Revisiting Leadership.

I'd like to revisit this a bit because the way we've adjusted it a bit bothers me.

Currently, you can create a cohort who has 25 attribute points to spend (As opposed to 30 by a PC). This cohort may or may not be allowed to adventure with you depending on the GM, and earns XP that keeps him at whatever level he currently is in relationship to the PC (Per the SRD), and can't be closer than 2 levels appart.

So, we have a lower level NPC tag along, who is effectively even farther behind by a level or two by attribute points (with 25, which is close to a -2 ECL being somewhere between -2 and -5 total atributes), and if he ever dies and is resurected, he can never gain the extra level difference back.

Now, I'm all understanding about letting GMs not let a Cohort go along on an adventure, but having a cohort with all these extra penalties can make him next to useless, limit your class choices significantly (No paladin or monk cohort, Wizard/Sorcerer cohorts are hard to make survivable) and what you can do with classes you select. And, if he doesn't go with the Player, does he fall even further behind in level while the PC advances?

I just think we took a feat that had a place and nerfed it so bad it's only worth taking for flavor consideration, and think it needs to be revisited.

I think I'm the only player who has the leadership feat actually. I'm also the one who have suggested the modification to the leadership feat for LEW. Crux of the Matter is the only adventure I've been playing with the cohort as a cohort (he was a NPC in M4, where he appeared first).

So, up to now, what I think:

25 point-buy: I find it correct. I think it is normal the chort doesn't eclipse the other players, and in the case of Rinaldo, his cohort is the same level of other players, but even then, the other players have stayed more important in the story. Ok, it makes not really good monk/paladin and otehr xclass that asks for many stats (Hogarth is a cleric, good at figthing but really bad at turning because of that...)

Cohort comes with DM approval: Sure, as a player, it is a bit frustrating to see a feat becoming totally useless for a whole adventure, but I am aware too that some master might not be confortable to have it around. In teh case of Hogarth, it has been the opposite, as it is teh only source of healing of the group for Crux, which had been more then welcome in that crazy tower.

XP: Now that I've seen Hogarth died and soul trapped, the whole question about XP catching have been meddling in my mind. I had in my hand the faith of Hogarth or Vanitri, as the two, weakened and almost defensless in front of a 17th+ level wizard. I have hesitated in my move because of two things. First, roleplay. I wasn,t sure if Hogarth would have done such a devotion for someone he knew little (Vanitri wasn't in M4 when the party saved his life), second, the XP loss, as there is only one way for Hogarth to catch up: Rinaldo need to lose XP (dying, item creation, level drain, ect...). I think the second reason should not have been a reason to hesitate.


The problem with the XP, it is, as a cohort cannot catch back, he become more and more fragile as the difference can increase. Now, you can always change of cohort, but having to create a new character every adventure, it become nothing more than a hireling with stats and lack of personality. Also, it is worst if you are considered to be teh cause of teh death of your cohort, as your leadership score reduce by 2, and thus, at one moment, you cannot recruit anymore a cohort 2 level under you...

A modification of the XP award, I think, would be a good thing, but befroe doing so, we must be aware that the XP award actually have one big positive point: It doesn't take XP to the players, so other players doens't have to pay for having one person in the group have taken Leadership. I, personally, don't mind to haev less XP because a cohort is around, but that wouldn't be the case of every player, and the XP award we use actually is the official SRD rule for XP award.

I'm curious what you would change, Bront.

Hogarth seems VERY powerful to me. He's the most powerful cleric in the game (not counting multiclassed clerics). I suspect he's indespensible in the group he's in.

I realize this wouldn't be the case for other PCs. Rinaldo being the highest level PC in LEW. But generally, PCs in a given party vary by several levels. A cohort in LEW, as opposed to a tabletop game, is likely to be more powerful compared to the other PCS, than usual.

I wouldn't be inclined to change our rules.

Manzanita said:

I'm curious what you would change, Bront.

Hogarth seems VERY powerful to me. He's the most powerful cleric in the game (not counting multiclassed clerics). I suspect he's indespensible in the group he's in.

I realize this wouldn't be the case for other PCs. Rinaldo being the highest level PC in LEW. But generally, PCs in a given party vary by several levels. A cohort in LEW, as opposed to a tabletop game, is likely to be more powerful compared to the other PCS, than usual.

I wouldn't be inclined to change our rules.

Click to expand...

