Where's my HR manager? or "How Leadership nerfs Power Attack"

[The Souljourner]

Also, why, exactly, are you taking leadership? The GM is already, essentially, giving you the benefits of Leadership, which he is perfectly entitled to do.

Well, is he? He gave me the post, that doesn't mean the people under me will follow me like they would someone who had taken leadership. I know, it's something to discuss with the DM, but I think taking leadership would be a good indication the character is trying to focus on being a good leader, and the DM would be more likely to have even non-followers treat him better. It's like the difference between someone who merely treats his employees well, and someone whose employees would lay down their lives for him.

At least, that's how I'd treat it if I were the DM.

-Nate

 

[Amitiel]

One thing that always made no sense to me with leadership is how it treats followers experience

Followers don’t earn experience and thus don’t gain levels. However, when a character with Leadership attains a new level, the player consults the table above to determine if she has acquired more followers, some of which may be higher level than the existing followers. (You don’t consult the table to see if your cohort gains levels, however, because cohorts earn experience on their own.)

Why wouldn't they gain EXP? Even if you don't take them with you on adventures they are still doing something back on home ground.

Your situation is a perfect example, while your running around doing whatever they will be doing the day to day activities of running things. Why wouldn't they gain experience for it?

I personally tossed that rule out, it makes no sense, I agree they will earn less EXP, but to never change is just strange. That rule gone and replaced by say gaining 1/2 the cohorts EXP if they are with you for encounters, and say 35exp a month for staying at homebase. Possibly 50 if you have your own keep or town to run.

 

[Quartz]

Go to the Story Hour forum and read Aphonion Tales.

 

[Zaruthustran]

Well, is he? He gave me the post, that doesn't mean the people under me will follow me like they would someone who had taken leadership. I know, it's something to discuss with the DM, but I think taking leadership would be a good indication the character is trying to focus on being a good leader, and the DM would be more likely to have even non-followers treat him better. It's like the difference between someone who merely treats his employees well, and someone whose employees would lay down their lives for him.

At least, that's how I'd treat it if I were the DM.

-Nate

That's a good idea, but you should definitely talk things over directly with the DM. Don't just take the feat and assume the DM will somehow divine your intentions.

I think it'd be fair that, in addition to the printed benefits of Leadership, you get +2 circumstance bonus when dealing with people under your command. Not just your own followers from the feat, but anyone who reports to you. Also, perhaps those in your organization (again, not just the feat-granted Followers) should get a +2 bonus to resist being manipulated against you.

Both minor benefits are reasonable, and within the guidelines for DM-granted circumstance bonuses.

-z

 

[RodneyThompson]

You could also ask about using the Affiliation rules from PHBII to model your City Guards (and the other PC's various groups). Then you can use Violence Checks to manage the big abstract level and have "boss fights" with your PC and his cohort and a few rank-n-file.

I think this is a really great solution. It would abstract things like minor skirmishes and quibbles, plus things like espionage checks (for turning your people against you) and the like could let you focus on adventures and let the affiliation rules take care of te rest. In fact, I think one could make the argument that this is exactly the kind of situation the Affiliation rules are made for, not the random little buffs you get from a higher organization score.

 

[Wycen]

One thing that always made no sense to me with leadership is how it treats followers experience


Why wouldn't they gain EXP? Even if you don't take them with you on adventures they are still doing something back on home ground.

Your situation is a perfect example, while your running around doing whatever they will be doing the day to day activities of running things. Why wouldn't they gain experience for it?

I personally tossed that rule out, it makes no sense, I agree they will earn less EXP, but to never change is just strange. That rule gone and replaced by say gaining 1/2 the cohorts EXP if they are with you for encounters, and say 35exp a month for staying at homebase. Possibly 50 if you have your own keep or town to run.

I'm currently playing a Noble, from Rodney's Noble' Handbook from Green Ronin. My character will get Leadership as a bonus feat in the next few levels, but at 3rd level he gained a "retinue". Basically strip out the cohort part of leadership and you have a retinue, though you can change its composition at each new level.

Here is how I plan to deal with followers not "gaining levels". As my character's Leadership score increases, (i.e. he gains levels and his CHA goes up), I'll calculate the number of followers and their levels. Instead of gaining new higher level people, I'll claim the older, loyal followers gain those levels. In the end it is the same effect, but this way you don't have to worry about how much experience they gain while you are in the dungeon, (unless you take them with you and that would be a different story).

In fact I'm considering if maybe the only member of my retinue I statted out, a dwarven adept, (we needed someone who could carry a wand of Cure Light wounds, as both cleric players couldn't make the session) will get the promotion to cohort.

 

[Ry]

Marshal for the cohort - make sure he gets good INT for skill selection, since he's definitely not your front-line man.

That's a good idea, but you should definitely talk things over directly with the DM. Don't just take the feat and assume the DM will somehow divine your intentions.

So true... soooo true...

 

[airwalkrr]

My wizard in a Savage Tide campaign has a whole slew of hirelings who have become very loyal to him, even though one has died. I make certain to pay them well (double the recommended amount from the DMG) and grant them bonuses whenever we face lethal situations. I currently have eight hirelings, one lackey to do odd jobs, two porters to carry stuff and drive a mule cart, four mercenaries to guard base camp and prisoners, and a mercenary leader to command them. I ensure their loyalty basically by making sure their jobs are cushy. There has been the occassional dangerous situation, but I expect them to be utilitarian, not throw themselves in front of a fire-breathing dragon.

 

[Storyteller01]

One thing that always made no sense to me with leadership is how it treats followers experience



Why wouldn't they gain EXP? Even if you don't take them with you on adventures they are still doing something back on home ground.

Your situation is a perfect example, while your running around doing whatever they will be doing the day to day activities of running things. Why wouldn't they gain experience for it?

I personally tossed that rule out, it makes no sense, I agree they will earn less EXP, but to never change is just strange. That rule gone and replaced by say gaining 1/2 the cohorts EXP if they are with you for encounters, and say 35exp a month for staying at homebase. Possibly 50 if you have your own keep or town to run.

I kept the rule (a logistical nightmare otherwise), but changed the fluff. As you gain higher level followers, some of your lower level followers can get promoted. They've been with you long enough to learn more tricks of their trade. New followers come and fill in the gaps left when the older one advanced.