So, in 3.5e rule, once a cohort lost a level, never catches up?

[Shin Okada]

In 3.5e, PCs who went behind a level from others (duet to death or spending XPs for spells or creating items) he/she eventually catches up with others, because lower-level PC gets more XPs comparing to others. I think this was a really nice change from 3.0e.

But now, in 3.5e, cohorts never get "his share" of XPs but instead get the XP equal to (his level/master's level). That means, a cohort who lost a level or two start to get even fewer XPs and never catches up to the maximum level (PC level-2). I am afraid of that will give players reason to "replace" the cohort.

Are there any way to prevent this?

 

[Derro]

If a cohort is down levels they could receive an XP bonus independent of the party award. The rationale here is that the cohort is facing challenges well above their standard level equivalent.

Alternately a cohort's master could donate XP but this might also lead to the cohort dumping that you don't want. Maybe a ratio. Without actually looking at the XP chart maybe 1 xp sacrificed by the master yields the cohort 1 xp per cohort level. This is applicable until the cohort reaches the exact amount of xp to put them at the level they would normally be.

 

[Corsair]

In 3.5e, PCs who went behind a level from others (duet to death or spending XPs for spells or creating items) he/she eventually catches up with others, because lower-level PC gets more XPs comparing to others. I think this was a really nice change from 3.0e.

But now, in 3.5e, cohorts never get "his share" of XPs but instead get the XP equal to (his level/master's level). That means, a cohort who lost a level or two start to get even fewer XPs and never catches up to the maximum level (PC level-2). I am afraid of that will give players reason to "replace" the cohort.

Are there any way to prevent this?

Prevent, no. By RAW, you're correct. The solution would be to have the leader ALSO lose a level, thus re-establishing the 2 level difference between them. Option two would be if the leader is a caster, he can craft and spend down his XP while the cohort catches up.

 

[irdeggman]

In 3.5e, PCs who went behind a level from others (duet to death or spending XPs for spells or creating items) he/she eventually catches up with others, because lower-level PC gets more XPs comparing to others. I think this was a really nice change from 3.0e.

But now, in 3.5e, cohorts never get "his share" of XPs but instead get the XP equal to (his level/master's level). That means, a cohort who lost a level or two start to get even fewer XPs and never catches up to the maximum level (PC level-2). I am afraid of that will give players reason to "replace" the cohort.

Are there any way to prevent this?

You can never spend xp that would result in lowering your level when creating magic items (that is a specific rule).

I am assuming you are talking about a PC losing levels and not one who is behind in levels. There is a huge difference in concept and application.

The cohort will always follow his "leader" in xp progression and will always be the same amount behind him/her because of this (as in a percentage of xp).

Now if the leader allowed his cohort to die (and eventually be raised - thus the level loss) then the leader should be penalized for his/her reckless leadership.

This also means that if the leader attempts to "replace" said cohort he/she suffers penalties due to his/her poor leadership when gaining a new cohort. (-2 on leadershp score per cohort that died)


If the leader died and was raised (thus lowering level) to the point that the cohort was now less than 2 levels lower in level (i.e., the same level or 1 less) then the cohort must leave the leader. In RPG terms this could be seen as the cohort having nothing more he can learn from the leader or that the leader is no longer "worthy" of the awe and respect that a cohort has. This does not mean the parting is bitter or that the cohort has to leave the party, the cohort can now be treated as an allied NPC but is no longer a cohort.

Just to ensure we are talking about the same xp award to a cohort.

A cohort does not receive xp equal to the leader's level. He receives xp equal to the cohort's level divided by the leader's level times the leader's xp award. (cohort level)/(leader's level) X (leader's xp award)

 

[Shin Okada]

I am assuming you are talking about a PC losing levels and not one who is behind in levels. There is a huge difference in concept and application.

In my understanding (or at least in my way of using that word in the first post), a PC "went behind in level" means "A PC went behind in levels relative to other PCs by any reason". Losing a level due to energy drain or death maybe one reason. Spending too much XP may another reason (that PC may not level-up at the same time as the other characters). Simply starting as a lower level character (some DMs like this style) can be another reason, too.

But anyway,

Now if the leader allowed his cohort to die (and eventually be raised - thus the level loss) then the leader should be penalized for his/her reckless leadership.

I tend to disagree with this. Of course, the leader of the cohort is most responsible to the condition of his cohort. But cohort is indeed a member of adventuring party and in my opinion, in an adventuring party, in most cases, someone's death is not that one's fault or not the particular PC's fault. That is the fault of entire adventuring party.

I think, that is also one of the reason why PC XP award rule changed in 3.5e from 3.0e's. Someone died should not be penalized much.

By the way,

If the leader died and was raised (thus lowering level) to the point that the cohort was now less than 2 levels lower in level (i.e., the same level or 1 less) then the cohort must leave the leader. In RPG terms this could be seen as the cohort having nothing more he can learn from the leader or that the leader is no longer "worthy" of the awe and respect that a cohort has. This does not mean the parting is bitter or that the cohort has to leave the party, the cohort can now be treated as an allied NPC but is no longer a cohort.

This is wrong by the RAW.

From DMG P.105

When the PC loses one or more levels; a cohort's level advancement could be stalled for quite some time until the PC regains his or her lost levels and gain enough additional XP to be eligible for a higher-level cohort (see the Leadership feat on the following page).

The cohort does not leave. Just his advancement is stalled.

Just to ensure we are talking about the same xp award to a cohort.

