Retainers and the Knight Background's Squire: How do you run them, make them?

[Coidzor]

Has the Sage addressed them?

All I've seen from searching around is stuff from 2014 where there seemed to be a lot of people obsessed with taking away/killing off the retainers as quickly as possible if they weren't left at a stronghold that the PCs only occasionally visited, and that believe that all squires ever are 13 year old body slaves. :smallconfused:

So I'm hoping for a bit more elaboration, especially after I've gotten a few posts on some of my recent threads that intimated that the retainers could be useful in some capacity.

What would you recommend as far as alternatives, either to sub in in place of the Retainers feature or as another Background entirely for an elite member of a warrior society that's civilized but decidedly foreign to the rest of the setting?

Knight of the Order and backgrounds with similar features are pretty much out, from a metagame standpoint at least, as we're doing Curse of Strahd, so anything that relies on either my character or the orders or organizations he's a part of being known to people is pretty much just going to be set on fire by my understanding.

[Ninja_Prawn]

Has the Sage addressed them?

All I've seen from searching around is stuff from 2014 where there seemed to be a lot of people obsessed with taking away/killing off the retainers as quickly as possible if they weren't left at a stronghold that the PCs only occasionally visited, and that believe that all squires ever are 13 year old body slaves. :smallconfused:

So I'm hoping for a bit more elaboration, especially after I've gotten a few posts on some of my recent threads that intimated that the retainers could be useful in some capacity.

What would you recommend as far as alternatives, either to sub in in place of the Retainers feature or as another Background entirely for an elite member of a warrior society that's civilized but decidedly foreign to the rest of the setting?

Knight of the Order and backgrounds with similar features are pretty much out, from a metagame standpoint at least, as we're doing Curse of Strahd, so anything that relies on either my character or the orders or organizations he's a part of being known to people is pretty much just going to be set on fire by my understanding.

I have done a bit of musing on this topic, as I was planning to run a paladins-only game where all of them had squires. I figured I'd roll up batches of random squires - a kind of 'crop' of young people that have joined the Order recently - and let them 'pick teams'. The first two sets I rolled up are here (https://www.dropbox.com/s/o0cn17nunigusbg/Squires.pdf?dl=0) (I did 3d6-in-order to represent the fact that they're kids). I even figured out a system for the squires coming of age and becoming full paladins themselves, if they live that long.

I had a lot more fun writing the script that did the rolling than I would have done playing them... :smallfrown:

As for your character's cultural baggage, well, this 'foreign warrior society' must have a system for bringing young warriors through the ranks. You can still have an apprentice, even if they're not literally a squire.

[hymer]

Has the Sage addressed them?

Not to my knowledge.

I've played a handful of sessions with a character who had followers as part of a custom background. They were mostly RP aids, personalities that I could play around with in my mind more than in sessions. Their usefulness was relatively limited for those sessions, except for the obvious use of being in several places at once, and to have more than one result on race+gender+social_status available. But they made good narrative sense, and helped explain various choices.

As for a different background perk, well... How about the alternate Pirate option for Sailor? People are afraid of the foreign-looking warrior sort-of-thing?

[DanyBallon]

In one game I'm currently playing, my character have retainers and they spend most of the time tending to the "manor" we claimed, and before that they either stay at the hotel room of setting up and keeping camp when we were adventuring.

Retainers are there to give you and your DM some roleplay opportunity, not an extra NPC to use in your party.
I'd say that a knight have the duty to train and protect his squire, and until the squire is just about to become a knight, he should stay away from real combat.

[Ninja_Prawn]

until the squire is just about to become a knight, he should stay away from real combat.

Especially if I rolled a 6 for his Con score!

But this, in itself, can be a roleplaying opportunity. The party is ambushed! The knights tell the squires to stay back, but the situation is desperate! The squires want to help... do the players let them? Do they feel guilty when these callow youths are cut down before their eyes?

[DanyBallon]

Especially if I rolled a 6 for his Con score!

