"Leadership" in 5e: thoughts, ideas, homebrew?

[Damon_Tor]

So the "Attacking as a Unit" system I came up with (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?571122-A-System-to-Simplify-Large-Combats-Attacking-as-a-Unit) to make massive attack rolls with amounts of skeletons easier worked quite well this weekend, but it reinvigorated an old discussion: the "Leadership" feat of past editions and the lack of an equivalent in 5e. The Paladin (Oath of Conquest) in the party wants mechanical backing for leading an army. It would be thematically appropriate and would benefit the narrative in the number of ways, but the mechanics of it have always held the idea back.

My argument had always been two-fold:

1. that the bounded accuracy system would make a large number of even 1/4 CR minions very powerful, more powerful than a single feat should allow.
2. That the management of a large number of followers in combat would be a pain in the ass.

The system I used for the skeletons could mitigate point #1, leaving point #2. It occurs to me that while simply allowing him to take one feat to gain a small army would be inappropriate, having him take levels in a CLASS devoted to the idea of collecting followers would be a more balanced way to do it. The number and levels of his followers would be based on his levels in this "Leader" class, not his character class.

Has anyone come across a good Homebrew to this effect? Any thoughts or ideas?

[MaxWilson]

Inspiring Leader is a pretty good leadership feat.

If you have 200 Guards who follow you around and fight for you, Inspiring Leader can be the difference between a Guard being instantly killed by a Fire Giant's boulder vs. living long enough to get medical attention and fight another day.

Fewer casualties + greater chance of victory = better reputation as a leader, more loyalty from your men.

There's nothing wrong with trying to create other mechanical way to illustrate good leadership (group initiative bonuses? lower chance of disease in the ranks? overland marching bonuses?) but Inspiring Leader is a good start. The main thing though is just a willingness to spend time collecting followers and tending to their needs. You don't strictly need any mechanical bonuses in order to benefit from having 200 Guards on your side. You just need to pay them and use them effectively.

[Man_Over_Game]

One thing that you could use for a balanced effect is by using the existing Proficiency system.

Perhaps by allowing mooks to use your proficiency for abilities/skills/attacks rather than their own. It wouldn't improve much (as they have a limited number of attacks/abilities) in the first place, but it would mean that they could contribute against enemies with higher AC.

Alternatively (additionally), maybe the feat could also allow you to take a more permanent leadership role, allowing you to control up to your Proficiency Bonus in characters that are considered "loyal".

Perhaps, something like:

"You use your action to command willing allied units. These units must not have a CR higher than 1 and cannot have a proficiency bonus. These units are now considered "loyal" units and under your leadership, they gain temporary hitpoints, bonus damage on their attacks, and bonus to their AC, all equal to your proficiency while you command them. They lose these bonuses at the start of your turn, but regain them if you use your action to command them. These units will follow your commands as long as they're willing and loyal. If you have the Extra Attack feature, you may make a single attack when you use this special action.

Additionally, all allied creatures that do not have a proficiency bonus that can both hear and see you gain your proficiency bonus to their attack rolls."

[MaxWilson]

One thing that you could use for a balanced effect is by using the existing Proficiency system.

Perhaps by allowing mooks to use your proficiency for abilities/skills/attacks rather than their own. It wouldn't improve much (as they have a limited number of attacks/abilities) in the first place, but it would mean that they could contribute against enemies with higher AC.

That's a cool idea.

[Unoriginal]

You don't need to have a feat to have NPCs fight with you.

I don't see the value in gate-keeping something that is essentially plot-dependent between a feat, personally.

It's not something you want to bother trying to balance, either. It's not class power nor even character power.

[Damon_Tor]

So as the most basic element of the class, I'd allow a number of CR 0 followers equal to the character's charisma modifier (almost exclusively "Commoners") and a collection of other followers with a CR which cannot exceed 1/4 the character's levels in the Leader class. So a level 1 leader with +3 Charisma could have 3 commoners and 2 "guards". A level 20 Leader with +5 Charisma could have 5 commoners (irrelevant by that point) and 40 guards (or a smaller number of more powerful followers).

There's the core of it right there.

Recruitment of followers would probably be a simple persuasion check while in a friendly (or at least non-hostile) settlement. Basically you stand on a soapbox and make a speech about the quest you're on and if you succeed some locals step forward to help. Later levels might introduce a system where new followers seek you out rather than you having to actively recruit. A minor feature giving you extra languages so you can recruit even in foreign lands would be a good idea.

Class features could allow for more novel recruitment of followers (ie, a subclass that uses intimidation to recruit defeated foes) or bonuses in a certain context (a subclass that relies on a noble title, giving you extra CR for your minions as long as you recruit from your fiefdom) or maybe a subclass that acts as a 1/3 caster, gaining some limited cleric spells to buff and heal his flock.

I don't have a good way of adding in the "Cohort" of the 3e feat, and I don't really intend to try.

[KorvinStarmast]

That's a cool idea. Yeah; a little bit of Ranger Beast Master kind of theme. (Or am I thinking beast conclave Revised Ranger?)
You don't need to have a feat to have NPCs fight with you. I don't see the value in gate-keeping something that is essentially plot-dependent between a feat, personally.

Agree, but the OP is looking for something mechanical.

[strangebloke]

Best way to run allied mobs (and often mobs in general) is to assign a 'morale' score. Every time one of them drops, the a single roll is made that serves as the 'morale' save for the whole party. each type of troop has its WIS save modifier applied. Better troops have better wis saves, of course, but I also make different units retreat depending on how high the roll is.

So something like:

untrained peasant:15
militia: 12
guard/man-at-arms:9
Thug/scout: 6
Knight: 3

So a peasant goes down, and you roll for the whole mess of mixed forces. The roll is a 9 before modifiers. So the militia and the peasant have a total of 9 each and they both fail, everyone else falls somewhere else on the range. So the militia disengage and retreat, but the rest of the units hold the line. If the combat is still going well a turn later, they might move back into position.

This is of course separate from the tactical retreat, where retreating is the sensible thing to do.

Obviously this is barely manageable for small units. For large units this is just an attrocious mess.

[EvilAnagram]

Best way to run allied mobs (and often mobs in general) is to assign a 'morale' score. Every time one of them drops, the a single roll is made that serves as the 'morale' save for the whole party. each type of troop has its WIS save modifier applied. Better troops have better wis saves, of course, but I also make different units retreat depending on how high the roll is.

So something like:

untrained peasant:15
militia: 12
guard/man-at-arms:9
Thug/scout: 6
Knight: 3

So a peasant goes down, and you roll for the whole mess of mixed forces. The roll is a 9 before modifiers. So the militia and the peasant have a total of 9 each and they both fail, everyone else falls somewhere else on the range. So the militia disengage and retreat, but the rest of the units hold the line. If the combat is still going well a turn later, they might move back into position.

This is of course separate from the tactical retreat, where retreating is the sensible thing to do.

Obviously this is barely manageable for small units. For large units this is just an attrocious mess.
It's probably better to crib off of Warhammer. Units only make leadership tests if one of their own number falls, and they use the best leadership to make the roll. That way, putting the castle's drill sergeant in charge of a small militia is a decent force multiplier.

[Sigreid]

There are rules in the dmg. Something like loyalty starts at half charisma and as you treat them well increases. Get it to 20 and they become fanatical.