Mercs, cohorts, and hirelings—do you let your players use them?

[kitsune9]

Mercs, cohorts, and hirelings—do you let your players use them?

Hello Gamers!

I remember back in the Ye Olde Days of Gaming of mercenaries, hirelings, and followers. I've always been a fan of this concept though my execution of it has been poor until around 3.0/3.5 in which I developed my own system of allowing players to hire on extra muscle, take cohorts, or expert hirelings.

I know some other DM's allow it too like for example, Monte Cook was talking about his players hiring a very large mercenary company to clean out a drow outpost in an older blog or design journal.

My question is that do you let your players hire the extra muscle? How do you manage it?

I actually have a set of custom rules for hiring mercs, experts, and sages. I'll see about posting it here on the forums so you all can look at it.

Happy Gaming!

 

[Jack7]

My question is that do you let your players hire the extra muscle? How do you manage it?

All of the time. But they don't just hire out muscle. Since they are a paramilitary and covert (undercover) team working for the Byzantine government they often work in cooperation with other units, hire on assistance (though not necessarily disclosing what they are really up to), and collaborate with various experts on different assignments, missions, or adventures. They take on local guides, men-at-arms, work with the "police," with the military, with government officials, have even done cooperative missions with semi-autonomous enemy forces. Some of them used to actually be enemies, such as a Viking convert become an Orthodox Christian and trusted team member. And they've worked with a wide range of mercenaries and regular soldiers and sailors, though as often as not they employ civilians or experts of other kinds (non-military).

And of course they have a wide-ranging network of contacts throughout the Empire, Middle East, Eastern Europe, parts of Western Europe and Africa, and even over into Persia. I'm all for networking, both in game and in real life. It makes you far, far more effective and capable in most things.

No-one can do everything all by themselves (although I'm big on the value of the capabilities of the individual, and what the individual can and should achieve), and small teams suffer the same kind of liabilities and inefficiencies and limitations that individuals do. It's simply smart operating procedure to know your limitations and then overcome those liabilities by cleverly employing the right people to help you get your work done efficiently and well.

If I personally could hire a scout and avoid blundering around wasting time or getting ambushed in unfamiliar enemy territory, or if I can hire a spy to prepare me for a potentially dangerous encounter, or if I need to buy reliable information or hire extra hands for a difficult mission, then I'm all over that. I'd do it just like I'd do it in real life. I'd investigate reliability and reputation and if everything fit as best as I could determine it, I'd employ who I needed to. I encourage my players to do the same. Better to succeed with the help of others than to fail alone in your hubris.

 

[Crothian]

If they want to do somethign and are able to do it in game I usually allow them and this is no different. However, I've only had PCs take on the occasional hireling and necver more then two at a time.

 

[Mikaze]

Yep.

Last weekend's session actually involved the fighter holding job interviews for the followers coming onboard after he took Leadership. Good times.

I make it clear that followers, hirelings, whatever aren't robots that will go to their deaths without a second thought though. Getting the party attatched to each of those Level 1 guys goes a long way towards preventing that to begin with, of course.

 

[Jack7]

I make it clear that followers, hirelings, whatever aren't robots that will go to their deaths without a second thought though. Getting the party attatched to each of those Level 1 guys goes a long way towards preventing that to begin with, of course.

A very good point Mik. To me there is nothing "heroic" in simply expending men. And it is not a sign of good leadership, or friendship to do so.

Better to use your help cleverly and wisely, than to sacrifice them unnecessarily.

 

[Hjorimir]

In one of my games we have two followers; a squire and a man-servant. Not only do I allow for it, I encourage it.

 

[Invisible Stalker]

Yes. This is one of the things from 1e I've tried to keep in recent editions.

If only the men at arms would quit wearing red tunics.

 

[ProfessorCirno]

I make it clear that followers, hirelings, whatever aren't robots that will go to their deaths without a second thought though. Getting the party attatched to each of those Level 1 guys goes a long way towards preventing that to begin with, of course.

Bingo.

Players will kill for a cool new item.

They'll die for a beloved NPC follower.

 

[Scribble]

Yep, whenever they take the initiative to do so.

Last campaign saw an apprentice turned to stone... The player intended to come back for him as soon as possible... but their enemy got to him first, and convinced him that his former master didn't care for him the way they would...

Darreth many levels later became a fully trained anti-paladin nemesis. It was a fun Darth Vader Obi-Wan moment.

This campaign they've had a couple mostly short term merc types... They hired the last remaining guard from a house they had to infiltrate... But he died in a giant squid attack.

 

[kitsune9]

All of the time. But they don't just hire out muscle. Since they are a paramilitary and covert (undercover) team working for the Byzantine government they often work in cooperation with other units, hire on assistance (though not necessarily disclosing what they are really up to), and collaborate with various experts on different assignments, missions, or adventures. They take on local guides, men-at-arms, work with the "police," with the military, with government officials, have even done cooperative missions with semi-autonomous enemy forces. Some of them used to actually be enemies, such as a Viking convert become an Orthodox Christian and trusted team member. And they've worked with a wide range of mercenaries and regular soldiers and sailors, though as often as not they employ civilians or experts of other kinds (non-military).

And of course they have a wide-ranging network of contacts throughout the Empire, Middle East, Eastern Europe, parts of Western Europe and Africa, and even over into Persia. I'm all for networking, both in game and in real life. It makes you far, far more effective and capable in most things.

No-one can do everything all by themselves (although I'm big on the value of the capabilities of the individual, and what the individual can and should achieve), and small teams suffer the same kind of liabilities and inefficiencies and limitations that individuals do. It's simply smart operating procedure to know your limitations and then overcome those liabilities by cleverly employing the right people to help you get your work done efficiently and well.

If I personally could hire a scout and avoid blundering around wasting time or getting ambushed in unfamiliar enemy territory, or if I can hire a spy to prepare me for a potentially dangerous encounter, or if I need to buy reliable information or hire extra hands for a difficult mission, then I'm all over that. I'd do it just like I'd do it in real life. I'd investigate reliability and reputation and if everything fit as best as I could determine it, I'd employ who I needed to. I encourage my players to do the same. Better to succeed with the help of others than to fail alone in your hubris.

Wow, that sounds like some serious Coolness, Jack. I like the idea a lot.