An above all else group leader

[Agback]

I was just curious what all of the DMs think of a no questions asked party leader.

I've done it lots, mostly with the PCs an investigative team in SF police procedurals, but also in some other places. The general trend of my experience is that it only works if:

1) the player of the CO is a good leader, willing to listen to advice and to delegate

2) the other players are team players, who want to shore up the boss and not show him or her up

3) each character has his or her accepted part to part, and gets a share of spotlight time

4) you put in at least some time to playing out things that the characters do when they are not subject to orders.

 

[Mouseferatu]

Have to chime in with the "in the right group" crowd.

We're currently playing a campaign where we're one of the party is the prince of the kingdom, leading expedition to determine why (Major Plot Point That Would Take Too Long To Explain And Is Irrelevent To The Current Conversation) is happening. The rest of us all come from that kingdom.

Frankly, we're having fun with it. The guy playing the prince isn't a jerk, and he's happy to listen to advice both IC and OOC. We're happy to give him the final say, because that's what the characters would do. And I'm having a blast with it, especially since I tend to play take-charge characters, and I'm trying to broaden my resume.

Sure, it could suck if the guy playing the prince was being abusive. But if he was, we'd talk about it OOC and put a stop to it.

Would I want every campaign to work this way? Not at all. But so far it's been a boon to RP and hasn't caused any problems, and I don't see that changing.

 

[~Joseph~]

I think that even in parties that don't have a definite leader, i.e. a casual or unofficial one, can still have a leader who's decisions are final even though the other characters are not quote-unquote required to follow them like in the drow example. It really depends on how the leader RP's his relationship with the other players. For instance, if the leader sees his companions as equals, say with Tanis in Dragonlance or Drizzt his books, or if he is still the definite leader but respects the knowledge and veiws of his subordinates, Captain Picard, then the group should work fine for D&D. In this case the leader gets the final decision making ability.
The other way the leader could go is the way I feel is the only way to really play a Lolthite without the Goddess stripping the Cleric of her powers for being so weak. That is the role of unquestioned leadership, but also of superiority in every meaning of the word. A brillian tactition General who values the advice of his aids, is the unquestioned leader, but sees the value of others.
A Drow Cleric would see a meer male that dares to even speak with out being spoken to as an outright insult, and one that presumes to tell her what to do, as an infidel who should be punished (read: killed). Even with other characters with one or two levels in cleric, the character with the most levels would be seen as the superior, and would see her self as such (assuming levels OoC equates ability IC). And you always have to worry about a weak willed Cleric that lacks control of her males loosing her abilities because Lolth has found her weak.

 

[Henrix]

Again, in the right group, with everyone agreeing, it can be a lot of fun!

I played in a very long RuneQuest campaign set in (mor or less) historical Japan, where one player was the deposed daimyo, and the rest of us just followed. It was really good fun!
Oh, he'd ask for our advice all the time, but in the end he always decided, and we obeyed even if we'd die.

 

[monboesen]

We are doing this right now. Not with one player as the king, but with the other players in his service (or rather his fathers service).

It has actually been great fun. Last time our leader ended up charmed, it took a long time for the rest of us to reason that out. He was leading us into a potentially lethal situation and it was a blast to play the gradual distrust, whispered conversations behind his back and eventually deciding that we had to stop him. In the end we had to beat and bind him and then flee the ancient ruins he had led us to.

So it definately can work, takes mature players I would guess.

 

[Primitive Screwhead]

I will add to the 'right group' crowd as well..

I ran one very memorable campaign that started as a Solo adventure on a day only one player showed up. That one-shot expanded until Ira and I were starting game days a couple hours early to run his character through the next viginnette. When other players showed up, I offered them NPC roles... with the understanding that it was still a Solo adventure.
It got to the point where I have 5 player character NPCs!
It was a blast.. but is was also not the only game in progress.

I was also part of an Aliens {by FASA} military game were we held to the military rank strucure. Fortunatly for us, the LT who was an ass ended up dying in when he mistakenly stepped in front of a Machine Gunner who was clearing the hallway the old fashioned way.