I think Bront's main problem is more with the SRD XP rules for assigning cohorts XP

(as a refresher, the SRD gives the cohort a level-based fraction of the PC's XP, such that assuming the PC and cohort each never lose experience for any reason, ever, the cohort stays exactly the same distance that she started from the PC)

This is all well and good until the cohort loses a level, or has to sit out because the GM doesn't want the cohort along. The cohort two levels lower? Okay, she can probably survive. But soon she becomes three or four levels lower, and unlike other PCs, who get extra XP and catch up to the high level PC, the cohort can never ever close the gap, not even a little.

I would propose to give the cohort XP appropriate to a PC of her level, with the caveat that she can never advance more than 2 levels behind the PC--if she gets more XP at that point, it is just wasted.

We do have to understand the consequences of this, however. The truly unfair SRD rules exist for a reason--they are there to prevent using the cohort as an XP-sponge for crafting. Thus, we would have to institute a parallel rule--when cohorts craft items (if we let them), it needs to take away XP from the PC as well.

Manzanita said:

I'm curious what you would change, Bront.

Hogarth seems VERY powerful to me. He's the most powerful cleric in the game (not counting multiclassed clerics). I suspect he's indespensible in the group he's in.

I realize this wouldn't be the case for other PCs. Rinaldo being the highest level PC in LEW. But generally, PCs in a given party vary by several levels. A cohort in LEW, as opposed to a tabletop game, is likely to be more powerful compared to the other PCS, than usual.

I wouldn't be inclined to change our rules.

Click to expand...

That's simply because of his level. If Rinaldo was in a game where he was even with everyone else in level, Hogarth would be very inconsequential as anything more than a glorified wand of healing. Clerics are also arguably the most powerful class in D&D (HD, full casting, armor, saves, and BAB), so that helps him a bit.

Vanitri almost took Leadership, and decided that the character he was going to take with him wouldn't be survivable with 25 PPs as well as the 2 level drop (A wizard) nor enjoyable to have come along.

As for the XP thing, RA pointed out my specific problem, as well as to why it is a potential problem if crafting is allowed. Either a no-crafting rule, or a PC/Cohort split XP cost 50/50 rule would have to address that.

Rinaldo, being the highest level character in LEW, isn't a good case study for Leadership. Horgath has been valuable, and in part because he's the same level as some of his other companions, and in part because we lack a cleric.

I'm not saying we need full PC power, I think 28 is a better number, which isn't nearly as hindering as 25. I mean, 15, 14, 13, 12, 11, 10 is a 28 point build, and is used for important NPCs. We're actualy relegating our Cohort to a lesser status than that. And still, he's not always welcome to adventure, and if he does die, he's permanently set back further in ability, which makes him more likely to die again, and it's a viscious cycle.

I would be happy to entertain a fix on XPs to keep the cohort from falling behind, but at this point, I'm happy w/the 25 point buy. I like that PCs are significantly better than cohorts that way.

There are so many feats that are rarely used, or that are minimally useful. I think it would be hard to argue that leadership, even as it is used here, is underpowered. A glorified wand of healing, or a low level wizard with an interesting spell selection is still quite useful.

It makes some concepts unplayable though, and a dead wizard isn't particularly useful, nor is one who's spells can be resisted easily.

I'm not asking for 30, but 28 would be reasonably fair. 25 is like penalizing them effectively 1-2 more levels.

I wouldn't mind cohorts being created with 32 point buy, if only to allow the possibility of making them the next PC in case the main PC dies or is retired. The possibility of not being allowed should be enough to prevent abuse, I think.

An option to the cohort XP problem would be to keep the current rules, but with the possibility of the main character being able to transfer XP to the cohort, but neven beyond of what his Leadership score allows, or his level -2, whatever is lower.

Someone said:

I wouldn't mind cohorts being created with 32 point buy, if only to allow the possibility of making them the next PC in case the main PC dies or is retired. The possibility of not being allowed should be enough to prevent abuse, I think.

An option to the cohort XP problem would be to keep the current rules, but with the possibility of the main character being able to transfer XP to the cohort, but neven beyond of what his Leadership score allows, or his level -2, whatever is lower.

Click to expand...

I don't know that I like that option either for the XP thing--both that option and the default rule penalise a character heavily for sticking with the same cohort rather than running out and finding a newer better model that is higher level. I think we should reward the character that sticks with the same cohort (and pays the high cost of resurrection) over the character who leaves the cohort dead and finds someone else at no cost.

That said, the idea for stats is intriguing. It would certainly help with the issue of the 32 PB NPC in one of my games who wants to follow around one of the PCs but can't currently without retconning down stats.

32 point-buy? It's just we are using 30 point-buy for LEW...

And I don't like much Someone idea... the best thing I think would be to calculate the XP of teh cohort just as if he was a PC of the group, which could mean less XP to the other PC, but after all, the challenges will be less danegrous because of his presence.