In fact he may not like the guy that keeps bossing around his boss. My problem with "cohort chains" is that these guys are like friend of a friend things - your cohort does pretty much what you want, but the next one down the chain isn't loyal to you, he's loyal to your cohort. Well if you want to be a jerk GM you can use Leadership to deny players XP - technically the cohort and followers are features of a feat and you don't get extra XP just because the bad guy has Power Attack.
#3.5 LEADERSHIP DMG PC#
I think that is the problem that would most likely come from it, with it just being a second PC for the player. It will be loyal and it's class and race would be up to the player, but not a "second PC" for that player.
If this was ever in my games, the cohort is an NPC run by the GM, created by the GM. The feat has a lot to it that can be quite subjective. NPCs don't need a feat to have lackeys, don't need to roll to control them, don't need anything really, just a GM to make it so. Shar Tahl wrote: In general, that seems more like a "player only" feat. I don't think there will be a queue of applicants! I say "was" as she got disintegrated a bit later on and we don't have raise dead or the like on our campaign.Īs for what my next cohort will be. So it fit in with the campaign for her to join us (plus the Duke is keen for some heirs.). My next cohort was a sorcerer who was researching dragons - which we had encountered in the same side quest.
#3.5 LEADERSHIP DMG FREE#
Alas poor Giacomo died trying to free a colony of kobold slaves from a drow city (in a DM generated side quest). When the DM wanted to use the cohort for some plot point he took him over, but when we got back to normal play I ran him. We befriended the kobolds early on so it fit in with the passage of the campaign for the kobold to become my cohort. In the Kingmaker campaign I am in my character, the Duke, had a kobold bard cohort. The DM can intervene if the PC tries something the DM thinks is out of line for the cohort. It's easy enough for the DM and player to work out how the cohort came to follow the PC and then the player can run the cohort within that framework. Why is it a "critical error" for the DM to let a player create the cohort? If the DM is happy for the player to do so then what is the issue? If the DM doesn't set the parameters for the cohort then it's their own fault if the cohort unbalances things.
This makes the cohort more of a real character than just a PCs shadow. In my games a player must choose an existing NPC with whom he already has an existing positive relationship. Also the DM should be leveling the cohort according to the NPCs goals and desires. If the DM makes the cohort organically (such as using a current NPC) then leadership becomes less powerful. They let the player make the cohort and so the player makes the cohort that is exactly what he wants. That is the critical error most DMs make. It is important to note that leadership specifies that the cohort is an NPC. SMART players use Followers as 'off screen' resources rather than dragon fodder. When facing CR12 threats you will find your NPCs evaporate under their first (and last) fireball. The followers of Cohorts and indeed your followers aren't necessarily your roving entourage - they can be many things such as experts, aristocrats, experts and warriors tied to certain jobs or locales and even if followers are? They are 1st level. Are they Player controlled? DM controlled? Or DM Controlled with Player using them subject to the DM's approval on their actions (ie letting the players run them in combat but not allowing them to throw themselves into certain death to save the player). There is mixed feedback on how Cohorts and Followers are done.
If the followers of cohorts are 'generically' loyal to you as the liege of their master but don't toil for you specifically in the magical item creation sweatshop AND the player doesn't chose followers and cohorts it can be flavorful. That said, this sort of pyramid scheme of followers is basically feudalism. Secondly, while the RAW doesn't disallow it, its a GMs job to work with the players in crafting the story and the game and call out when something is breaking the game. Well firstly one of the most common house rules is to remove this feat.
0 kommentar(er)