Anyway.. time for breakfast

 

[Scratched_back]

The group I've been playing with in various different campaigns for the last eight or so years is quite strict on this issue. We've always had a party leader.

I think partly because in the groups original incarnation there were ten players plus the DM, we were forced more or less to appoint a leader. Although this was mainly for OOC purposes (to have one voice allowing us to DO something, rather than get bogged down in the bureucracy of such a large group) we always justified it in character and even created some house rules to suit the role.

Out of combat: The leader would take advice on board, listen to various plans of action and choose one to progress with.

In combat: The leader gets "leader orders" which are taken before any player/NPC/critter gets his action, except in a suprise round. These leader orders are no more than five words which everyone within reasonable distance can hear. Don't know why five words specifically, just always was the case. Our game was quite strict regarding talking in combat too, so maybe that's how the rule arose, to help co-ordination.

That's another discussion anyway

 

[Luthien Greyspear]

A slight twist on this...

I was just curious what all of the DMs think of a no questions asked party leader. For ex. Perhaps PC 1 is the King of the Country while the other PCs are just "henchmen" leaving no room for their decisions, of course they might have an opinion but it's really up to PC1. Or if you have a Drow Female Cleric of Lolth with a party of other drow (not clerics of Lolth) and while they may or may not get input its ultimatly up to the Lolthite. Do you think this is a real problem in a gaming group?

I've actually had a character in my campaign that had a clear social dominance over the other players; to make matters potentially worse, the player of this character was my fiance (now my wife). Somehow (luckily) this never became an issue. The character in question was a royal elven princess; several party members were of elven blood or were favorably disposed towards the elves, so her rank did matter. She had the money available to bankroll the party, as well, so she could have had the rest of them by THOSE short hairs also, if she wanted.

Fortunately, my wife was able to translate her character's NG alignment into the best portayal of a SAINT I've ever seen. Paladins could have taken lessons from her. Piffany (of Nodwick fame) would have looked up to her. Belkar (OotS) would die of diabetic shock. She was that nice. (And not only I think so. Every member of the group has commented on just how nice and good and wholesome she was.) She NEVER abused her power, and she never made the rest of the party feel inferior. So the party happily gave her the reins.

It was entirely at her initiative (and with her bankroll) that the party went into the Underdark to complete the 'DQ' portion of the 'GDQ' adventure series. Her motive? To try to rescue as many drow as possible from the mind-control of Lolth. She wasn't naive; she didn't think they'll all come skipping merrily to the surface to frolic in the glades. She knew going in that she'd have to sift through thousands of drow to find one or two that were worth talking to. In the end, she came back with one baby drow, and had planted the seeds in two others to come up to the surface on their own.

Since then, we haven't been able to replicate that kind of natural leadership. But I keep hoping.

 

[Tarangil]

I've actually done something similar myself. As a DM I've seen many games go bad when the social structure is set amongst players with a "leader". However my friend wanted to run a drow campaign and I jumped in on it. Of course I had chosen a female clerk...why not eh? Anyways it was discussed first with the other players if that's how they would like it. Of course they did and everyone picked something that would flow with the group as a whole. The players who knew about the drow had picked female fighters, and fighter/clerics, and although I was the Matron mother (mind you we were banished from our city) we all chose to be part of the same family which helped keep everyone together for mutual protection. Although I was Matron, the females and I would council on any decision, which is probably the closest thing to a Drow democracy you can find.

The players that chose males weren't too familiar with drow culture (except one, he was ok) but most of them were the type of player you'd wanted killed off first anyways because they were dicks. The ladies and I had to show them how the show was run and it didn't take them long to know their place.

After that we were all quite successful on setting up a Base below Myth Drannor in an attempt to set up our own community... :\ But unfortunately that's where we ended.

It can be done, but the players have to take part in the creation of their group as a whole rather than just their own character.

 

[Kahuna Burger]

I wouldn't run it, I wouldn't play in it. Just not my thing at all. I suggest if you as a DM are considering this that you ask each player, privately, how they feel about it.