The problem with Cohorts !!

[Luis Figoo]

Actually my cohort (Sorc/MotAO) is plenty more powerful than i am even though he's 1 level below me.

Maybe its because i'm a awakened dog Temple Raider of Olidammara

 

[Li Shenron]

It happened to me to DM some sessions with few players (1-3) with low level PCs and I was not afraid of letting them side with one or two NPCs, which of course I ran by myself. To acquire the support of those NPCs required only some RP (even if some Diplomacy rolls were involved), and obviously the DM's will to accept such a situation. Note also that those NPCs in my games are usually the same level as PCs (or higher, in the case there is only 1 friendly NPC).

Since I did that from the start, a player of mine takes Leadership only if he wants a constant and faithful support from an NPC (we have never used "followers" yet); that is, an NPC who doesn't go away suddenly because of his own reasons. Somehow it is accepted for LShip sense to be that the character has enough Charisma AND a special talent ("Leadership") that grants him the ability to keep a SINGLE cohort to follow him*. It is still possible that the cohort leaves if mistreated, but usually it doesn't happen.

Anyway, cohorts must be of lower level to be "leadershipped". In any case, I prefer to run the cohort by myself.

*I think there is a rule to take LShip more times and have more cohorts

 

[DiFier]

A little back ground. I am in a 2 person campaign. My charachter is a fighter/wizard/spellsword and The other charachter (Dru) is a fighter/Rogue/wizard slayer. we started out as members of the Freeport city watch. At 6th level we took the leadership feat and got a promotion on the force, heading up the SCU Special Crimes Unit. The DM then created 5 other watchmen who were the rest of the unit. they were NPC cohorts/followers who answered to us but we not totally loyal to us. (not that they we disloyal) after Dru left the watch to joint with her father (the head of a major crime organization) Dru played my cohort one of the members of the SCU and I created a member's of the nialo organization as her bodyguard/cohort. then when we were sold into slavery and shipwrecked Dru's created her cohort. my cohort was created by the DM. Dru's was a elven Bard mine was a holy warrior (?) sorta a chaotic paladin. I think that they were both 3 or 4 levels below our levels tho Dru could of had a more powerful one (higher charisma score) then we had a cleric and the bard. When we start playing again (after 3.5 comes out) we will be seperated for a while so we each created a cohort for the other's charachter. and i will be playing Dru's chort and She will be playing mine.

I think that Cohorts are essential for campaigns with low number in the party. Our DM suggested that we both take leadership. Having bards and clerics as Cohorts was extremely useful. Since neither of us had access to divine magic. There were many time when we were really hurting and they were really useful. they sucked in battle and rarely hit anything. but we would have been so hurting with out them.

For us the Dm roleplays them and We sometimes deciede their combat actions. sometimes it is a group effort.

 

[Hackenslash]

Cohorts...Grrrr !!!!

Hello Everyone !

Well it looks like I need to freshen up on the DMG Cohort rules. Sorry !!! It was not my intention to criticize my DM "Lord Vangarel" on how he runs his Cohorts in his campaign. I only posted this Thread to get other points of view and see if I could incorporate Cohorts in a different way in my own campaign. Now, I must admit to still being reluctant to even bother with Cohorts in my campaign but I am pleased with the response from all of you out there and have certainly cleared up the standard rules and how they could be incorporated into a campaign. I think I have been a little frustrated with the way Cohorts have been portrayed to me in the game that I play in, as it's the first time I have been exposed to them in game time. This may be due to my own narrow mindedness or maybe even a lack of imagination to explore other possibilities for "second PC's" but I just don't feel comfortable with PC's having that much power over, and with, a second PC and "possibly" taking away play from other players. Oh well I will probably die a horrid death at the hands of my disgruntled DM...hehehehe !!! But never mind I can always play another players Cohort !!! Hahahahaha !!!! Peace All

 

[rtricher]

Myself I got to play a character with a cohort in a game, I had lots of fun with it. But I think there were good reasons for my getting it.

1. The DM believed that I could handle the extra load, since most of us were beginners, I did happen to catch on rather quickly so I wasn't hogging major amounts of time when decideing what was happening.

2. The cohort had no say what so ever as to what was happening.

Following those guidelines I think things went well..

However, I am starting a game of my own, but I will not allow a PC to take Leadership.. It is a very powerful feat, one that only very skilled players should be allowed to have because if the player with the cohort is sluggish when it comes to what's going on in the game example: easily distracted or takes forever deciding what to do; then other players won't be happy..

