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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Lord Pendragon" data-source="post: 2425295" data-attributes="member: 707">Hiya!  Can't wait to get back to the table myself. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />A paladin technically can't have a bard cohort.  A paladin's cohort must be Lawful-Good, and of course a bard needs to be Chaotic.  But more than that, I'm not sure I'm interested in a bard.  They're too fragile for our game.  Light armor, a d6 hit die, and two levels below the rest of the party?  If I do pick up a cohort, I'm going to have a hard enough time keeping a cleric or wizard alive, let alone a bard. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />  On top of that, I just don't see a bard as providing as much benefit as a cleric or wizard.Yeah.  Suffice it to say that they're great guys, just not really tactically-minded.  So I as a player don't plan on trying to control their choices as players, or their actions as PCs (within reason), but I do think the party is lacking as a result of it.  So I'm thinking a cohort may be a good way to have my cake and eat it too, basically.One can hope. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />Yes.  I've talked with some of the other players out of game, and this is my biggest worry.  The game has already been fairly unforgiving.  But we're reaching the mid- to high-levels, where a serious mistake inevitably results in serious disaster.  And only one-third of our spellpower (the druid) is tactically sound.You mean you haven't been practicing the RBDM School up to this point?  Now I'm really worried. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />In response to some of the ideas we've had so far:* I've seen a Favored Soul in action (there's one in the game I DM,) but I don't think this is a solution to our particular problem.  The thing is, the cleric is just generally incompetent.  Healing is one of the few positive contributions he makes.  If that duty were removed from him, he'd most likely become wholly useless, instead of the "useless, but heals occasionally" we have now.With a cleric cohort, I can choose a tactically potent spell load, then supplement his spotty healing as needed, while also buffing the rest of the party and providing a few utility spells such as Dispel Magic and the various divinations.I've played a bard, and am well-acquainted with their usefulness.  If we had a well-played cleric and wizard, I'd seriously consider a bard cohort.  But the bard can't provide what our party lacks.  Divination, buffing, and potent wizardry.Like our DM nyrfherdr mentioned, the player relationships are complicated, but saying the player doesn't (quite) get playing a wizard is a fair claim.  However, that doesn't really mean anything.  I'm not trying to change the players.  I don't want to, and I don't think I have a right to.  I offer both of them advice when they ask, and sometimes make a friendly suggestion.  But I am very careful not to try and play their characters for them.  They don't deserve that.That's actually the point of this thread.  I'm considering picking up a cohort to shore up a tactical weakness without trying to "train" the players in question.  It's a game, I don't plan to berate their playing, or make them feel like they are playing the "wrong" way.  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />Hrm.  Given the input so far, I am leaning towards a cleric of some kind.  It may be that I can help our wizard pick up a few vital spells in the future.  Meanwhile, a cleric cohort--possibly with the magic domain--could help shore up the tactical weaknesses of the party.  Also, if I were to design an archer-cleric, it would help to differentiate the cohort from the party's main cleric, who is built with an eye toward melee (and prevent the cohort from competing with the cleric.)  We have a ranger in the party too, but the ranger is so lethal that there's no way an archer cohort could compete with him--no worries there. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f61b.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":p" title="Stick out tongue    :p"  data-smilie="7"data-shortname=":p" /></blockquote>

Verification