But this, in itself, can be a roleplaying opportunity. The party is ambushed! The knights tell the squires to stay back, but the situation is desperate! The squires want to help... do the players let them? Do they feel guilty when these callow youths are cut down before their eyes?

This! But as a DM I wouldn't roll score for them, I'd do it in a narrative kind of way. Maybe give the players an extra bonus on an action to represent that the squires are helping or have the squire being struck instead of a character preventing a fatal blow to the character, and now having the character to deal with the death (or injury) of the squire under his protection

[hymer]

This! But as a DM I wouldn't roll score for them, I'd do it in a narrative kind of way. Maybe give the players an extra bonus on an action to represent that the squires are helping or have the squire being struck instead of a character preventing a fatal blow to the character, and now having the character to deal with the death (or injury) of the squire under his protection

That's rather strong (and combat-related) for a background perk, wouldn't you say?

In general, I feel I ought to point out that the text on retainers states that they do not fight for the PC. Just, you know, for what it's worth.

[DanyBallon]

That's rather strong (and combat-related) for a background perk, wouldn't you say?

In general, I feel I ought to point out that the text on retainers states that they do not fight for the PC. Just, you know, for what it's worth.

The squire being struck instead of the character is not a combat advantage, it's a roleplay tool, as the character now have to live with the fact that he failed to be a good master. A knight in shiny armor would have prefer to die than seing his squire been injured, while a more tyranical (evil) knight might have been the one that have pull the squire in the sword path in order to use him as a shield, and now it will affect his reputation as a knight.

[Gwendol]

I have the squire assist in combat: how else will he/she learn the job?

[Kurt Kurageous]

I have the squire assist in combat: how else will he/she learn the job?

That would depend on the style of knight, societal norms, etc.

A squire taking any role to assist their betters may make the betters lose face as it implies weakness.

This may not apply in some combats such as against dishonored foes such as "inferior" races/unintelligent monsters.

I like Ninjaprawn's concept of keeping them as plot elements. Come on, folks, think comic sidekick and the memories you make as DM could be golden! Many possibilities exist when the helpers "help."

Remember that time when the squire decided to "help" by putting poison on the knight's blade the morning before before that big fight with the Heffalumps? Or when the helpers start placing side bets on who would get hit first, get the first/most kills, and who asked for healing first? And when they started making up cheers to taunt their foes and encourage the knights? Or that one time when the new squire failed to properly reassemble and buckle the armor? Parts fell off reducing AC and possibly to hit bonuses if it was the arms. Or when (s)he didn't fully cinch down the latigo strap on the warhorse's saddle and the knight didn't check it themselves? Oh, those were good times!

Trade that for a statblock? Never! Optimizers beware! I'm telling a STORY here, not running some retro pre-computer era MMORPG for people with too much spare time.

[Slipperychicken]

As a player, I'd be most interested in using retainers to watch the party's pack animals, carts, and wagons. Not to mention their own carrying capacity that isn't taken up by weapons and armor; they could be excellent for carrying all the required heavy stuff like bedrolls and tents, freeing up space for the players to hold more treasure and equipment. It's rare that you have trusted NPCs to handle this stuff while players are neck deep in a dungeon.


The squire being struck instead of the character is not a combat advantage, it's a roleplay tool, as the character now have to live with the fact that he failed to be a good master. A knight in shiny armor would have prefer to die than seing his squire been injured, while a more tyranical (evil) knight might have been the one that have pull the squire in the sword path in order to use him as a shield, and now it will affect his reputation as a knight.

Squires are supposed to be training to be knights, much like apprentices in other professions. They're meant to accompany knights into the field, so getting hit once in a while is kind of what they signed up for. Eventually, a knight is supposed to give his squire the chance to prove himself so he can claim combat experience.


I'd feel bad if a retainer got hit, since they're noncombatants, but not so much for a squire. Unless the squire got some kind of truly debilitating and permanent injury, I'd count it as experience so he knows what to expect in a real fight. Besides, in 5th edition, even if the squire gets knocked down to 0hp, we can just get the cleric to Healing Word him back up. Or rez him if he dies. Not many knights can claim to have died and come back to life.

