Balanceing Cohorts in 4e

[Irda Ranger]

This should work - if every player wants also to control a cohort. Otherwise, the economy of actions between players (not characters) doesn't work out, and that can also be bad.

Why does everyone have to play a cohort? So what if Sir Bradley wants a Squire? Just let him have a second PC who's 1/2 the group level. He'll take his fair share of the loot and stuff (adjusted for level and such), just like any other PC. As long as Bob (the player) doesn't take too much table-time running the second PC and everyone else is cool with it, why do you need to strain yourself this way?

I'd suggest creating a special 'Cohort' class. It wouldn't really get any powers of its own, but it could multiclass using the 4e multiclassing rules. So, once per encounter (or day), your cohort gets to do something really cool and the rest of the time they're stuck using basic attacks. Wouldn't need to spend much time running them, and they certainly wouldn't outshine any other member of the party which, you know, makes sense for a mere cohort.

This is very clever. I'll have to remember this. I assume this is a "Martial" co-hort? Or does it even matter? Is the Co-hort class not even Martial?

 

[Gort]

I'm hoping they ditch cohorts, and leadership gives you a bunch of minions now.

 

[MyISPHatesENWorld]

It'd probably be easiest to just treat cohorts as a normal character, and then make the combats tougher by an appropriate amount.

I'd go with this as well. As a player, I never minded other players using a cohort (or familiar or animal companion or whatever). If I'm using a cohort, it's because the party needs something and I'm stuck playing it, so I don't care for the idea of having to give up my character's action for the dubious privilege of playing an npc that I'd have as a character if I wanted to play it. As a DM, I don't mind if there aren't a lot of players or if there is a gap in the party's capabilities. I like to avoid cohorts that outshine another party member, but that's the only real restriction. (I let people design their own cohorts, and have been allowed to design my own in games where one was needed.)

 

[Family]

I'm hoping they ditch cohorts, and leadership gives you a bunch of minions now.

Cohort: Sir I think enemies doth approach!
PC: Sorry I can't here you over how AWESOME I am.
Minion: Master...{dies via arrow to neck}..gurgle...
PC: Okay, suit up. It's time to hero!

 

[Av3rnus]

This is very clever. I'll have to remember this. I assume this is a "Martial" co-hort? Or does it even matter? Is the Co-hort class not even Martial?

Thanks. I hadn't really thought about power source, but presumably if the class doesn't come with any intrinsic powers it wouldn't really have a power source. Or a role, for that matter. It would just sorta take on the power source and role of whatever class it multiclassed into.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Cohorts are NPC´s entirely played by the DM (or by the bard in 3rd edition who usually has not a lot to do if he plays right)

My approach is to let the cohort (or the animal) companion have its own fight, finishing his enemy when its the right time to help the party out. So speaking in 4e terms: for every cohort you have an enemy minion appears, which dies when the DM desires.

Variation: Your cohort has to retreat or needs help when the PCs are winning

This approach is a very handy for a DM because it makes balancing an encounter much easier because you can add a monster or an ally on the fly.

 

[Moon-Lancer]

Someone once had a very good idea (IMHO) regarding using your actions to "command" your cohort by trading up. Therefore, you could spend your Minor Action to give your cohort a Move Action or Minor Action, or you could spend a Move Action to give your cohort a Minor, Move or Standard action. This way you still get at least a Standard Action to perform your own action for the round, but also gain the benefit of having a minion without too much disruption of the economy of actions.

But hey... Communism looked good on paper, too. I'd have to try playtesting this to see it it actually works.

Well, I'd try to do something from the implied action tradeoff from Warlord powers:

At-will - replace your attack with another's basic attack (you both are in melee range)
Encounter - add your attack to another's basic attack

So, I'd tweak it slightly for cohorts:

Cohorts get a move action every round. At will, as a standard action you can have your cohort make a basic attack (though you don't have to be in melee range to the cohorts target). Possibly allow you to sacrifice your minor, or possibly your move, to let the cohort use a power instead of a basic attack. Once per encounter you can have your cohort attack as a minor action (thus allowing you to attack too).

Then to balance things, I'd say that having a cohort takes up a magical item slot/power usage. I.e. if normally people can draw up to X encounter powers from their items, while you have a cohort you only get X-1 powers. Plus presumably there is some kind of feat cost or something for initially getting the cohort.

I like both your ideas alot. I was thinking the price for a cohort would be a paragon path of some sort, and possibly a special initiation feat, so the paragon path is open to many types of classes.

I like using a minor action to get the cohort to move around or preform minor actions.

I also like having a power that allows the hero to trade attack actions with the cohort.

how would powers work? If a cohort has a class level, how would their encounter or daily powers work while still maintaining balance? Maybe action points? I was already thinking that action points should allow both the cohort and hero to attack together, but i haven't thought if this should allow the cohort to use powers while attacking or not.

 

[Starfox]

The mounted combat rules have a note that's applicable here. If you bring a mount that fights on its own into a battle, subtract the mount's xp value from the xp the party gets. Kind of similar to the idea that the DM adds an extra enemy for the cohort to fight, off-stage.