Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="JamesonCourage" data-source="post: 5703245" data-attributes="member: 6668292">Because generally, weapons and armor is more beneficial to the world at large (anyone can pick up a sword, but most people can't use a wand), so more people are willing to befriend you / let you bribe them / let you craft them things / directly beneficial to other party member / etc.That's true. Then again, saying that doesn't mean that the rule is bad, either, does it?I'm sorry, if the group I play with decides they want to do this, are they having badwrongfun? Because, if that's the case, just let me know and I'll tell them, and we'll change the way we play right away <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />First things first. First, just because you were raised in a monastery, it doesn't mean you can draw on it. You can take the resource "beaten up orphan" but it doesn't give you a resource to draw on. I'm not sure where you made that leap.Secondly, how is this different from making arms and armor for people you know? I mean, even if this background does benefit you, it's not directly. Spending this resource indirectly helps you achieve your goal, just like crafting arms and armor.I think you're being inconsistent here. This background resource indirectly benefits your character (other people can help you). Craft arms and armor is the same way (other people can help you). This is the same thing.Um, let me take a look at what I wrote again. Indeed, the first thing about it, really. "You can spend one to affect any other character in some minor or major way..." Of course, I'm pointing out that you cannot affect yourself. That means that you can only benefit yourself indirectly (such as by improving an ally, which might aid you... much like crafting arms and armor).Because you cannot use the feat directly to help your character. You've gained allies that will aid you. This feat allows outside forces to help aid your character... much like craft arms and armor.This is only to an extent. If you mistreat the cohort, he'll leave you. He's loyal, but he's not necessarily stupid. According to the 3.5 DMG (page 104), "mistreated cohorts become disloyal and eventually leave or even seek revenge against their employers." So, they definitely will only do as they're told to a certain extent, as they're subservient but not dominated.Again, I'm not sure where you got this. This can definitely be the case, but I assume that many cohorts might be subject to the laws of their church (if a cleric or paladin), druidic circle (if a druid), wizard school (if a wizard), and so on. Most of the time, they probably won't serve anyone else, but I don't see anywhere in the rules where it says they don't obey anyone else.While this is widely how this feat is dealt with (as are animal companions), I'm not sure where the official ruling on this is (or if there is one). I know that in my campaigns, animal companions, familiars, and (especially) followers / cohorts were not directly controlled by the players, though the characters had great sway. However, none of them were near "directly controlled, within some limitations." That sounds way too close to Dominate to me.Well, if that's the case, your character also directly benefits from outfitting a group that supports him (or his goals) by supplying the party, by garnering political pull that would otherwise be outside his reach, by making allies by giving them weapons or armor, by making contacts by being sought out for your services, etc. These are just as much of a direct benefit as the Leadership feat.I'm not. Again, consulted four players on this tonight when we were hanging out (not playing, just chilling) and they think you disagreeing is funny. Our mileage has varied.Depends on the party.Hardly ever?Most of the time? In the campaign I played in with this party (over 2,000 hours of gaming), the PCs started off ages 21-27, and died of old age in their 90's. Needless to say, they had a lot of down time in between their adventures. Some campaigns are nonstop, some aren't. I still feel like you're making a lot of assumptions here.This is slightly baffling to me. Why not include making items in a low magic setting, political pull, making weapons/armor for allies, making money, and so on. These all seem to directly benefit your character. Now, these may not enough to swing how much you like the feat (and, like I said, I don't use it). However, the feat can provide just as much direct benefit as what you've outlined with Leadership.Yeah, I still think that maybe your groups just didn't get to use them to their maximum benefit. There's very little reason not to use them to make allies, contacts, benefit allies (which can extend beyond the party... the PCs probably had 25-35 close NPC allies at high levels), use the crafting for political pull, create magic items in a low magic setting, and the like.Just because you don't, and your campaigns may not accommodate that, it doesn't mean the feat is poorly designed. It means it didn't mesh well with you. Which is fine, of course, but I feel like you're coming off as irrationally dismissive and kinda one-way-trueish. I don't find, "my group doesn't bribe people often, and that's all crafting magic weapons is good for if you're a wizard" particularly persuasive, especially after outlining why that's obviously untrue. But that's just me. I didn't like the feats (or crafting system) enough to keep them for my game. I just think you're being a little contradictory on what constitutes "directly benefiting" a character. But, as always, play what you like <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

Verification