Cohorts - how do you handle them?

[stevelabny]

I view cohorts the same as familiars / animal companions

The PC gets to create and control them at all times.

If you have problem PCs who create them to just be min/max powerhouses or cannon fodder, thats a problem of the PC not the feat, and should of course be slapped down.

Treasure? However the party wants to split it up. But logically, they shoud get a cohort level/ party level share. This assumes the cohort is fully involved in all encounters.

XP? Personally, level up the cohorts with the PC.

 

[Shallown]

What does the player have access to, full stats of the cohort, or something less?

Yes. The Gm has enough to deal with. Especially as you gain levels and since leadership is usually gained at higher levels it makes sense.



What about character creation for the cohort? Do you use the same rules as PC creation, or something else? Who creates the cohort, DM, player, or a joint effort?

Same rules as the PC. After all they will have to survive the same things as the PC. Sometimes player sometimes GM sometimes both depends on the player and the GM and what they want. GM always has final approval and the Cohort follows the same rules for wealth that a new character does.


How much control does the player have over the cohort, and when? From what I hear, many games just allow the player full control over the cohort, like a second player character. We will almost certainly go with something less than this, but the question is how much less.

The player has full control but we tend to put some effort into roleplaying that relationship and the cohorts personality up to and including cohorts and their leader arguing over some things. The Gm maintains Veto rights but very seldom is this ever used. We aren't super duper roleplayers but we do like to keep our choices and those of cohorts within the bounds of thier personality.


How are XP and treasure rewards handled/divided (especially if other than per the DMG)? Are the new XP rules for cohorts working out, or are you using something else?
Especially concerning treasure, it seems like other players may get the feeling the the presence of a cohort takes away some of the party's treasure, almost like the player with the cohort is double-dipping. Any problems in this area?

Xp wise I assume our GM is just leveling up the Cohort with the PC to keep it in line with the Leadership feat. Makes things easier on the GM. Its what I did in the last campaign.
As far as treasure goes the characters decided on giving the chohort a 1/2 share and would probably give him a full share if he wanted it. It doesn't make sense to make the chohort weaker by not giving him enough loot. The cohort in our group is the only Tank fighter we have. He is much to useful to treat him like a second class citizen just becuase mechanic wise he is NPC. In game, in character we treat him as an equal (as much as we would anyone with his lack of personality (a warforged with a 6 charisma... very robotic. May be the only warforged in the World)



What works and what doesn't -- DMing technique stuff, rather than rules judgments. What do you like about the system you use, and how would you change it?

I think what works really does depend on the group. We tend to like having a cohort in the group and they often fill in a niche we need and let other characters stay focused on what they want in their character instead of having to filla role the cohort covers.
As a Gm the cohort also offers a voice in the group that doesn't require a lot of manufacturing or force. The GM can occasionally help the game and the group by speaking up as the cohort and since the cohort is a member of the group what they say won't be suspect as it might be coming from an outsider.

I like the way we handle it. It might change if everyone in the group got a cohort (since we have 5 players and a GM). Having too many character running around would be a pain.

Later

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

Hmmm. Still considering. I'm rather conflicted about cohorts. One the one hand, they're a very powerful additional capability, that (if full control is granted the player) effectively doubles the player's "screen time", potentially detracting from other players' play. And if the cohort gets a share of the XP/treasure, one PC could (potentially) be siphoning off XP and/or treasure from the rest of the party (probabaly treasure from the PC's share, but XP from the party allotment).

On the other hand, some PCs already get extra time due to animal companions (though this is relatively small compared to another character), and a cohort provides a way to cover capability gaps in the party. *cough*cleric*cough*meatshield*coughcough*

It's a pain for the DM to take on yet another full-time persona; OTOH, if the DM runs the cohort, it minimizes "cohort abuse", and allows the cohort a more distinct personality. I personally dislike running an NPC that travels with the party (though due to a hired guide whose quest is not yet complete, I've been running one for some time, and he just won't die, darn it.)

If the DM controls the stats, it adds some mystery about the cohort -- but makes it hard for the player to run the cohort in combat, if that's what the player is doing.