[JellyPooga]

I've long wanted to get the opportunity to use the Retainers feature, but haven't played in an appropriate game yet.

I see my Retainers being;

- "Jeeves"; a butler/man-servant type, perhaps somewhat elderly, who "runs the staff" and takes care of little things like folding my clothes and arranging for accommodations whenever I'm in town. Tends to nag about things, in a reasonable, polite and most of all, friendly manner until he gets his way. Gets irate when protocol isn't followed. Dry sense of humour.

- "Jimmy"; the stable-boy/groom. In awe of my character somewhat, but despite his hero-worship, knows a remarkable amount about the consistency of dung, manages to saddle horses twice his height (somehow...I suspect magic, but there might be levers or a pulley involved) and is a cheery chappy who's willing to run and fetch and carry whenever/whatever he's asked. Probably has a moronic, yet endearing catch-phrase. Possible Squire material when he gets older. Definitely guilt-trip material if he dies.

- "John"; the farmer/porter/handy-man. Young to Middle-aged, strong as an ox and as practical as a hammer, but not too bright. Probably drinks too much, but does what he's told. Handy for moving large chests, carrying supplies that don't fit on the horse, propping open doors...that sort of thing. Also good at clearing up after people and generally doing handy-work; sweeping, putting chairs away, repainting the door frames, fixing the fence and rescuing the goat that got its head stuck under the fallen tree *again*. Surly and/or quiet. Keeps to himself.

[Coidzor]

Not to my knowledge.

I've played a handful of sessions with a character who had followers as part of a custom background. They were mostly RP aids, personalities that I could play around with in my mind more than in sessions. Their usefulness was relatively limited for those sessions, except for the obvious use of being in several places at once, and to have more than one result on race+gender+social_status available. But they made good narrative sense, and helped explain various choices.

What sort of choices?


As for a different background perk, well... How about the alternate Pirate option for Sailor? People are afraid of the foreign-looking warrior sort-of-thing?

Ahh, good point, I hadn't thought of that, but that could definitely work, given the interaction between the race/culture and setting for the game, both backstory-wise and for the Curse of Strahd in particular. Not that petty larceny is really going to be this character's bag, but people turning a blind-eye to a heavy-handed interrogation/intimidation... Yeah, that's got some potential.


In one game I'm currently playing, my character have retainers and they spend most of the time tending to the "manor" we claimed, and before that they either stay at the hotel room of setting up and keeping camp when we were adventuring.

Retainers are there to give you and your DM some roleplay opportunity, not an extra NPC to use in your party.
I'd say that a knight have the duty to train and protect his squire, and until the squire is just about to become a knight, he should stay away from real combat.

Naturally the retainers wouldn't be for dungeondelving per se, but your approach brings up the problem of what to do with them when attacked on the road.

But the Background does rather explicitly give you three subordinate NPCs. If they don't serve any purpose at all, then they might as well not exist or should be a thing that everyone can get 1-2 of without competing with actually useful Background features.


The squire being struck instead of the character is not a combat advantage, it's a roleplay tool, as the character now have to live with the fact that he failed to be a good master. A knight in shiny armor would have prefer to die than seing his squire been injured, while a more tyranical (evil) knight might have been the one that have pull the squire in the sword path in order to use him as a shield, and now it will affect his reputation as a knight.

I really have to ask, now that you've mentioned it, where did you get this idea and conception of squires as being, essentially, Humpty-Dumpty and Knights being insanely preoccupied with making sure they don't get so much as a scratch on them?

Is there some meme or work of fiction that you're basing this on in particular?

It's one of the more bizarre notions about chivalry and knighthood and squires that I encountered when I was googling the subject, basically tied with the idea that all squires are incompetent 13 year old boys and that 13 year olds are somehow super scrawny, uniformly, compared to 15 year olds which are the minimum age of adulthood for humans in D&D land and has been for a while now.

[hymer]

What sort of choices?