 

[Hypersmurf]

I've found subsidiary personalities - in various forms - to be nice in PbEMs, as it allows a player to illustrate aspects of his PC's personality in dialogues that take up far less "real time" than carrying out an extended conversation with another PC or an NPC.

I've played a cleric with an intelligent talking greataxe, a druid with a signing chimpanzee animal companion, a paladin with a dragon mount/cohort, a two-headed barbarian... and I found that the banter/relationships between the two personalities allowed me to develop a "feel" for the characters far more easily than in games where I didn't have that at my disposal.

The only one of those that was a significant "powerup" was the dragon. A chimpanzee is a fun flavour touch, but it doesn't have the combat power of a dire wolf or a bear. An intelligent greataxe is interesting, but ultimately makes little difference to the outcome of an adventure. But I've had fun with all of them.

-Hyp.

 

[Spatzimaus]

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.

Both of these are good ideas, although you don't need to be so absolute on it. For the creation of the cohort, you can work with the player to pick something appropriate. If he's affiliated with a church, his cohort probably should also (i.e., the Cleric gets a Paladin bodyguard or vice versa). If he's a spellcaster of one type of magic, his cohort could the other class that uses the same type of magic. And so on. In my case, my Aristocrat/Psion (yes, I took an NPC class level) wanted an apprentice, so the DM and I designed a Psychic Warrior to be his student. We tweaked her stats as we went along, retroactively changing out old levels if it made more sense for the character.

As for roleplaying the cohort, it's still important to let the player handle some of the day-to-day stuff, like picking which spells to memorize, or running the cohort in combat. If the cohort's the "strong 'n stupid" type it's not a big deal, but for casters it's really important for the character to not be played by someone who knows all the secrets of the encounter.

Actually, back in high school I was in a group that had a great solution. There were almost a dozen players, which got unmanageable at times, so one guy (who couldn't make it every week and so didn't want to make a normal character) volunteered to be NPC Guy. He was sort of a DM's Assistant who roleplayed all the minor characters.

Anyone couldn't make it that week? NPC Guy ran their characters for them.
Cohorts, Followers, Familiars, Mounts? Same. (We were all level 12 or so, so there were a lot of these). If the DM had an encounter where he needed a second personality, he'd hand the stats of some of the "thug" bad guys to NPC Guy (but not the masterminds who actually had to know what was going on.)

 

[Hypersmurf]

In my case, my Aristocrat/Psion (yes, I took an NPC class level) wanted an apprentice, so the DM and I designed a Psychic Warrior to be his student.

Ooh... did you get to call her "my young apprentice" in an evil voice?

I wanted to play an Aristocrat/Psychic Warrior/Paladin once... but I couldn't convince my DM that NPC class levels shouldn't contribute to multiclass penalties, so I dropped the idea

-Hyp.

 

[Azul]

Ugh, the leadership feat... reminds me too much of the old 1st edition "summon the barbarian horde" problem.

In our campaign, we tend to be pretty restrictive on allowing the leadership feat. First, it has to fit the character's current evolution. And antisocial rogue will not be allowed leadership, no matter what his level. The rogue who is actively trying to organize a gang or thieves' guild probably will.

We use cohorts more as senechals than sidekicks. We have a high player count and no one in our group is interested in adding even more characters into the party unless absolutely necessary. Instead, player cohorts "hold the fort" and act as a proxy for a character with leadership, running whatever organization/holdings the character has.

In one campaign, one player was a pirate, so her cohort was her first mate and her followers were her crew. When we went ashore to adventure, the cohort would take command of the ship and we knew it was in good hands.

In that same campaign, the cleric eventually built a small temple and took leadership. His cohort was the resident high priest at the temple he founded and the followers were the other clergy and staff.

Use in this way, the leadership feat provides the player with a trustworthy cluster of NPCs which he can entrust non-portable holdings to, rather than a small military unit that follows him everywhere.

 

[Durifern]

I would deal with it the exact same way as Azul.
My idea of a Cohorts is that of a trusted helper, a helper who´s more powerful than a commoner but with no more than one fourth, one third of the levels than the character. So I´d give the player more cohorts.
A cohort would never be part of the adventurers´ party but because of the level limit that wouldn´t make so much sense either.
Another idea for cohorts for a fighter pc: they could be some kind of strike force, specially equipped by the player. I always wanted to do that with my Fighter/ Paladin but we stopped that campaign