The problem with Cohorts !!

[Hackenslash]

Hello All,

I am a DM of my own campaign and a player in a friends campaign and I seem to be confused over the importance and to what degree of involvement a player characters Cohort should be in a campaign. My own campaign does not have a cohort yet, but the Cleric PC is thinking of taking the Leadership Feat to get a cohort. Now I do have a problem with the rules on this as I feel that to allow a Cohort to be the same level and not higher is not restricting enough as it basically places an equally powerfull character in the control of a PC and thus causes the other PC's to feel a little left out and like they are missing something. Also from my own experience with playing in a campaign that does have a cohort, the player in question is a Cleric/ Prestige Scion sub class form the Ultimate Prestige Classes Book, and has a Minotaur Cohort, wait for it...Cleric/Holy Liberator...of the same total levels as his own class. Now that in itself may not seem to be an issue in a high level campaign but it does provoke questions as to whether the PC is just taking advantage of the rules so that he can be in both sets of Dialogues/Discussions and take part in multi action scenarios, and always have a say in every scenario to the annoyance of other players with only one class who sometimes don't get a word in edgeways. However I am digressing, the main point of this thread is to see what you all think of the Rules for Cohorts in the DnD Game and whether you think that they are Fair and more importantly, should they be as powerfull as the PC that controls them. I personally think that a Cohort should take a back seat, supportave role and not have a say in party decisions as they are for all intensive purposes an extension of the PC controlling them. Also, I think that the Cohort should only be 2-3 levels below the main PC. The DMG and Leadership Feat descriptions are not too clear on this and allow too much scope for players to over estimate the importance of their Cohorts. So I would appreciate suggestions and advice primarily for my own campaign as I can not influence, nor would I be rude enough, to try and change my friends campaign rules, as he seems to be ok with high level cohorts running around getting their own missions and quests and having equal say in party decisions. Cheers and hope to hear from you all soon.

 

[Fenes 2]

IMC I run "cohorts" as NPCs. The player has no more control over them as over otzher NPCs. The leadership feat doesnot exist IMC - a PC acquires all his or her followers and cohorts through deeds and reputation. The player gets some input concerning teh class/level of the "cohort", but that it is.

 

[Spatzimaus]

Leadership is probably the toughest Feat to handle well, which is why it's in the DMG instead of the PHB.

Short answer: it looks like your friend never read the Cohort section on p. 147-148 of the DMG. While the last paragraph allows for cohorts to be treated as full characters, this isn't the default and it clearly warns against the problems this'll cause.

Long answer:
Originally posted by Hackenslash
I feel that to allow a Cohort to be the same level... basically places an equally powerfull character in the control of a PC

Well, first of all, by the book the cohort has to be LOWER in level, the Feat text is "he can't recruit a cohort of his level or higher", so if he's, say, level 15, his cohort can be at most level 14. And that'd require a Leadership score of 20, so he'd need a high CHA (20 or higher). Most players who use CHA as a dump stat won't get one that high. The typical player would end up with a cohort 3-4 levels below them.

the player in question is a Cleric/ Prestige Scion sub class form the Ultimate Prestige Classes Book, and has a Minotaur Cohort, wait for it...Cleric/Holy Liberator...of the same total levels as his own class.

By "total levels", you're including the ECL of the Minotaur, right? Because Minotaurs are ECL +8 (according to the DMG, anyway, other results may vary), so if he's a level 15 Cleric, his Minotaur cohort couldn't have more than 6 total class levels. That'd probably keep him from entering a PrC easily.

That's why there's that "Special Cohort" table. By default, your cohort is just an ordinary ECL+0 race. This isn't a sneaky way to get around the ECL rules.

Now that in itself may not seem to be an issue in a high level campaign but it does provoke questions as to whether the PC is just taking advantage of the rules so that he can be in both sets of Dialogues/Discussions and take part in multi action scenarios, and always have a say in every scenario to the annoyance of other players with only one class who sometimes don't get a word in edgeways.

