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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Lily Inverse" data-source="post: 269074" data-attributes="member: 4594">Jerid. . . I would suppose this is my point.  Once you do this, many options for a "normal" adventuring party simply no longer exist, and in their place different options appear.  If you're going to insist on dragging an army everywhere you go, there are simply things that you can no longer do.  This is not necessairly a bad thing, but by necessity it limits the playing styles you can utilize.  By making it a requirement for a certain prestiege class, you add a flavor to that class of a leader, commanding his troops from behind the front lines, and only going out to do battle against the leader of the opposition.  I would argue this is counter to the image of the Paladin as the lone hero, striving against all odds with only a few trusted companions at his side.Moreover, followers would need to be chosen very carefully for any extended trek.  25 fighters and three Paladin hopefuls simply isn't going to cut it.  A few will probably have to be Rogues or Experts, several Rangers or Barbarians will be needed (and Barbarians aren't allowed for Paladins unless they're Ex-Barbarians) to keep the group well-fed, and of course a priest or two is going to be absolutely necessary.What happens if your reputation doesn't attract all of the right kinds of professions?  You're going to need to hire out, but that takes money.  You need equipment and horses to carry it all, and more money is needed for that.  Who pays for all this?  If Paladins are giving away their pocket money (And I dont' have any indication that they are or are not in SoaPM's campaign), then it can't be the hero.  The Church almost certainly isn't going to support this expensive little endeavor.  And what happens when the horses and wagons are brought up against terrain they can't cross?  I could go on, but I'm sure these are all concerns you've thought of (and more!), Jerid, and they can certainly make an interesting source for a campaign all by themselves.  But these are hardly things that six adventurers sitting around the table in the dark corner of the tavern would be pondering.Is Leadership a bad feat, or underpowered?  No, unless the DM wishes it to be.  However, it is one that requires careful consideration before it's allowed into the campaign.  By its very nature it dictates certain campaign styles will be used over others, the very reason that it is in the DMG and not the PHB.  This is hardly irrelevant when discussing a PrC intended for PCs with Leadership as a requirement, as SoaPM would have one believe.  It can not just be "thrown in" and expected to not change the way time is spent in the game.  Maybe he's thought of this, maybe he hasn't, but he indicates that he hasn't actually put any thought into this at all, which is why I belabor the point.</blockquote>

Verification