 

[wingsandsword]

• What does the player have access to, full stats of the cohort, or something less?
• What about character creation for the cohort? Do you use the same rules as PC creation, or something else? Who creates the cohort, DM, player, or a joint effort?
• How much control does the player have over the cohort, and when? From what I hear, many games just allow the player full control over the cohort, like a second player character. We will almost certainly go with something less than this, but the question is how much less.
• How are XP and treasure rewards handled/divided (especially if other than per the DMG)? Are the new XP rules for cohorts working out, or are you using something else?
• Especially concerning treasure, it seems like other players may get the feeling the the presence of a cohort takes away some of the party's treasure, almost like the player with the cohort is double-dipping. Any problems in this area?
• What works and what doesn't -- DMing technique stuff, rather than rules judgments. What do you like about the system you use, and how would you change it?

Thanks for your input.

I've got a party of 7 PC's, 3 of which have Leadership, so I've definitely had it used a lot in my game, so here's how I run it:

1. Character Creation is DM's purview. The Cohort is an NPC and is created as such. I make them with weaker point-buy than PC's (25 points instead of 32), they are limited to only core classes at initial creation, and everything about their progression (including levels, feats and skills) is DM's choice. I usually keep the character sheet myself, but hand it to the PC when a fight breaks out so he can run the cohort in battle (to cut down on DM overhead).

2. The cohort is run by the DM, especially in roleplaying encounters or non-combat scenarios. In combat, to save me the time of tracking another NPC, the PC runs the cohort, although I do make it clear I can override the Cohort's actions if I choose.

3. I run Cohort XP by-the-book.

4. Cohorts and treasure has never once come up, because in all my gaming groups we've never been very possessive about treasure. In virtually every game I've ever been people have their own personal equipment, and a big communal party fund in which the vast majority of treasure goes into, and there is none of this hassling with shares and divvying the treasure (and frankly, I'd rather not be in a game that does that, it sounds rather annoying and like it just creates problems). Of course, my PC's (and I when I play) aren't horribly obsessed with "keeping up with the jones" in magic items and running out to get another plus tacked on every level or two, so it all works out well. In practice, Cohorts get hand-me-down or surplus magic items, like a spare +1 Shield or a spare Ring of Protection that the party has built up.

5. I like the way I run cohorts. Cohorts are a chance by the DM to plug gaps in the PC party that they might not notice or really care about, like when the first Cohort was taken in my game, the party had nobody who could cast Identify, and didn't bother to identify most magic items, so it was annoying listing treasure that they couldn't know what it was, so I made sure that since a PC wanted an Elven Cleric of Hanali Celanil as his cohort (and I'd approved this because it fit with his character and the campaign), I gave her the Elf and Magic domains (over the PC's protest, because he wanted Elf and Charm for her). I said that's just the way it is, and by the way, she has Identify as a domain spell so you can actually ID those items you're carrying. Detail out their personality and background a little, since they are going to be a recurring NPC for possibly the rest of the campaign. From a story perspective, if the PC's have a base of operations, a cohort who stays behind most of the time when they go adventuring (and comes along when a PC didn't show up to the game so they are shorthanded) gives a story explanation for who's saying back to run the Keep (and it's usually presumed to be the absent PC when the Cohort comes along because the party is undermanned).

 

[brehobit]

Hmmm. Still considering.

...

It's a pain for the DM to take on yet another full-time persona; OTOH, if the DM runs the cohort, it minimizes "cohort abuse", and allows the cohort a more distinct personality. I personally dislike running an NPC that travels with the party (though due to a hired guide whose quest is not yet complete, I've been running one for some time, and he just won't die, darn it.)

If the DM controls the stats, it adds some mystery about the cohort -- but makes it hard for the player to run the cohort in combat, if that's what the player is doing.

I think everyone else summed it up nicely. In my experiance a cohort is a good thing in a smallish group. Let the player run the PC and the cohort with the DM stepping in as needed.

As far as stats go, I would not let a cohort have PC stats. If using point-buy, drop the points by 4 to 8. For a 32 point point buy game I've seen 23, 25 and the 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 array used (21 points I think). This keeps the cohort down in power, which I think is appropriate. The PCs should be the stars, the cohorts the supporting cast. Either player or DM designed is probably fine.

