Leadership & Dragon Cohort?

[Shin Okada]

It's my understanding that most of the written material wasn't MEANT for min-maxing... Doesn't stop those of us from actually doing it.

Right. But Cohort rule is more so than most of the other rules are. Many of the rules are optional indeed. But Cohort is more "optional" and specifically need's a DM's permission.

IMHO, a play group should think twice before even allowing one cohort. That will technically let a player control another PC and thus that player takes more actual playing time comparing to the other players. That is often more problematic than a player having a particularly powerful PC.

Also note that a cohort takes his own share of treasure. Having 2 cohorts means that a player takes two-men worth of treasure share. Some other member may not be happy about it.

In overall, regarding cohort, what important is not if that is legal by RAW or not. The important thing is if the DM and other players are happy about it or not.

 

[Shin Okada]

I thought it was there so people could play good characters but still keep healers and marshalls around.

Cohort healer .. yes. Having no healer in a party is very problematic. So complementing that role with a cohort is a reasonable option.

But a Cohort Marshal (or some other buffer), I say that is a totally different story

 

[ghostwasp]

I was going to post this question in a new thread, but it seems like it will fit here. Which feat would be better to take? Leadership allows for a good buffer or healer (wizard, sorcerer, healer, marshall specifically)-but dragons can kick a hole lot of ass (with the elite array and loot equal to NPC of same ECL). I'd really like to hear everyone's ideas on this since I have a 11th level multiclassed martial character (all standard roles are filled in the group) and I'm going to take one of the feats but I'm stuck on which one to take.

 

[Rampant]

Time is your primary concern. Leadership is more potentially potent if you're willing to take the time to care for and lead followers. For the most utility in the least amount of work, grab the dragon cohort.

 

[RUMBLETiGER]

Right. But Cohort rule is more so than most of the other rules are. Many of the rules are optional indeed. But Cohort is more "optional" and specifically need's a DM's permission.

You are absolutely right. Leadership is worded by RAW as DM's call for all of it. The books place it in a special category of complicated and DM's call.

Also note that a cohort takes his own share of treasure. Having 2 cohorts means that a player takes two-men worth of treasure share. Some other member may not be happy about it.

My understanding was that the Cohort's took their treasure out of your cut and therefore it didn't affect other players. That's how I've played this in the past.

I was going to post this question in a new thread, but it seems like it will fit here. Which feat would be better to take? Leadership allows for a good buffer or healer (wizard, sorcerer, healer, marshall specifically)-but dragons can kick a hole lot of ass (with the elite array and loot equal to NPC of same ECL). I'd really like to hear everyone's ideas on this since I have a 11th level multiclassed martial character (all standard roles are filled in the group) and I'm going to take one of the feats but I'm stuck on which one to take.

If it matters to you, Dragon Cohort does not grant you any followers, where Leadership does. it's the difference between acquiring a powerful ally, and a powerful ally plus a small (although weak) army.


Personally, as can be seen in my other thread, I'm abusing the leadership/Dragon Cohort feats to acquire a Cohort with NPC class levels that will stay out of combat, and a Pseudodragon, which is a pretty weak creature (although I'll give it class levels). I'm trying to appeal to my DM with a creative idea, without bringing wrath down upon me. If I had a Human Druid and a Gold Dragon, methinks the Banhammer might come down pretty fiercely upon me head.

 

[Shin Okada]

My understanding was that the Cohort's took their treasure out of your cut and therefore it didn't affect other players. That's how I've played this in the past.

See DMG P.105 "Treasure". A cohort usually takes his share of treasure (half the amount of one PC.) And that is usually needed to let a cohort arm appropriately for his level and survive. In D&D, many of a character's capability (including survivability) is coming from not only his own abilities but also from his gears.

 

[Crothian]

The cohort gets as much or as little treasure as you give him. Just like the PCs get as much or as little as you decide to give them. Most groups do equal shares but there is no hard fast rule that demands this.

Now, saying that the cohort can and should demand a fair share and if the Pcs refuse should abandon the party. A dragon cohort should demand a greater then equal share as dragons are usually greedy and superior by nature and tend to be treasure hungry.

 

[RUMBLETiGER]

See DMG P.105 "Treasure". A cohort usually takes his share of treasure (half the amount of one PC.) And that is usually needed to let a cohort arm appropriately for his level and survive. In D&D, many of a character's capability (including survivability) is coming from not only his own abilities but also from his gears.

Thanks for the reference, you're right. Always good to know what RAW says. So as to avoid irritating my fellow players, I'll pay my cohort from my share.

The cohort gets as much or as little treasure as you give him. Just like the PCs get as much or as little as you decide to give them. Most groups do equal shares but there is no hard fast rule that demands this.

Now, saying that the cohort can and should demand a fair share and if the Pcs refuse should abandon the party. A dragon cohort should demand a greater then equal share as dragons are usually greedy and superior by nature and tend to be treasure hungry.

I can imagine a Dragon Cohort would definitly expect more treasure!

 

[Ravilah]

I just let two guys in my group take on cohorts (one of them a dragon cohort). I told them, though, that any treasure given to the cohorts was permanently theirs; the PCs couldn't just have it back whenever they wanted. Also, I told them their cohorts had to be "one trick ponies," so they can do one martial or defensive thing, and one basic skill set (diplomancy, thieving, athletics, etc.).

Their cohorts must have personalities, real alignments, and goals. If their "leader" loses their respect or ignores them too much, they will go. And since the cohort is still technically an NPC, I get to act out the cohort's responses to events (though the cohort always follows his leader).

I think this balances the presence of cohorts and keeps things from being unbalanced or too complicated. With these conditions in place, I wouldn't have a problem with a player having two cohorts.