Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Breezly" data-source="post: 994388" data-attributes="member: 12847">Re: Positive changeI can see this if the DM does not account for the change in party dynamics.&nbsp; But, it is the DM's job to make sure that the challenges (i.e. Encounter Levels) are suitable for the new party.This point was made back on page 2 (sorry to not quote it here), where the addition of the cohort makes you a stronger party and should therefore be able to go after stronger challenges, or the DM should enhance encounters, to account for this new strength.If you took a party of 4 and you slew 4 ogres, you each would get x/4 experience.&nbsp; If you added a cohort and you went after those same ogres, you would get x/4.5 and of course there would be a little grumbling in the party.&nbsp; But, I argue that a good DM should take those 4 Ogres and throw in some Orcs or other suitable challenge to make up for the parties new strength.If this were the case, as has been stated before, your party might actual get MORE experience with a cohort then you would have as a standard party of 4.&nbsp; All of this falls down if the DM does not make any changes to the encounter to account for the challenge.Now, where this argument completely falls apart is with the new 3.5 rule that states cohorts do not get party Exp.&nbsp; This artifical way of addressing the party grumbling issue actually does more harm then good, IMHO.&nbsp; Because, if as argued above, the DM upgrades the challenges, the group would get more experience then they perhaps should have.&nbsp; If the DM leaves the encounter the same, he may have a party with Cohorts hacking and burning their way through the adventure.So, therefore, I have argued in circles against the new changes to the Cohort.&nbsp; And, now I am dizzy and must go sit down.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Breezly, post: 994388, member: 12847"] [b]Re: Positive change[/b] I can see this if the DM does not account for the change in party dynamics. But, it is the DM's job to make sure that the challenges (i.e. Encounter Levels) are suitable for the new party. This point was made back on page 2 (sorry to not quote it here), where the addition of the cohort makes you a stronger party and should therefore be able to go after stronger challenges, or the DM should enhance encounters, to account for this new strength. If you took a party of 4 and you slew 4 ogres, you each would get x/4 experience. If you added a cohort and you went after those same ogres, you would get x/4.5 and of course there would be a little grumbling in the party. But, I argue that a good DM should take those 4 Ogres and throw in some Orcs or other suitable challenge to make up for the parties new strength. If this were the case, as has been stated before, your party might actual get MORE experience with a cohort then you would have as a standard party of 4. All of this falls down if the DM does not make any changes to the encounter to account for the challenge. Now, where this argument completely falls apart is with the new 3.5 rule that states cohorts do not get party Exp. This artifical way of addressing the party grumbling issue actually does more harm then good, IMHO. Because, if as argued above, the DM upgrades the challenges, the group would get more experience then they perhaps should have. If the DM leaves the encounter the same, he may have a party with Cohorts hacking and burning their way through the adventure. So, therefore, I have argued in circles against the new changes to the Cohort. And, now I am dizzy and must go sit down. [/QUOTE]

Verification