Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="(contact)" data-source="post: 363741" data-attributes="member: 41">I love the leadership feat, and allow it in my game.Yes, I have to re-think my encounters, and do extra work . . . and?  I'm the DM!IMC, I allow the player to determine that they want to take followers, but I create and level the NPC.  I generally allow the player to run the cohort in combat, subject to my DMs fiat to overrule decisions based on personality.What's the problem again?I let my players determine what kind of game they want to play in.  If they all wanted to run a more tactical fantasy skirmish type of D&D, fine with me.  We'd have a good time regardless.Now, my players being who they are, we haven't had any drop off in roleplay, and we've had followers and cohorts since day one.  You can see how this has worked in <a href="http://enworld.cyberstreet.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=121" target="_blank">Liberation of Tenh</a> campaign.  We have had some beautiful role-playing moments with our cohorts.D&D has concrete examples of what characters can and cannot do.  Some groups think it's just great to role-play scenes like a magnetic fighter recruiting a gang of toughs and goons to stage a daring raid, while other groups would fall asleep listening to Carl impersonate Mel Gibson from Braveheart.I think spending a feat to gain a benefit like followers and cohorts is a great game mechanic, and would never consider letting that ability pass to a player who didn't have to trade some other point of character development for it.  Nor would I ever consider leaving it out of the options because it forced me to stretch what I'm doing behind the screen.</blockquote>

Verification