A cohort does not receive xp equal to the leader's level. He receives xp equal to the cohort's level divided by the leader's level times the leader's xp award. (cohort level)/(leader's level) X (leader's xp award)

Yes. That is what I wrote in the first post. When a PC went some levels behind other PCs, that PC gains more XP from the same encounter comparing to other PCs and thus catches up with them eventually. But once a cohort loses some levels, he/she never catches up.

 

[Jack Simth]

In 3.5e, PCs who went behind a level from others (duet to death or spending XPs for spells or creating items) he/she eventually catches up with others, because lower-level PC gets more XPs comparing to others. I think this was a really nice change from 3.0e.

But now, in 3.5e, cohorts never get "his share" of XPs but instead get the XP equal to (his level/master's level). That means, a cohort who lost a level or two start to get even fewer XPs and never catches up to the maximum level (PC level-2). I am afraid of that will give players reason to "replace" the cohort.

Are there any way to prevent this?

Headache-reducing house-rule:
On PC level up, advance Cohort to the highest level the PC qualifies for.
Any XP the Cohort spends at the PC's request is drained from the PC's stores, not the cohorts.
Any XP the Cohort spends at the DM's order comes out of the DM's box of handwavium.

 

[Shin Okada]

Headache-reducing house-rule:
On PC level up, advance Cohort to the highest level the PC qualifies for.
Any XP the Cohort spends at the PC's request is drained from the PC's stores, not the cohorts.
Any XP the Cohort spends at the DM's order comes out of the DM's box of handwavium.

Ah. That sounds simple enough and may work unless a DM just hand the character sheet to a player and let him use that NPC as a XP battery or something. And I have no will to let a player "use" one's cohort in such a way.

I may actually hand the character sheet to a player and let her control the maneuver of the cohort in combats. But I still treat the cohort as a NPC.

 

[irdeggman]

I tend to disagree with this. Of course, the leader of the cohort is most responsible to the condition of his cohort. But cohort is indeed a member of adventuring party and in my opinion, in an adventuring party, in most cases, someone's death is not that one's fault or not the particular PC's fault. That is the fault of entire adventuring party.

And that might be the crux of the issue here.

The cohort is considered part of the PC's package (like a summoned creature does not count towards xp awarded since it is part of the foe's package). Now it does talk about sometimes having a cohort follow a group instead of an individual - but that will cause a whole lot of corresponding issues, IMO. BY intent a cohort specifically follows an individual and has tremendous loyalty to that individual. That individual likewise has tremendous responsibility to that cohort. And regardless of whether or not the leader was specifically "responsible" for the death of the cohort - the character's reputation is still "tainted" since he is gaining a reputation for having those who follow him die. That is the essence of the leadership score - it is a reflection of "reputation" and "status".

This is wrong by the RAW.

From DMG P.105

The cohort does not leave. Just his advancement is stalled.

Possibly or possibly not - an interpretation issue, depending on how the DM wishes to run cohorts. The cohort can not gain xp if he is less than 2 levels apart from his leader - that part is absolutely and always true.

Nothing states that a cohort must be the highest level possible so that if a PC loses 2 levels he could still maintain the 2 level difference required. But this is subject to interpretation and I was attempting to provide a way of rationalizing (and discouraging) trading up cohorts.

Yes. That is what I wrote in the first post. When a PC went some levels behind other PCs, that PC gains more XP from the same encounter comparing to other PCs and thus catches up with them eventually. But once a cohort loses some levels, he/she never catches up.

Not true. The cohort will follow the same pattern. Note that his advancement requirement is based on his level (which is lower than a character of higher level). He gets less xp per level than he would have if higher level, but requires less to advance so it could balance out depending on the circumstance.

It is really misleading to say a PC will "catch up" to other characters if he is lower level. There will always be an xp difference - they may be the same level - but they will be at vastly different ends of that level. So one will "level up" quicker at one point or another.

 

[Shin Okada]

Not true. The cohort will follow the same pattern. Note that his advancement requirement is based on his level (which is lower than a character of higher level). He gets less xp per level than he would have if higher level, but requires less to advance so it could balance out depending on the circumstance.

That is no true. For example, a 10th-level character needs 10,000 xp to become a 11th-level character. And a 11th-level character needs 11,000 xp to level up. Current level by 1,000 XPs. This is the formula.

A cohort gets his level/leader's level by the XPs the leader gets. So, when a 12th-level master gets 12,000 XPs (enough to advance in to a 13th-level character) throughout a certain period, his 10th-level cohort gets 10,000 XPs during that same period, which is enough to push him up to the next (11th) level.

Now, if the said cohort was somehow at lower level, say, 8th, he only gets 8/12 of the XPs his leader gets. So, throughout the above period, he will earn only 8,000 XP. Just enough to push him up to a 9th-level character. This continues. Once the cohort become certain levels behind the leader, unless the leader somehow lose a level or two, the cohort never catches up. The difference in levels between the leader and the cohort never decreases.

It is really misleading to say a PC will "catch up" to other characters if he is lower level. There will always be an xp difference - they may be the same level - but they will be at vastly different ends of that level. So one will "level up" quicker at one point or another.

It really depends on the length of each session and XP awards of each sessions. About two months ago, a cleric PC in a party which I am DMing went about an entire level behind other PCs due to intensive creation of magic items. But after several combat-heavy sessions and one big final showdown session with several big battles, she actually ended up having more XP total than other PCs. That happens.

 

[mvincent]

Headache-reducing house-rule:
On PC level up, advance Cohort to the highest level the PC qualifies for.
Any XP the Cohort spends at the PC's request is drained from the PC's stores, not the cohorts.

Excellent. I agree completely.