Leadership

[Ranting Fool]

A random thought flickers about my rather empty head today... who do Cohorts belong to? Are they NPC's run by the DM or are they in effect just a second character for the PC's?

What is GiTP view?
When you give/let a PC have leadership do you let them create the cohort as they will (to what ever op they choose) and let them RP the choices/reactions of the Cohort.
Or do you as DM run them like any other NPC who just happens to really really like the PC?

The Feat lets you attract a cohort, with no restriction on class/race. So would you as DM allow them to say "I'd like a favored soul with these feats, this stat build and these spells oh and this equipment" or "I'd like a favored soul, what does he/she/it have"

Just a random thought :smallbiggrin:

[AdamT]

I have always dmed it as a combination of what you are asking. The player can name class/race and from there we kind of split the op-fu on it. If the player is very good at optimization, I generally knock it down a notch or two. If the player is very bad at optimization I normally boost it a bit (usually with tricks that i think the pc would like on some future character based on their normal play style.

[Morcleon]

I've always just let them make and run the cohort themselves, with the same restrictions that their PCs are under. I also make them tie it into their backstory in a way other than "some guy off the street".

Optimization wise, if I feel it's too much for my campaign setting/the other PCs, I will tell them to bring it down a few notches. If they fail to optimize their cohort, I might give them a small tip or two, but I won't tell them what to do. It is their cohort, after all. :smallsmile:

[Thump]

Out of curiosity, is there a clause in Leadership that a cohort can't take Leadership?

[Morcleon]

Out of curiosity, is there a clause in Leadership that a cohort can't take Leadership?

Nope. But doing so generally causes books to be thrown. :smallsmile:

And the second gen cohort would be 4 levels under your own, and thus would be likely ineffective anyway...

[Darrin]

Out of curiosity, is there a clause in Leadership that a cohort can't take Leadership?

No, but there's the problem of diminishing returns: at best, your cohort will be your ECL - 2. So while you can build recursive nesting cohorts, the ECL eventually drops below 6 (minimum for taking Leadership).

Dragon Cohort (Draconomicon), however, doesn't have this problem...

[Alleran]

I usually say that a cohort is run by the player on behalf of the DM, so the DM doesn't have another NPC to keep following around the party. However, if necessary, the DM can take control of the cohort back if the player is being abusive with how they use their cohort.

As to optimisation level, they can have it up to a bit less optimised than the party themselves, in general. Sometimes I'll do it, sometimes I'll let the player do it.

[Coidzor]

No, but there's the problem of diminishing returns: at best, your cohort will be your ECL - 2. So while you can build recursive nesting cohorts, the ECL eventually drops below 6 (minimum for taking Leadership).

Dragon Cohort (Draconomicon), however, doesn't have this problem...

Well, for two feats invested you can get ECL - 1, though I think that does require Dragon Magazine material.

[prufock]

who do Cohorts belong to? Are they NPC's run by the DM or are they in effect just a second character for the PC's?
I generally allow the players to run the cohorts actions, such as combat, skill use, spellcasting, etc, unless they want the cohort to do something totally out of wack for the character. This is meant to represent a certain level of instruction (both literal and intuitive) from the PC. I run the cohort's roleplaying as a normal NPC.

I'll work in conjunction with the player to build the cohort, but if the player wants I'll just build it. For example, in the most recent game a player took Leadership in order to gain a follower who could heal, since that was a weak spot in the party. Because it's a low-op game, I suggested Healer rather than Cleric - literally the cohort would be a healer only. I went ahead and built one because I mess around with character builds all the time. The player was fine with the character as she was, so that's what we used. If the player wanted to swap out feats or whatever I would probably have been fine with that, but the build was pretty solid for its intended purpose.

[eggs]

Well, for two feats invested you can get ECL - 1, though I think that does require Dragon Magazine material.
Heroes of Battle

[veven]

As I DM I've always ran cohorts outside of combat and had the player with leadership control them during battles.

[nedz]

As a DM I have far better things to do than run someone's cohort.
It is a part of their character anyway, so they get to build and run them.
I would step in if they were being abusive, well the cohort would probably leave.
I usually give them a half share of xp, which can make them 2-3 levels lower.

I once ran a game where two players swapped their cohorts in the sense that they ran each others. This worked very well, and led to some amusing character interactions which we wouldn't have seen otherwise. This was the players idea.

[J-H]

I once ran a game where two players swapped their cohorts in the sense that they ran each others. This worked very well, and led to some amusing character interactions which we wouldn't have seen otherwise. This was the players idea.
That's a really good idea...

[navar100]

My DM does not use Leadership RAW. He uses Leadership as a roleplaying feat. Spending the feat is the cost to have an organization of some kind - a business, a guild, an estate, a title, etc. By DM fiat you will have a group that has influence within the gameworld. Depending on the player character it could be something the player developed in play or an inheritance, figuratively speaking - something the PC had all along but was unaware in character until the player took Leadership out of character. This group is your Followers. They mean something. The DM by fiat uses them as part of campaign plot but the player does have a say and can even direct them to particular goals taking initiative on the matter. Because there is real value in game play the feat cost is not wasted.

Depending on circumstances Followers can be any level any class by DM fiat, though most probably lower level than the PC and his cohort. The cohort is DM built and run by the DM. The cohort is absolutely loyal. A particular Follower could be of such competence and skill that he's effectively a second cohort. It depends on how the campaign develops. Important non-enemy NPCs recognize you as the leader of the organization and regard you as someone of Importance as well.

Having this organization is fun. Players don't always take Leadership, but it is of such good value that players seriously consider it. If not taken at first opportunity, perhaps later.

[nedz]

My DM does not use Leadership RAW. He uses Leadership as a roleplaying feat. Spending the feat is the cost to have an organization of some kind - a business, a guild, an estate, a title, etc. By DM fiat you will have a group that has influence within the gameworld. Depending on the player character it could be something the player developed in play or an inheritance, figuratively speaking - something the PC had all along but was unaware in character until the player took Leadership out of character. This group is your Followers. They mean something. The DM by fiat uses them as part of campaign plot but the player does have a say and can even direct them to particular goals taking initiative on the matter. Because there is real value in game play the feat cost is not wasted.

Depending on circumstances Followers can be any level any class by DM fiat, though most probably lower level than the PC and his cohort. The cohort is DM built and run by the DM. The cohort is absolutely loyal. A particular Follower could be of such competence and skill that he's effectively a second cohort. It depends on how the campaign develops. Important non-enemy NPCs recognize you as the leader of the organization and regard you as someone of Importance as well.

Having this organization is fun. Players don't always take Leadership, but it is of such good value that players seriously consider it. If not taken at first opportunity, perhaps later.

+1 to this idea.

In another campaign I ran: the PCs were all members of a recon unit in the army. Someone took leadership, so I made him the officer :smallbiggrin: