D&D 5E Assassins, Spies, and Support Personel

[doctorbadwolf]

So, in a lot of fiction, Assassins and Spies, and lets be real, fantastical spies are basically fantastical assassins, have support personel.

Sometimes it's a handler, who arranges jobs and gets you your money, keeping layers of separation between the job and the client, other times it is an engineer of specialized tools, supplying the Assassin with gear to make their job easier, and facilitating tactics that no less specialized operative would bother with. Other times, it might be a superior or mentor, or someone who the Assassin's liason to the Authority that provides motivation and justification for The Work.

It occured to me today, while talking to my wife about my assassin class, that it might make sense, and provide fun gameplay, to give the class a retainer. A Noble Assassin would have a whole team working with them, providing support on a largely cosmetic/ribbon level. My preference as a DM is to allow a character with such allies to invest in them, and get more out of them as a result, but others will simply keep them on the ribbon level, just smoothing over downtime and book keeping stuff.

But what do you think? Should the Assassin (and perhaps the name could be Operative instead?) have a "retainer" ribbon feature?

Should I save this idea for the Marshal class, instead?

Should the Fighter get retainers as they level up, along with home-base style features?

Should I start working on a whole supplement that gives this sort of stuff to all classes, optionally?

Am I just going wacky and none of this is a good idea?

 

[Horwath]

I voted for "go to bed" and "all should get it".

This is a good idea, but it is more for some kingdom building type of campaign.
In combat, I presume they would be next to useless and they will hog time by performing their own actions.

They are more likely to be used as extra body to perform gathering informations, crafting, researching or buying/selling stuff for you while you are out adventuring. And that kind if featuer belongs to every (sub)class.

Now, you could have special skills/features for retainers depending on the (sub)classes that hires them.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I voted for "go to bed" and "all should get it".

This is a good idea, but it is more for some kingdom building type of campaign.
In combat, I presume they would be next to useless and they will hog time by performing their own actions.

They are more likely to be used as extra body to perform gathering informations, crafting, researching or buying/selling stuff for you while you are out adventuring. And that kind if featuer belongs to every (sub)class.

Now, you could have special skills/features for retainers depending on the (sub)classes that hires them.

The expectation, as with the existing Retainers feature for the Noble background, is that they wouldn’t ever be in combat.

Which is also the space I wish 5e familiars mostly existed in, but that’s a tangent for another thread.

The context for the Assassin is that your retainer is a bit like the warlock’s patron. Nebulous, narrative driven, and part of the characters background most of the time.
They might be the person who makes the assassin’s specialized gear, does most of the work preparing poisons and disguises, and is part of the assassin’s daily rituals like training at dawn before breaking camp, etc.

Then again, for the Paladin, I’d love to have them gain a squire that serves many of the same functions, so perhaps it is more something for all classed.

 

[MNblockhead]

With all my players I try to give them options to build a network if they are into that. That can include patrons, handlers, informants, fences, safe houses, supporters, fellow believers, etc.

Mechanically I use one or more of the following:

* existing or custom backgrounds that have back ground features for this. Folk Hero comes to mind, but I like working with players to come up with custom backgrounds as well.

* Factions/Reputation/Infamy. Drawing from the DMG but heavily modified with an "organization dice" mechanic from an ENWorld article

* Matt Coleville's Strongholds and Followers book

* Xanathar's Guide to Everythings downtime rules

The Rogue in the party for my main campain is a member of the Underguild (from the Lost Lands setting), but also has perks with a number of other organizations that he's earned through good reputation (as well as some enemies he's earned through infamy). He also owns a tavern that gives him some benefits when collecting intel.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

If a player of any class wants to have a retainer, they can have a sidekick. That's what those rules are for.

If a player wants their character to be known by a job title different from the name of their class/subclass that's fine. They can call themselves whatever they want.

 

[Minigiant]

I once suggested that some classes get dedicated replaceable followers from their subclass.

Like a rogue would get a crew of 3 at level 3. The rogue gets to choose crewmates like fence, forger, and lookout. Higher levels grants stronger crewmates and quicker recall times.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

If a player of any class wants to have a retainer, they can have a sidekick. That's what those rules are for.

If a player wants their character to be known by a job title different from the name of their class/subclass that's fine. They can call themselves whatever they want.

A sidekick is a combat ready ally comperable to a PC in power level. That is a whole order of magnitude more than anything relevant to the topic of this thread.

The job title thing also isn't really relevant to the thread topic, tbh.

I once suggested that some classes get dedicated replaceable followers from their subclass.

Like a rogue would get a crew of 3 at level 3. The rogue gets to choose crewmates like fence, forger, and lookout. Higher levels grants stronger crewmates and quicker recall times.

I like that. I'll keep that in mind if I put together a supplement for retainers specific to each class. Something 1-3 pages, ideally, maybe twice that if I include home base rules. Something much simpler than Colville's book.

 

[Drazen]

With all my players I try to give them options to build a network if they are into that. That can include patrons, handlers, informants, fences, safe houses, supporters, fellow believers, etc.

Mechanically I use one or more of the following:

* existing or custom backgrounds that have back ground features for this. Folk Hero comes to mind, but I like working with players to come up with custom backgrounds as well.

* Factions/Reputation/Infamy. Drawing from the DMG but heavily modified with an "organization dice" mechanic from an ENWorld article

* Matt Coleville's Strongholds and Followers book

* Xanathar's Guide to Everythings downtime rules

The Rogue in the party for my main campain is a member of the Underguild (from the Lost Lands setting), but also has perks with a number of other organizations that he's earned through good reputation (as well as some enemies he's earned through infamy). He also owns a tavern that gives him some benefits when collecting intel.

I concur.
Giving advanced players more options and using those kinda mechanics keeps things interesting.
And a whole lot cooler

 

[Oofta]

Yeah, if only there were some book coming out with ideas on organizations sponsor an adventurer. Call it a "patron" or some such.

As far as the rest, that's what sidekicks, hirelings and connections developed through play are for. Basically I wouldn't want one PC (or PC class) to get anything powerful enough to matter that wasn't resolved through actions of the character in game.

It's not the worst idea in the world, reminds me of old 2E games where fighters got retainers and so on. But just like those retainers, it could be a lot of overhead. Fun in a way, but not sure we need a whole set of rules customized to specific niches.

 

[Drazen]

Yeah, if only there were some book coming out with ideas on organizations sponsor an adventurer. Call it a "patron" or some such.

As far as the rest, that's what sidekicks, hirelings and connections developed through play are for. Basically I wouldn't want one PC (or PC class) to get anything powerful enough to matter that wasn't resolved through actions of the character in game.

It's not the worst idea in the world, reminds me of old 2E games where fighters got retainers and so on. But just like those retainers, it could be a lot of overhead. Fun in a way, but not sure we need a whole set of rules customized to specific niches.

You believe that over complicates things? A new set of customized rules?