Henchmen, Followers, Cohorts and Companions

[MerricB]

Here's a question for everyone:

Do you prefer, when playing D&D (any edition), to be controlling just the one character? Or do you enjoy having more than one character at your command?

In oD&D and AD&D, it was pretty much assumed that you would take NPCs into the dungeon. At the lower levels, you'd hire men-at-arms, but soon thereafter you'd have henchmen: NPCs with class levels.

Thus, adventuring groups would be 8+ characters.

In later days, we've gone much more to a 1:1 characterlayer ratio, possibly due to the rise of roleplaying and storytelling elements rather than purer adventuring. So, many groups are just 4-6 players.

What do you feel about this? Has your playing style changed over the years? Did you ever use cohorts, even in 1e days?

Cheers!

 

[kaomera]

I prefer, when playing, to just have the one character. In 1e my games tended to be a PCs-only affair, with no player having more than one active PC (at any one time) beyond 3rd level. Several other games I played in featured NPCs much more.

In 3e I don't usually see many cohorts / henchmen at lower levels. However at levels 10+ it seems pretty common for someone to pick up Leadership, and then everyone else usually follows the next time they gain Feats... But in many cases these NPCs don't adventure, or at least not on every dungeon run.

 

[Beckett]

In earlier editions, the groups I was in often had 2 or 3 players, so it was natural for everyone to play two characters. I can only think of one campaign where NPCs figured heavily into, and in that one there was almost no difference between the PCs and the NPC followers.

In 3.x, my group has tended to be closer to 4 players, so 1 character per player is the norm. Of late, the group has shrunk, so one or two players (the more experienced members of the group) might pick up a second character to make sure the arcane and divine angles are covered without anyone forced to play the cleric instead of what they really wanted to play.

When I play, even in a larger group, I've often picked up Leadership, normally with the intent of supporting my character. My warforged paladin gained an artificer follower as no one in the party was skilled at healing him, and this way I could handle my own buffs. In another game, I had the sole melee character (we had a skirmisher type character, and everyone else was missile or magic), so I picked up Leadership to gain a fighter cohort who could stand up front and absorb part of the damage.

So far, no one else in my group has taken Leadership, though one has contemplated it a few times.

 

[Kae'Yoss]

One character.

 

[Li Shenron]

Here's a question for everyone:

Do you prefer, when playing D&D (any edition), to be controlling just the one character? Or do you enjoy having more than one character at your command?

In oD&D and AD&D, it was pretty much assumed that you would take NPCs into the dungeon. At the lower levels, you'd hire men-at-arms, but soon thereafter you'd have henchmen: NPCs with class levels.

Thus, adventuring groups would be 8+ characters.

In later days, we've gone much more to a 1:1 characterlayer ratio, possibly due to the rise of roleplaying and storytelling elements rather than purer adventuring. So, many groups are just 4-6 players.

What do you feel about this? Has your playing style changed over the years? Did you ever use cohorts, even in 1e days?

Cheers!

I largely prefer 1 character. When having a cohort, I prefer that the DM plays it or at least helps playing it, although a very good player could manage it alone.

 

[Lanefan]

I prefer running 2 characters, so when one dies I still have something to do.

And - due to a combination of bad luck and my low boredom threshold leading to rash actions - they die. Oh, do they die.

Lanefan

 

[Jhaelen]

Definitely just one character. Playing several characters at once was problematic in earlier editions, in 3.X it's a major PITA.

 

[Numion]

One character, definitely. We don't usually hire help, but if we do, DM plays them.

Cohorts can be directed by the character 'owning' the cohort, but DM has veto (indeed, the DM should play the cohort, but a) he's not as familiar with it as the player b) nobody wants to watch DM rolling for two NPCs fighting eachother).

 

[Kestrel]

My group generally runs one character, but personally, I like NPCs, both as a player and GM.

(But not a GM PC...everyone hates those)

I like cohorts to fill roles that the party may not have covered, like a tracker, trapsmith, sage...etc. They also serve as a great info conduit from the GM. But, I do not like for them to have a specialty covered by a PC, because it tends to lead to compeition for the spotlight. Never a good thing.

 

[MrFilthyIke]

I enjoy playing multiple characters, I'm always engaged in any given task.

The more NPCs the better.