'll have trouble bringing those forces to bear). Also, you need to support them, and when followers die, your leadership score drops, likewise if you don't treat them well.

It's the cohort that's the real problem, since he's of a level where he can do some serious stuff, especially if he's a high-tier class.

[Doorhandle]

.... So the way to balance it would be to make the cohort weaker and make the followers stronger but less numerous?

...Intresting. Perhaps if you made follower levels scale... (*Takes notes for his leadership-based Ruler class*)

[Circle of Life]

.... So the way to balance it would be to make the cohort weaker and make the followers stronger but less numerous?

Without further restrictions, it's pretty much impossible to balance regardless of the nerfs to the cohort. Either you tone it down so much that the wizard or cleric people grab with it isn't worth more than the feat it costs, thereby turning every other class choice that isn't a fullcaster into utter garbage, or you keep the other classes competitive and people grab a fullcaster anyway.

It's just a broken concept from start to finish. Even if you restrict it to NPC classes, people will always take the Adept over, say, a Warrior, and with good reason.

[Doorhandle]

Well, I was gonna start the class having only commoners to help him, and eventually getting experts, warriors, aristocrats and finally adepts, and maybe a few more N.P.C classes.

Maybe also restricting the cohorts to N.P.C classes and having them get occasional bonuses, like another spell or sneak attack damage.

[Ashtagon]

Personally, I'd adjust the leadership table so that max cohort level is leadership / 2.

[Yitzi]

135 Wizards all casting Magic Missile is broken anyway you slice it, as well.

Not when the enemy has unsurpassable (for them) SR, it isn't. Also, restricting followers to NPC levels would solve that quite nicely.


Without further restrictions, it's pretty much impossible to balance regardless of the nerfs to the cohort. Either you tone it down so much that the wizard or cleric people grab with it isn't worth more than the feat it costs, thereby turning every other class choice that isn't a fullcaster into utter garbage, or you keep the other classes competitive and people grab a fullcaster anyway.

That's just another way of saying "wizards and clerics are too powerful and therefore unabalanced". Without fixing that, Leadership is the least of your worries.

[Ashtagon]

If a PC takes leadership and then asks for 135 wizards, my first response would be to ask where he is recruiting them from. The only place where you will likely find that many low level wizards in one place is at a magic college, and 99% of them would rather continue their studies that go off with a relative unknown.

If then they somehow bludgeon me into accepting that request as "it is raw", I would then point out that by strict raw, NPCs can do that too, and do they have defence against 135 magic missiles. Or 135 charm persons for that matter (a natural 1 still fails a save, right?).

In my campaign, they still have to recruit these groups - whether followers or cohorts - from whoever they meet in-campaign. The feat allows them to upgrade their loyalty from hireling to cohort/follower.

[Morph Bark]

If a PC takes leadership and then asks for 135 wizards, my first response would be to ask where he is recruiting them from. The only place where you will likely find that many low level wizards in one place is at a magic college, and 99% of them would rather continue their studies that go off with a relative unknown.

If then they somehow bludgeon me into accepting that request as "it is raw", I would then point out that by strict raw, NPCs can do that too, and do they have defence against 135 magic missiles. Or 135 charm persons for that matter (a natural 1 still fails a save, right?).

In my campaign, they still have to recruit these groups - whether followers or cohorts - from whoever they meet in-campaign. The feat allows them to upgrade their loyalty from hireling to cohort/follower.

This is why I've simply done away with Leadership in my campaigns and allow my players to use Diplomacy to recruit people. So far, the ones they have recruited have generally been criminals they've freed from prison or bards that became interested in their stories.