Why do PCs Need Leadership when Monster's Don't?

[Ogrork the Mighty]

Are you implying that the NPCs in your campaign never have to answer to each other?

Nope.

p.s. Muddying the waters doesn't answer the question.

 

[moritheil]

Nope.

Then what are you implying with that statement? You mentioned a condition for the PCs and didn't say anything about how it is for the NPCs. Since you're clamoring for equality, one would assume that you meant to imply that the NPCs didn't have to do something the PCs had to do.

 

[moritheil]

Nope.

p.s. Muddying the waters doesn't answer the question.

Who's muddying the waters? I'm giving the analogy of several villains who work together to several players who work together.

You replied with an unrelated and vague statement about how PCs are answerable to each other.

Should I not assume that you meant to imply that NPCs are, by way of contrast, not answerable to each other?

 

[William_2]

Who's muddying the waters? I'm giving the analogy of several villains who work together to several players who work together.

You replied with an unrelated and vague statement about how PCs are answerable to each other.

Should I not assume that you meant to imply that NPCs are, by way of contrast, not answerable to each other?

I don’t know - it seemed fairly clear to me: PCs don’t generally answer to each other in a leader/follower relationship the way virtually every NPC group will. It is that relationship, not simply proximity, that requires explanation. Why is one NPC leading others when they have no feat to accomplish it?

I happen to like it that way – that the role of a leader is explained through conventional means of power, wealth, even just luck. PCs can role-play their way to being a leader to parallel that.

At any rate, the point seemed clear enough, and the reverse of what you are suggesting.

Cheers

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

PCs can just pay for hirelings (such as mercenaries; see DMG Ch. 5). PCs can make short-term associations with particular NPCs (see lots of published adventures). The Leadership feat is specific for permanent, totally devoted henchman run by the same player.

NPC (monster) groups might include a mix of any of the above.

Dcollins has the right of it.

 

[Majoru Oakheart]

Simply because they ARE players and what unbalances players may not unbalance NPCs. Similar to the reason there are level adjustments and CRs which are different. Being able to have a minion attack twice before dying is more akin to a summon monster spell than an entire feat. This is all the villian's cohorts are likely to be able to do before dying.

On the other hand, the players cohorts will likely survive for many, many combats, provide out of combat support and abilities such as healing, role playing benefits, etc.

So, it is more powerful when players take it. Therefore, better for them.

 

[Voadam]

Nobody has to take leadership to get followers. Leadership merely gives them to you as part of a feat, or you could summon somebody up with planar binding and get them do something for you, or pay them, or convince them, or charm them, or intimidate them, or be granted leadership responsibility by the king, etc.

 

[Philip]

Your PCs don't need the Leadership feat to get Cohorts and/or followers, you just need to get special DM dispensation or permission. Of course, all Monsters automatically get this from the DM.

The Leadership feat is not there to regulate how Cohorts and followers work between DM and Player, but more as a balancing and predictive factor between different players.

It's why monsters don't have to roll for their stats.

 

[Particle_Man]

yeah, the way I ran it, if a player character had hirelings, followers, etc., without the leadership feat, I had no qualms about making one or more of them a secret assassin that was going to spy on or try to kill that pc. But the leadership feat gave that pc some "hands off, nasty DM!" style followers.

I imagine that npc's could have the same deal, where a "follower" might agree to betray his lord for cash, or might simply run and abandon his lord, if that option exists and the lord does not have leadership. A clever pc party might even give minions an "out" so they can concentrate on the BBEG. But a party that just "kills everything that moves" doesn't usually leave that option, and *anyone* will fight to survive, if given no chance to surrender and no way to run.

 

[Quasqueton]

Lord Xykon + Leadership feat = Red Cloak

Roy Greenhilt with no Leadership feat = Order of the Stick

Quasqueton