Any tips on handling cohorts/followers/Leadership feat?

[dreaded_beast]

In other threads I have posed questions regarding cohorts/followers/Leadership Feat. However, I was wondering if anyone out there would like to share some basic advice or tips on handling the previous subjects.

This is my first time DMing a PC with the Leadership Feat, so I don't want to make the feat either too powerful or too useless.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

Sure! I don't have much experience with it, either, but here's what I've picked up:

1. Cohorts adventure; followers don't: In general, the followers a PC gets with the Leadership feat are used more for plot generation than for firepower. They allow a PC with a stable base of operations to leave that base in competent hands while he's off saving the world.

2. Followers are good to have around: Allow them to do work to benefit the PC - research, item creation (especially masterwork items), tax collection, minor questing - but make sure the big stuff is still in the PC's hands.

3. OK, Followers can fight, too: If your PC is of the correct bent, your followers may actually represent the hand-picked and elite militia that he's built up. Allow the PC to use them in such a way: goblinoid incursions, dealing with a new thieves' guild, etc. Alternatively, followers could just as easily be the bandit gang that's formed around your PC, or the pirate crew, etc.

 

[Storyteller01]

There was a book printed for the sword & sorcery set that used an interesting twist on the Leadership feat. A bard had the feat, but could not afford to have her troops following her around all the time. So, instead of actual followers, they became a kind of fan club. Where ever she most frequented there would be a loyal follower holding onto some hidden money and gear. They would also give her a place to lay low for a while. Other than that, her cohort took care of the administration of everything.

I forget the name of the book, but it was a compilation of NPC's for the Sword and Sorcery campaign set. I think it was called 'The Wise and the Wicked'.

 

[Lord Pendragon]

When dealing with the Leadership feat, here are a few of my thoughts on the matter.

1. I usually do not grant followers unless the PC has some kind of task for them to accomplish, or place for them to be. In your case, your PC wants them to serve as retainers, so I'd allow it. But for a PC with no base of operations, I find that a dozen tag-alongs are more trouble, for both player and DM, than they're worth. So no followers. Though if later a PC were to come into circumstances where followers were useful/complimentary, he could certainly claim the proper number of followers at that time.

2. When defining the Follower-PC relationship, I think of a Rock Star and his groupies. They are basically in awe of him and will do nearly anything he says. When defining the Cohort-PC relationship, I think of Batman and Robin. Batman is clearly the senior member of the partnership. He's the hero, the focus. He's the one responsible if the [ahem] hits the fan. However, though Robin follows his lead, that doesn't mean that Robin won't have a different opinion, or even argue with Batman if their opinions come into conflict. Although Robin is Batman's sidekick, there is a certain degree of independence there.

3. If there are many players, I'll have the player RP the cohort, and control him in combat. If there are fewer players, I will RP the cohort (to create some of that independence noted before), but still have the player control the cohort during combat.

4. I never make the cohort important to the main story, except in relation to the main PC. The cohort is there to be an aid to the PC, not steal spotlight time from the other players.

 

[dreaded_beast]

Good ideas! Can anyone mention anymore sources that might have more info or "twists" to the Leadership feat?

I plan to offer the paladin player a chance to get a "special" mount, in place of the standard warhorse, probably a pegasus.

 

[Plane Sailing]

One of the PCs in my game was a rogue with the leadership feat. His cohort was a diviner who stayed at home, did research for him and communicated via crystal ball and message spells twice a day. The followers were his spy network, distributed across the land. Half of them were developed and precisely located, the remainder were "potentials" and at any time in a civilised city the player could say "Ah, I've got a contact here" and activate one of his remaining followers.

The whole situation worked very nicely.

The "paladin" character in my campaign has recently taken leadership, the followers are manning a temple recovered from the hands of bad guys and the cohort... is interesting - he hasn't turned up in the storyhour yet so I don't want to say much about him.

In a campaign I play in my sorcerer has a ranger cohort and no followers have been defined yet. The cohort works really well as a sort of additional PC for me, enabling me to be involved in bits of action that I wouldn't normally be involved with (and gives a ready made backup character with history in the party who can take over if the primary character dies)

 

[kigmatzomat]

The key is story relevance. Followers should be followers for a reason. Bards have it easy since anyone can be a fan. IMC the rogue who goes out of his way to be unnoticed would have immense problems gaining followers because he minimizes interaction. The cleric who's sheperding in a new religion, OTOH, virtually has to beat the followers back with a +4 stick.

Followers are differentiated from "people who won't leave" by one simple factoid: The GM won't screw with you through the Followers and Cohorts. Oh, they may get kidnapped and there may be attempts of blackmail, but the Followers/Cohorts won't betray the Leader, at least on purpose. All those other people, well, some may be downright loonies.

Followers are great when your PCs have a "grand plan." Building temples, research, teaching the masses to read, etc are all good ways to put the Followers to work. They are trustworthy hands doing things the Leader wants done and that fits in with their reason for being there.

Cohorts fill a number of roles. IMC we can't keep a wizard player around so there's a Cohort wizard. He's not as powerful but he provides some "oomph" and a host of knowledge. In others they act as rear-guards, secondary characters, and handle "off screen" events ("go get the army while we hold the pass").

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

The cleric who's sheperding in a new religion, OTOH, virtually has to beat the followers back with a +4 stick.

+4 Stick - It's a bat!

 

[Storyteller01]

IMC the rogue who goes out of his way to be unnoticed would have immense problems gaining followers because he minimizes interaction. .

Don't want to countermand or insult your house rules, just a thought...

Even if you choose to be unnoticed, a character tends to build a rep for themselves. These followers and cohorts for rogues could be the ones who were smart enough or lucky enough to follow the trail. The rogue chooses to kill 'em or use 'em (Guilds have to start somewhere).

IMC, I actually have a rogue who does the opposite. His focus is on Diplomacy and Intimidation. His goal is to be a crime lord. He actually goes out and interacts with the environment!! He prefers to test the local law (prove I did it!!!). Makes for one heck of a rep, and he doesn't hide from it.

 

[Lord Pendragon]

IMC, I actually have a rogue who does the opposite. His focus is on Diplomacy and Intimidation. His goal is to be a crime lord. He actually goes out and interacts with the environment!! He prefers to test the local law (prove I did it!!!).

Out of curiosity, have you removed Commune from your game?