That sort of dynamic is up to the DM to handle, but remember that the cohort is basically a follower, NOT an equal member of the party. He's there to protect and assist the PC.

Read the Cohort description on page 147 in the DMG. It definitely doesn't support the sort of system you're talking about.

By the book (the p. 147 thing), the Cohort is simply an NPC that follows the player around and helps him. The DM controls him in most character-based discussions (with suggestions from the player), although most DMs I've seen let the player decide his combat actions. He only gets a half-share of the XP and loot.

Cohorts make great characters for visiting players to play, and when you retire your main character you have a ready-made character to jump to. They're not supposed to be a replacement for the original character.

However I am digressing, the main point of this thread is to see what you all think of the Rules for Cohorts in the DnD Game and whether you think that they are Fair and more importantly, should they be as powerfull as the PC that controls them.

They're okay. Not great, just okay. And no, they shouldn't be as powerful as the PC that controls them, which is why the rules as written don't allow them to be equal level.

nor would I be rude enough, to try and change my friends campaign rules, as he seems to be ok with high level cohorts running around getting their own missions and quests and having equal say in party decisions. Cheers and hope to hear from you all soon.

If he's running a campaign where cohorts are the equals in every way of the characters who selected them, then he's really using a house rule and there's no reason not to take the Feat. Effectively, everyone will be playing 2 characters. Now, that can be a lot of fun, too (especially in small parties of 2-4 players), but it's only "balanced" if all of the players are doing it.

*********

Now, IMC we totally redesigned the Feat to follow a point-based system, so it's been a little while since I used the rules as written.

The character I currently play (a Psychic Warrior) was the cohort of my previous character (a Psion) under the old Leadership feat, so keeping that Feat available can be a very good thing IMO.

 

[Hackenslash]

Thanks for the Clarification !!

Thanks for the quick reply.

I have taken into account the suggestions you have stated in your post and feel that they are indeed the way to go forward with cohorts but I am still not happy with the whole Leadership feat and have probably mis-read the rules. I'm at work at the moment so I don't have my books. I will re-read the rules and make a final decision as to how I am going to incorporate the Cohort into my own campaign. As for the Game that I play in, guess what next feat I will be taking as my Character does have a high CHA = 16. Yep, you guessed it, that Half-Ogre thug of a Barbarian will gladly take up arms with my Grey Elf Wizard. And I may even slap a Frenzied Berzerker Prestige class on him as well.
Thanks again for your advice....Cheers !!!

 

[mmu1]

I think cohorts are purely optional (which is why they're in the DMG) and frankly, it really gets on my nerves when players assume they should be able to pick oen up like it was Weapon Focus.

It's a feat that gives a character with a decent CHA score a second PC a couple levels lower, which is a huge benefit, and should only be allowed if you feel it fits the flavor and pace of the campaign, and isn't going to create unnecessary logistical difficulties.

 

[Sir Whiskers]

In my current campaign, we just had a character select leadership as a feat. This is how we've handled it so far:

1) The player was not allowed to create the cohort. I created an npc, based on the character's background, and had her show up in an adventure. The cohort is (based on the chart in the DMG) one level below the character.

2) Since I wanted to test the mystic theurge rules, the cohort is a Cle3/Wiz3/MT1. If we find the MT is unbalanced, it's easier to replace/rework a cohort than a pc. Also, since the party has no cleric, this allows them to have a modicum of healing without forcing a player to run a cleric.

3) In most cases, the player runs the cohort during encounters (basically the player has two characters). If I disagree with any action, I can take over the cohort temporarily.

4) If the pc ever decides to let her cohort go, then she can get another - after a suitable amount of time, when it fits the campaign. The details will depend on how it's roleplayed by the player. I can see situations where it fits the story for the current cohort to leave, and I wouldn't punish the pc for this.

The only problem I see so far is that the player now takes up twice as much time in combat as other players. For this reason, I'm encouraging creating standard strategies for the cohort, so her actions will take little time from the other players.

 

[Barcode]

Two of my players have taken cohorts in my game, and it was generally pretty fun. The downside is that the party got really too big (6 PC's and 2 cohorts, plus an occasional plot-driven NPC or two tagging along). For GM's who are comfortable running large parties, I don't see where it would be a problem.

