[3.5] Cohorts no longer gobble up party XP

[ForceUser]

Did anyone ever actually consider a half-share to be "gobbling up party XP"?

Well, I know that I find it kind of annoying personally that because another party member chose to take a cohort I'd be getting less XP overall. It's not like having a cohort or two around actually makes encounters easier for the PCs; instead, my DMs tend to up the power level of encounters to compensate for the fact we have the added strength a cohort(s) brings. So what's really happening is that with cohorts the fights are even more deadly for individual party members, longer, and more work for the DM to write up. I can see why a small player group of two or three might like to grab a cohort to fill one of the four iconic roles, but if you've got five or more PCs, I say avoid cohorts altogether. They can really bog things down, and in 3.0 everyone gets a little less XP to boot.

 

[Nifft]

This would be an open invitation to take spellcaster cohorts and letting them make magical items 24/7. After all, they'll neatly level up regardless of their xp anyway.
[ ... ]
See the problem?
You need to keep track of your cohort's xp.

Nah -- I'd charge the XP to the PC who took the Cohort. The way I figure it, they're paying 1 Feat to get X Item Creation Feats, and that's a good enough bargain.

-- Nifft

 

[Lord Pendragon]

While this sounds good in theory, it is in fact horribly broken.
This would be an open invitation to take spellcaster cohorts and letting them make magical items 24/7. After all, they'll neatly level up regardless of their xp anyway.

I can see this. But I've never had anyone take a cohort as an Item Creation Machine. If I did, I'd have to rethink my stance. Until I do, I'd rather do it my way.

We can also reverse this. Poor little fighter cohort never gets to level up ever again, because his stupid wizard master keeps making expensive items.

Actually, in this scenario things work out fine. By the new 3.5 rules the cohort would cease to gain xp. By the old rules, the cohort would eventually outclass the PC and have to move on. So by my rules, if the master stops gaining levels, so does the cohort, (same as 3.5), and you get to keep the same cohort.

See the problem?
You need to keep track of your cohort's xp.

If you have abusive players, then yes, I can see that you do. If you don't have abusive players, then I don't see any reason why it's necessary.

 

[Corlon]

While this sounds good in theory, it is in fact horribly broken.
This would be an open invitation to take spellcaster cohorts and letting them make magical items 24/7. After all, they'll neatly level up regardless of their xp anyway.

We can also reverse this. Poor little fighter cohort never gets to level up ever again, because his stupid wizard master keeps making expensive items.

See the problem?
You need to keep track of your cohort's xp.

There are billions of ways to make rules broken, 3.5 tries to cut down on them, but I think eventually it comes down to the DM saying yes or no to what the character wants to do...within reason of course.

 

[Someone]

If you have abusive players, then yes, I can see that you do. If you don't have abusive players, then I don't see any reason why it's necessary.

That´s the point, without abusive players 3.5 wouldn´t exists.

 

[Destil]

Item Making cohorts are awesome now! After all, once the're within one level of their master they don't gain any XP. So instead of leveling up just spend most of their XP on making items... since once they reach your level they don't get any anyway... if you run the math right it would be like having a big pool of free XP!

 

[Aaron2]

So, Players 2, 3, and 4 LOSE XP, because Player #1 took Leadership. They amortise his special ability.

That's not fair to them. A share of XP drawn from the common "teat", as it were, only remains balanced if EVERYONE has a cohort.

I run a game with cohorts, but I find that instead of just sending more CR10 encounters, I'll have to send CR11 or 12. In the end, I figure that the non-cohort-bearing party members actually gains XP faster because the party is tougher and the cohorts are only getting 1/2 of what they deserve.

In the extreme, where all four players have cohorts, they will be gaining XP at twice the rate since they are fighting monsters twice as powerful as before. Its an XP generation tool.

Yet another 3.5 rule I won' t be using.


Aaron

 

[youspoonybard]

Ummm...

The cohorts are still in your party, to help.

If you throw higher CR guys there, the party will still get more exp, and more exp than under your current method.

What's the problem?

 

[Pax]

As someone observed: while the GROUP may be able to handle higher-CR / higher-EL encounters, the individual risks and challenges increse; the chance that SOMEONE among the party-of-four-and-a-sidekick will die goes up out of proportion to any changes in XP awards.

Now, someone said a party of 4, with 1 cohort, would face creatures of CR11 or CR 12; they aslso stated a party-of-four and four cohorts might face encounters twice as tough as the same party with no cohots.

Well, I hate to tell you, but EL 12 is "twice as hard" as EL10 (a matched pair of CR 10 baddies is EL 12). EL 11, by extension, is probably 150% as hard as EL10.

One extra, guaranteed-to-be-lower-in-level character, and a 50% increase in challenge levels? THAT hardly seems fair, either!

 

[Wolf72]

Nah -- I'd charge the XP to the PC who took the Cohort. The way I figure it, they're paying 1 Feat to get X Item Creation Feats, and that's a good enough bargain.

-- Nifft

that's what I'd do as well. The PC may not level as quickly, but then again that player effectively has 2 characters.