[3.5] Cohorts no longer gobble up party XP

[Celtavian]

Re: Re: Re: Re: re

Yup. And who fits the Leadership role better than someone with a strong "force of personality, persuasiveness, personal magnetism, and ability to lead"?

Just like I expect Combat Reflexes to be a feat favoured by people with high Dex, I expect Leadership to be favoured by people with high Cha.

I don't expect to see cohorts 4 levels behind the party average very often.

-Hyp.

Exactly. The feat fits perfectly for those who would most benefit by taking it.

Hypersmurf,

Your good with the rules. Where does it say cohorts can't make magical items for the PC or the party?

 

[Hypersmurf]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: re

Your good with the rules. Where does it say cohorts can't make magical items for the PC or the party?

Er.

Um.

It's not on p45-46 or p147 of the DMG regarding Cohorts, or on any of the pages covering Item Creation in the DMG or PHB, and it's not in the FAQ.

The closest I can find is the reference in the Magic Overview section that says Summoned creatures will not cast spells that cost them XP.

Maybe Pax has found something I've overlooked...?

-Hyp.

 

[Li Shenron]

Sure.

Picture a party of four -- iconic characters, all. They're all LEvel 10; they slay a CR10 baddie of some sort or other. The XP award is 3,000 total, for 750XP per player.

Noone levels, but before the next encounter, player #1's cohort finally shows up. The party, cohort in tow, encounters another CR10 baddie, same exact type as the first. Again, they win the battle. Same XP award in total, 3,000 of 'em.

But wait ... this time, instead of 4 shares, there're 4.5 shares. Each share is worth ABOUT 666 and 2/3 XP.

The cohort gets half that much, or, 333XP.

Each of the four PCs gets 666XP.

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.

Party penalized by having a cohort?

As a matter of fact your reasoning does not take into account that the cohort is playing.

Think of this: I know a cohort must be at least 1 level lower than his master, and that the PCs can be of different levels, but first let's imagine they are all the same level 10th, including the cohort. Same monster of CR 10.
Try to picture the difference between a party of 4 PCs and a party pf 3 PCs + 1 cohort. In the latter case the Xp are divided among 3.5 and not 4, therefore the PCs take MORE Xp than the first case.

Compared instead to the same 3 PCs without a cohort, with a cohort you supposedly can afford a more difficult encounter, or to save spells, wands, whatever for another time.

Having a cohort is just like having a friendly NPC. For the cost of a Feat, the NPC is much less eligible to leave the party (DM's call, but an NPC should be considered always free to leave, a cohort is supposed to be a lot more) and takes only half the Xp.

 

[Pax]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: re

Maybe Pax has found something I've overlooked...?

-Hyp.

ATM, Pax is confused. I could SWEAR I'd read that ... but I cannot find it. I've checked the DMG, the FAQ, everywhere I can think of ... and I just can't find the thing.

Which is completely screwy, because I KNOW I read it, in a WOTC source!!!

...

However, regardless of actual rules -- I'd never ALLOW a polayer to have their cohort make magic items for the PC, charging only the materials cost; NO Cohort is THAT loyal!

Pass on special discounts and savings, like those of Magical Artisan? Sure. But make NO profit from it? Hell, no ... ain't no such thing as a cohort loyal enough to (in essence) rip out pieces of their soul and hand 'em over to the PC they follow. Period.

 

[Celtavian]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: re

ATM, Pax is confused. I could SWEAR I'd read that ... but I cannot find it. I've checked the DMG, the FAQ, everywhere I can think of ... and I just can't find the thing.

Which is completely screwy, because I KNOW I read it, in a WOTC source!!!

...

However, regardless of actual rules -- I'd never ALLOW a polayer to have their cohort make magic items for the PC, charging only the materials cost; NO Cohort is THAT loyal!

Pass on special discounts and savings, like those of Magical Artisan? Sure. But make NO profit from it? Hell, no ... ain't no such thing as a cohort loyal enough to (in essence) rip out pieces of their soul and hand 'em over to the PC they follow. Period.

The cohort is part of the group Pax. It would be abusive if my cohort were making magic items soley for my use, benefit, or profit without purpose.

My cohort makes magic items like scrolls with healing and protective spells on them for party use. He constructs wands for the same. He will add an enchantment to someones armor, including his own, to make it better.

A cohort is a member of the party who serves one of the other members. That is why he or she should take a share of the xp. They are very helpful often to the entire party.

The other players love my cohort. They don't complain about him taking xp because he has saved their bacon before or improved their armor. He is an armorer, which I thought was fitting to serve a knight.

