What the hell are followers?

[Basileus]

How "in-charge" am I when it comes to followers? When they earn money, to whom does it belong?

Let's say my character has a keep and Leadership, with a few dozen followers. I'm unclear as to the relationship between followers and leaders when economics comes into play. Let's also assume they're either Warriors or Experts with ranks in Profession, etc..

They gotta eat to live, but do I pay for their food, or do they? Do I give them lodging, or do they pay me rent? If it's a "hands-off" keep, and they're left alone with a manager for a while, they'll use their skills to earn some money. Their Profession and Craft commodities would be exported, but do I take their gold, or do they take it? Am I reasonably allowed to impose income taxes on them, being their Lord? Are there existing rules for this dynamic?

I always assumed I'd take all the profits while giving them free food and lodging, but then I realized that's kind of the textbook definition of slavery.

[RickAllison]

Taxes, basically. You are like the feudal lords: you provide the capital and protection, they provide money back to you in the form of crops or other goods and services. Now, this changes if the terms of service differ. Guards would need to be paid and/or fed, skilled laborers could get paid a salary and perform their skills, etc.

[PersonMan]

Depends on the character and situation as well.

If you're a crusading warrior fighting to 'civilize' a region, you'll likely end up paying for the service of your followers by giving them land, privileges, etc. rather than just giving them sacks of gold.

If you're a mage who wants to establish a settlement near an interesting magical phenomenon, you may just go the quick route of "if you move here, I'll pay for your food and lodging for half a year", hoping that once that time is over you'll have a self-sufficient population.

Also: remember that slaves aren't allowed to leave. "Come here to be safe and fed, but I'll be taking the money you earn" isn't exactly something that you'd expect to fly in our world, but to someone whose other options include a 50/50 shot of being gutted during the next raid on their village, or dying when the next famine hits or having to work on someone else's fields as well as their own, it doesn't sound too bad. In fact, it's a pretty good deal - you're guaranteed to not die horribly or suffer from hunger, so the only issue would be how stuff like trading for wool, etc. works.

[Mastikator]

As a leader it's your responsibility to decide these things.
Though they're not your employees, you don't need a feat to hire people, you just need money for that. So they're probably more like your apprentices.

[TheCountAlucard]

Depends on the game, as well. 3.5-style Leadership is hardly the norm.

[Yora]

If they stay around with a PC full time than this is their primary employment and source of income. Either the PC pays for food and lodging and distributes it among the followers and their dependants, or the PC pays them a wage and they take care of it themselves. In either case the PC has to pay the same amount of money.

[Quertus]

In 3.x, their job is to dig ditches, fill them with water, and then take turns pointing my Rod of Wonder at said ditches and activating the rod until gems fly out. Then their job is to go collect the gems, and bring them to my treasury.

My character's job is to spend those gems on a castle, defenses, food, and paying a wizard to craft more Rods of Wonder.

Yeah, my first character to hit level 6 may have had an early retirement.

[Jay R]

First, the simple answer. The rule is the following:

Followers don't demand a share of treasure, although they depend on the PC to equip them and keep them fed.

Followers are loyal servants who want to follow you. You are in charge of how you treat them, but how you treat them can affect their willingness to follow you. On page 106, there is a description of how many followers you can have, based on (among other factors) your fairness and generosity, aloofness, cruelty, and whether you've caused the deaths of any followers..

I always assumed I'd take all the profits while giving them free food and lodging, but then I realized that's kind of the textbook definition of slavery.

Not unless you can buy and sell them. Serfdom is closer, but serfs belong to the land, not the person. it's really pretty much any fealty relationship. You provide for yeomen, men-at-arms, etc., and they work for you.

You provide what? Well, that's for you to decide. But remember that generosity is on the list of modifiers for how loyal they will be.

[The Glyphstone]

What the hell are followers?

-Cannon fodder.
-Ablative armor.
-Free labor.
-Reserve fuel.
-Test subjects.
-Spare parts.
-Target practice.
-Emergency rations.

[Quertus]

-Emergency rations.

Ok, that one got me.

EDIT: although, in retrospect, I suppose I shouldn't have been so surprised. My Illithid Savant stole the equivalent power from a Thrall Herder so that he could have an infinite supply of brains for his colony that, RAW, automatically replenish every 24 hours. Yes, suicidal beings around the world were drawn to my presence, begging to become a part of something bigger than themselves.

And I obliged. Nom nom nom.

[Segev]

Assuming d20/D&D 3.PF using the Leadership feat, "followers" actually follow you out of devotion. They're caught up in your charisma and aura of success/awesomeness/whatever, and work for you out of personal loyalty.

If you do NOTHING to support them, then their following you is akin to a devoted fan's hobby. You can get them to spend their free time for your projects, get them to gather together to do cool stuff, etc., but they still need to feed themselves.

If you provide them employment that sustains them (whether putting them to work for your organization, and supplying them with income or with direct room and board), they will happily take it. (Remember, though, that poor treatment will negatively impact your Leadership score.) If you want them to take a job that doesn't provide income sufficient to sustain them, you'll need to pay them or feed them, yourself. They're extremely loyal employees, at that point.

You can ALSO get hirelings, which are people who work for you because you pay their living. Their loyalty is primarily to their paycheck, however. While you can certainly get loyal hirelings without the Leadership feat, your followers are ALWAYS trustworthy, while your hirelings are only mostly so, at best. Followers will only abandon you if your Leadership score drops too low to sustain their numbers; hirelings will abandon you for a number of reasons that amount to "you're not paying them enough to make it desirable to stay with you."


Hope that helps!

[Pugwampy]

Pay em 2 gold pieces a month .

[Jay R]

My general approach is that I should always overpay them. After all, overpaying low level characters takes a trivial amount of money; I still won't feel it. At the levels at which I have followers, 100 gp is trivial for me, and buys undying loyalty and devotion if I over-reward my followers.

[Segev]

My general approach is that I should always overpay them. After all, overpaying low level characters takes a trivial amount of money; I still won't feel it. At the levels at which I have followers, 100 gp is trivial for me, and buys undying loyalty and devotion if I over-reward my followers.

It's even worth a +1 "reputation for fairness and generosity" bonus to your Leadership score!

[LibraryOgre]

1e and 2e followers were only available when you'd established a home base of some sort, and were presumably paid out of the incomes from that. Your fighter has 300 footmen as followers? He's probably granted them plots of land which they farm with their families and are subject to call-up when he needs forces. Don't have a keep or land to grant? Then you don't get followers.