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="Michael Silverbane" data-source="post: 3277476" data-attributes="member: 38016">In general, I like for the player resources to be controlled by the players.  That is, animal compainions, familiars, mounts, cohorts, followers...  This also sometimes extends to hirelings for short periods of time.My players often like to use cohorts and followers to fill in holes in their knowledges, so I'll sometimes pipe in with something like, "lackey Bob, points at the carrion crawler, noting the paralyzing goo that covers its tentacles."And often, I'll use cohorts or lackeys to hook the party into a plotline that I think they'll enjoy but have otherwise missed, "minstrel Jim complains that he cannot write a proper epic if his subject continues to ignore the pleas of the damsel in distress.  Yes, THAT damsel in distress."Some players don't really like to handle the extra paperwork or strategizing or characterizing that goes along with having additional characters.  For those players, I generally suggest character options that do not come with such additional responsibilities.  If they take them anyway, I encourage them to take on those roles.  If they will not or cannot, then I take care of it for them.The campaign that I'm running now has only a few extras in it, at the moment (a hunting beast, a few non-magical mounts, and one carrier)...  But in the previous campaign, each of the eight players had two PCs and each of them had at least one cohort, dozens of followers and hundreds of hirelings.  That does not include the multitude of animals that were either bonded to one of the characters in some way, or were trained in a more mundane fashion to obey one of the PCs or someone under his command.Latersilver</blockquote>

Verification