 

[Bauglir]

A cohort helps the whole party directly, at least mine does. I could see if the cohort refused to help anyone else but the player who led him, but only the most selfish cohorts would do such a thing. I wouldn't want a self-centered cohort in my group for more than just taking a share of my xp.

The magic weapon contributes to the whole party too. Enemies take more damage, die more quickly, deal out less pain to the party as a whole. Nevertheless the sword IS the fighter's resource. Instead of being spent entirely on the fighter that xp could be used for example to craft items for the whole party.

Same with the cohort. While they may serve the rest of the party where convenient their actual loyalty lies still in one place. If it came down to it the cohort would always choose to save his leader over another party member.

 

[Celtavian]

The magic weapon contributes to the whole party too. Enemies take more damage, die more quickly, deal out less pain to the party as a whole. Nevertheless the sword IS the fighter's resource. Instead of being spent entirely on the fighter that xp could be used for example to craft items for the whole party.

Same with the cohort. While they may serve the rest of the party where convenient their actual loyalty lies still in one place. If it came down to it the cohort would always choose to save his leader over another party member.

As I said, directly contribute. A magic sword does not directly contribute, though your argument about indirect contribution to the party is valid.

No, my cohort does not save me first. Please remember, I play a Paladin in the truest sense of the word. If the party is going down in flames, the last order my Paladin will give is "see everyone gets out safely. I'll see you in the realm of Lathander."

A cohort is a person. They will help who needs it the most. Maybe in your campaigns cohorts are used for selfish purposes, and though that is a possibility in our campaigns if you are playing an appropriate character, cohorts in our campaign generally serve a roleplaying purpose.

Here are the cohorts in one party:
1. Priest of Lathander who helped fight in the rebellion when the Zhentarim were occupying Daggerdale. He is a friend of the family who serves my Paladin because he is good and true.

2. The other cohort in that party is the druid sister of the Arcane Archer. Do you think any DM is going to allow this character to abuse his sister for petty magic item creation or to die in his place? The character worries more about his cohort than his cohort worries about the character. Sometimes he makes sure to give her better magic items than he gets himself.

Cohorts are for roleplaying in our campaign. They are actual people who have a good reason for being with the party. If I were playing Banites, than alot of what you say applies. Then I would have to worry about my cohort plotting to kill me and take my position. That is another situation entirely.

I don't get your selfish take on cohorts. They are not some item you pick up or some mindless slave without a personality. They are NPC's that a character controls as part of his main character. The DM makes sure the relationship is reasonable and moderates any abuse of the cohort.

The party gains the advantage of another full PC a few levels lower and suffers the loss of a little xp. I see no reason why a cohort shouldn't receive xp if they are helping the entire party, which I would think most cohorts do.

 

[Plane Sailing]

Interesting to see that the xp mechanism in 3.5 is designed to keep the cohort at the same level.

Interesting discussion all round in fact.

Cheers

 

[Bauglir]

A cohort is a person yes, but a person will have loyalties. The followers are described under the leadership feat as "loyal companions and devoted followers, subordinates who assist her."

So it's far from atypical to assume the cohort is loyal to the leader first and foremost, and any benefits to the other party members, while not as indirect as those from the fighter's magic weapon are secondary nonetheless, and depending on the cohort may be very small. (For example a rogue whose fighter cohort provides flanking for him will be contributing little to the rest of the party)

 

[RigaMortus]

I find it kind of interesting that a lot of the arguements against cohorts is that they "suck" up the party exp and that the other players in the group are at a disadvantage. I find this interesting because IMC we usually value the STORY over any exp/loot that is acquired. If it makes sense in the STORY that player X has a cohort, then none of the players ever feel shortchanged when and if they get smaller amounts of exp from an encounter.

Another way to look at it... Ever play in a campaign where your characters are in charge of destroying or protecting a powerful artifact before the agents of evil get it? Something similiar to "Lord of the Rings" where Frodo must destroy The One Ring. Well let's say you have this super powerful artifact, priceless on the open market, does this mean that the possessor of the item is now screwed out of getting any magical items on the adventure because he is far above his current Character Wealth for his level (and even at level 20 he would still be above it)? I'd say no... The STORY is first, and if an acquired item on the advetunre suits the "Ring Bearer" the best, we'd let him have it, even if it would put his character wealth even more over the top.

It works the same way with cohorts and exp I think. Same principle. Stop worrying about, "Oh I am getting less exp because of your cohort" and just enjoy the story/adventure the DM has layed out for you.

Aragorn: Frodo, can we ditch Merry and Pippin, I would have leveled by now if it weren' for them...

LOL