I create the cohort character, but I do allow the player to give me a wish list, and I do my best to accomodate them. One player requested something specific, and I gave him what he asked for (A Devoted Defender - the PC is a bard with a lot of false bravado and needed someone big and dumb to hide behind and boss around). However, I built some secret plot hooks into the character's background.

During play, I roleplay the cohorts as NPC's to give them personality, but the player decides his actions and runs them in combat. I do reserve the right to overrule the player's directives if I feel he or she is having the cohort do something distinctly out of character. The interaction is usually done in character, and has provided some of the most entertaining exchanges in the game.

So, I am fine with the cohort rules. I think they add to the game, if done properly. The biggest drawback is that too many cohorts can grow the party to an unmanageable size.

Also, Hackenslash, you really need to reread the rules on Leadership. The cohorts are always lower level, and they advance at half the rate of the PC's, so they get further back as time goes on. Neither of my players have dismissed his cohort yet to get a higher level one, but I can see that as a potential problem not unlike the Animal Companion.

Fortunately, the characters keep on dying and losing levels, so the cohorts have not fallen that far behind as yet.

 

[Demon Knight]

I've always thought of Cohorts as sort of lieutenants to generals. They follow their "lord" and do as he/she commands. When the PC goes on an adventure, the Cohort is simply a guard, and never really gets a vote in the party's decisions.

And don't forget the followers associated with the Leadership feat. Most DMs dismiss them, because it's too much paperwork. But having a hundred peasants follow you into a dragon's lair can get quite messy...

 

[LokiDR]

Leadership is entirely optional. In my game, every time some one brings it up, I mention that I am not sure and it would be lots of work. That prevents people from powergame via leadership.

Also, the cohort is a character, so it follows the character creation rules. If it is a race that has an ECL modifier, that counts against the total level of the cohort, which can never be higher than the leading character.

The best use of the cohort is be a background character. Let the PC control it, but make sure they understand the cohort is just a follower and that metagaming is not tolerated.

When I played a character who had a cohort, the cohort was introduced as a chalange to my cleric, to see who was stronger. The half dragon paladin wanted to see who was stronger. She said that if she lost she would follow me untill she was stronger and would take a vow of silence (so I didn't have to talk to myself). It worked out well, because the cohort fought for the party, but wasn't a decision maker.

Just some thoughts.

 

[Lord Vangarel]

Ok, thought I'd add my two cents into this one, seem as I am the DM in question.

Hackenslash isn't quite right, the cohort is a lower level than the primary character and also gains XP at a reduced rate, approximately half of the primary character. What I tend to do is award the XP to the two characters separately so the primary character earns XP and the cohort earns XP. The player wants to play his primary character more, hopefully, and so that advances faster. What I would also add is, as a group, we decided +8 was too high for a Minotaur and reduced this figure so the character has more class levels than the standard rules.

As regarding the levels, the cohort is a lower level but the player makes sure he knows the rules inside out and has maxed out his primary character to enable the best possible cohort.

Ok, so what effect is it having on the game?

Combat: Can take longer as the player gets double the combat options. Has added extra beef to an already strong party, please refer to Hackenslash's character over in the Rogues Gallery for a slighty above average party member. Also bear in mind the player in question knows the rules better than any other player and creates his characters appropriately.

Roleplaying: I tend to let the player roleplay the cohort. As I said above the XP doesn't combine but the player can see more playing time. The player concerned is one of the stronger roleplayers in the group though so he'd probably see a fair amount of talking time anyway.

What solutions could I use to prevent future problems?

I could create the cohorts. This would stop a player using it as an extra ability to powergame.

I could roleplay the cohorts. This would stop any additional time being taken by a player with a cohort reducing other players time.


As the DM I'm trying to walk a fine line between seeing the feat as a powergame facility and letting players run with it to see what happens. I would suggest that if it goes in the current direction then the rules my have to be revised with one or both of the above suggestions.