arguing with my DM: The Leadership feat(and a wizard)

[Scribble]

As a DM I wouldn't have an issue with you attracting followers (see Henry's Steven Hawking reference.)

But I would expect you to stay in character even when it's to your own disadvantage to do so.

You attract the followers even if you don't really want them following you around, and they make you uncomfortable in the first place.

 

[Crothian]

What you need to do is show him this thread were everyone agrees with you and says he's wrong; DM's love that.

 

[amysrevenge]

I'm gonna have to say that your best hope of convincing your DM to give you the feat is this (as mentioned already):

Leadership is already controlled by Charisma.

Whip out the Leadership table, along with your own Charisma and the Paladin's Charisma. Work out and call attention to the difference in your Leadership scores, and the resulting difference in both number and maximum level of your respective followers. Extrapolating forward a few levels on the table should make the difference even more apparent.

If it helps the negotiations, offer to take on followers of a slightly different alignment (reducing the Leadership score even farther), or even to take an additional Leadership score penalty to reflect your anti-social behaviour, above and beyond the already accounted for Charisma penalty. Promise to not abuse any Charisma-increasing magic items to boost your Leadership score (a contentious issue in any group).

 

[GMforPowergamers]

have him watch the TV show House...a wired diffently low cha border line sociopath...with followers...

 

[Scribble]

What you need to do is show him this thread were everyone agrees with you and says he's wrong; DM's love that.

Yeah really...

If you really want to convince him you need to show him that you understand why he feels the way he does, but you can address his concerns, and make him feel comfortable about it.

 

[S'mon]

The DM is clearly wrong in this case.

BTW, there's a show called 'House'. Maybe your GM should watch it.

Edit: scooped *sigh*

 

[Theroc]

If you're deadset on having the feat and the DM disagrees, I would say using House as an example is a good one. The guy is pretty much a total a$$hole to everyone(including his boss, the cops, and those who want in his pants), seems only to care about himself and knowing more things, yet people DO value him and his advice, and care about his well being.

Obviously there's something leaderlike about him, else no one would follow.

Also, pointing out all of the mechanical concerns would likely convince him to allow it, watching a few episodes of House might give him an idea of how it can be roleplayed out.

 

[Oryan77]

You've already accepted his right to house rule the system when it is in your favor, you can't now back out and force him to adhere to the rules as written.

This is a very important thing that I wish all players kept in mind. A big pet peeve of mine as a DM is when players are very vocal when the DM implements something in the game that might be a penalty for PCs...but when the DM implements things that might actually be overpowered for a PC, nobody says a word.

Your DM is an extremely generous DM just for letting you use your Int score for your Will saves. That alone is an incredible advantage for your PC. So you get to cripple your PC by giving him a bad Wis but an awesome Int, and that basically doesn't matter a single bit because now you even get an extremely good Will save & other than that, Wis isn't going to effect you much....so your 7 Wis is meaningless (it may as well be a 1). That's pretty unfair to other PCs unless they get the same kind of advantage.

Did you bother to argue with your DM that maybe this new feat is overpowered? I doubt it. So why are you going to post here in hopes of getting more ammo to use against him so you can pester him about his decision about the Leadership feat? That's obviously your intent.

I say, state your case with him once by showing him the Cha penalty applied for the feat. If he still says, "I still don't like it" then say, "damn, ok" and leave it at that. He sounds like a generous DM, so you don't want to be annoying him. You could make an offer where you'll pick a new feat in place of the "savant mind" feat if he'll let you take the leadership feat. That way you'll take that penalty to Will saves but gain a cohort instead. Maybe you can convince him that your PC needs a care taker because his mind is so unstable. But if your Will is giving you a +7 from Int alone, then that character doesn't have an unstable mind.

Yeah, you should get your DM to check out this thread....mainly so I can convince him to take away that "savant mind" feat cause it's way too overpowered (mainly only because you have a +7 bonus to it at level 7).

 

[pawsplay]

This is a very important thing that I wish all players kept in mind. A big pet peeve of mine as a DM is when players are very vocal when the DM implements something in the game that might be a penalty for PCs...but when the DM implements things that might actually be overpowered for a PC, nobody says a word.

Not true. The GM of The Worst Shadowrun Game Ever was warned by his players.

The issue here is not one of power, but of fairness. If the paladin were also not allowed Leadership, I think we could all agree the GM is within his rights to say, "I don't wish to define NPC relationships in my game that way." But if the paladin can have followers, the wizard should be able to.

 

[Allenchan]

As people already mentioned, his low Charisma score already covers his social ills, not to mention the Aloof quality, which it sounds like this wizard would certainly have.

Honestly, I'd love it if my PC wanted this instead of a feat that boosted their Will save. (Cause seriously? Just Ego Whip the guy).