Oh, and I'm very partial to awakened animals as cohorts. They tend to have a reason to stay with the party (no real home generally) and they tend to be simpler to play as a seconadary PC. I've seen a wolf mount (barbarian) for a halfling and a cleric mule with a Vow of Poverty (for a VoP Sorc). Also, the mount thing can keep the PC and the cohort on the same initiative. That, IME, tends to speed things up.

 

[tarchon]

We mostly seem to handle them in pine boxes.

 

[Starglim]

Dungeon Masters' Guide 1979, p. 34-37.

OK, seriously, I wouldn't play Leadership exactly as 1st Edition henchmen but I'd retain some strong similarities. The standard Leadership feat assumes that a heroic character turns up somehow to serve the leader character. Unless the character already has underlings of some sort, one of whom is capable of becoming and advancing as a trusted cohort, clearly, the cohort is some sort of itinerant looking for a leader and mentor who has got word of the character's desire for a skilled aide. He's an NPC, with all that that implies, who has some reason to adventure with the character - either because he is genuinely loyal, or for some ulterior motive that could eventually be turned to real admiration and loyalty over time.

The DM should create the character, based on the types of characters that the player asks to find, run whatever form of interaction and negotiation he sees fit, and play the cohort as an NPC who generally follows the PC's orders with a helpful attitude. Once the PC and cohort fully know and trust each other in-game, the DM may hand over the character sheet and may agree to the player running the character, depending on the general ruling for the campaign as to players running multiple characters. By default it doesn't happen unless the PC is not present for the adventure.

Cohorts should gain half XP (regardless of who's running the character) if the leader is present, full XP if they are the sole character run by the player in that session. However they count as full characters for Challenge Ratings and division of XP whenever they are present for an adventure. Heroes should be discouraged from placing their followers and entourage in danger to absorb hits and give themselves a cheap boost in combat power.

Division of treasure, as always, is negotiated between players (as distinct from PCs) and should never be the subject of a GM ruling. However two possible systems are to give cohorts half shares of treasure, or to give each player the same share of treasure and let the PC pay his own employees as he sees fit. Cohorts don't get magic items as of right, but it might be sensible or good role-playing to give them items that the PCs don't need themselves.

 

[RodneyThompson]

If a player wants a cohort, I generally ask them what class. Then I build the character myself. I'll role play it, but the player usually controls it in combat. We haven't had any problems with this approach.

This is exactly how I handle it, except that I don't always ask what class (though I do ask for a general theme). For example, our party's noble got his first cohort a while back, and he wanted an arcane spellcaster, so I made a wizard. Our party's gold dragon PC is about to take Leadership and wants to start a cult of Bahamut, so I'm probably going to give him a cleric/dracolyte.

I give the player the character sheet, but in non-combat situations I usually play the part of the cohort. And if the player isn't basing the combat decisions on the character of the cohort, sometimes I'll step in and overrule their decisions. The cohort doesn't get a "pick" of the treasure, but the cohorts are usually given magic items by the players because they want to keep the character up to par.

So far, this has worked out pretty well, since I usually try and make it to where an established NPC becomes the cohort rather than a new person just randomly showing up. As such, usually the players are already familiar with the cohort and can respect him as a part of the cast of characters.

 

[Ed Cha]

I like the idea of cohorts rolled up randomly myself.

 

[S'mon]

Hi - had some bad cohort experiences here.

IMC I've come to realise that it's best to only let PCs recruit as cohorts suitable NPCs who they encounter during play, not tailor cohorts to the PC. I tried the "let player roll up whatever cohort they want" approach and every cohort was a beautiful (usually female, dep on player preference) Cleric or Bard in love with the (male) PC... this got tiresome real quick, esp with 3 Clerics in a 3.0 party - you really see just how stupidly overpowered Clerics are. As for XP, I use the 3.0 approach where Cohorts get a 1/2 share and this seems to work fine. For roleplaying the Cohort, I used to let players do it - ie mostly 0 roleplaying, I even had 1 player _wouldn't let_ me play his sex-object cohort - "That'd be weird" - now I'd just let them run the cohort in combat with me RPIng them out of combat.