It was a modified Dragon Age setting, and they helped explain why an order of druids would let a highly talented, but potentially unstable, mage go out and fight darkspawn without anyone above her in the hierarchy being there to rein her in. Two of the retainers had shown considerable influence over the PC when she had her episode (a tutor/father figure and a lover), and would be expected to be able to spot signs of problems and/or talk her down if something happened.

[Gwendol]

The squire being struck instead of the character is not a combat advantage, it's a roleplay tool, as the character now have to live with the fact that he failed to be a good master. A knight in shiny armor would have prefer to die than seing his squire been injured, while a more tyranical (evil) knight might have been the one that have pull the squire in the sword path in order to use him as a shield, and now it will affect his reputation as a knight.

That does not fit well with the whole "knight in training" thing. Here's an extract of what Wikipedia has to say on this topic:


A knight typically took his squire into battle and gave him a chance to prove himself. If he proved his loyalty and skill in battle, he would have a “dubbing”, an official ceremony that made him a knight. However, during the Middle Ages, the squire’s rank came to be recognized in its own right; it was no longer assumed that a squire would automatically become a knight. The connection between a squire and any particular knight also ended, as did any shield-carrying duties.

Jobs

The typical jobs of a squire included:

Carrying the knight’s armour, shield and sword
Guarding prisoners
Freeing the knight when taken captive
Ensuring an honorable burial for a deceased knight
Replacing lost or damaged equipment
Replacing an injured or killed horse
Dressing the knight in armour
Carrying the knight’s flag
Protecting the knight
Taking care of the horses
Accompanying the knight to tournaments and the battlefield
Maintaining the knight's equipment



Taking someone into battle means the squire has some kind of martial prowess, eventually gaining class levels even.

[Slipperychicken]

Taking someone into battle means the squire has some kind of martial prowess, eventually gaining class levels even.

Well, not necessarily class levels. As an NPC, he might just take on the MM Knight statblock at some point during his training.

[Gwendol]

Right, and start off using another NPC template. Up to the DM, really.

[Arkhios]

Before our campaign hit the wall and was rebooted, my character was a Noble who held close (and good) relations with the commoners of a village which rulers his family technically were. My character had a close group of friends who later on insisted of being his retainers, even though my character insisted he was their equal and would never ask them to "serve" him.

Eldest of them was once a page at my character's family manor, but when my character came of age the page found himself becoming the young heir’s manservant. Sometimes overly serious, he was extremely proud of his work, and his experience had given him a keen insight into the running of a large household.

Second eldest was an unlikely companion to the heir of a distinguished house, being considered a general nuisance by the denizens of the village. An orphan, he spent most of his days daydreaming, getting into trouble, or otherwise testing the seemingly everlasting patience of his guardian, "Old Man". The troublemaker considered himself something of a silver-tongue, though his mouth got him into trouble more oft than out of it.

The youngest was the son of the local blacksmith, who started following the group around when the others were teenagers. Initially dismissed by the older boys, he nonetheless eventually found his place as a valued member of the group. A sturdy but quiet lad, he looked up to his older compatriots and delighted in helping them around, especially making use of the expertise he had gained working as a stable-boy at the local tavern.

So, given their occupations (or the lack thereof) the retainers lived their own lives and stayed out of trouble (=didn't follow my character around during prime time adventuring).
This is somewhat related to why our campaign met an untimely end, because our DM had focused too intesively in that very village, while his hopes were to expand the campaign well beyond the borders of the village. The retainers, for example, would've had to either leave their former homes, or my character would've lost his background trait for the majority of his future career. Needless to say, this wasn't what we wanted, and thus led to the reboot.

To outline, one approach to make retainers work and still remain relevant throughout the campaign would be leaving them "behind" when the characters are exploring the world. While they are the retainers of only one character (the Knight) they could easily be left to look after their camp and their left-over gear they don't need while doing whatever adventurers do. Their presence could still be relevant during downtime, referring to their actions on the background or "behind the scenes" every now and then. Involving them as active pieces of combat for example should be left at a minimum. They are not your expendable cannon-fodder. If you keep doing that, soon the word spreads out and no one is willing to become a new retainer for you. At worst case scenario, your knighthood might get stripped away from you.