Game Discussion

So, I'll say my piece on cohorts, though with the disclaimer that I am not exactly without personal interest in the matter.

Generally, I am not a fan on special restrictions to what a cohort can and can't do. That is, I do believe that a cohort/PC team should be allowed to do what a PC/PC team would be allowed to do. Case study: Calling first upon X:
If Yoren/Walton can roll status and their cohort follow up with persuasion, then this needs to be an option available for two PC's to collaborate on. If a PC is allowed to assist another PC, then so should a cohort be allowed to. A side discussion being that I sort of view the calling upon X as an event where each participant must make all rolls separately of each other (with special provisions for the AH and awareness rolls), perhaps with allowance made for foregoing one's roll to assist another. For that particular event, two characters with a good shot of making the status and persuasion/deception TN's are better served rolling separately, while those who has rank 2 could still can contribute through assistance.

I can, however, see the need for a measure of restraint concerning cohorts and their use, it has vastly greater potential than almost any other benefit available, I do not think this should bar them from taking part in events, and generally assist their PC's in various endeavors, simply because that's just feels like an annoying restriction. And I also strongly believe that a cohort is a responsibility that if handled properly, makes the player earn whatever edge in events this might give him. I will note, however, that if looking at events alone, there's other benefits that generally have been more useful (famous springs to mind).

On the flip side, I also believe that if not handled properly, that responsibility is not for you. A cohort, in my mind, needs to be a separate character, with it's own motivations and personality quirks, not an extension of your PC, but neither someone that steals the show from him (or any other PC for that matter, which is perhaps even more important). If he does that, then you ought to consider who's supposed to be the cohort. And all of this, the burden is on you to show IMO, or else it very quickly becomes nothing more than a benefit that is so much stronger than the others available that it should be banned. Basically, you want a cohort, then you better be able to make the part where it may be much stronger than a regular benefit mostly be a side-effect of what makes the cohort an awesome addition to the story. Ellie is almost at the point where Ben should be the cohort because she's more fun to read about....and yet, there is no doubt that Ben is the PC and Ellie the supporting character. That is kinda the gold standard to aim for, and I hope I managed to do it with Raff.

On a sidenote, the biggest benefit of Raff has never been events or strengthening Theo's dice rolls (and generally the min/maxers are still better). It's essentially that the range of options available to carry out Theo's schemes has been broadened. That's my justification for having him around.

It's rather sketchy to come up with specific restrictions and demands on cohorts, but the one definite line I would draw would be that the PC should be the leading character in the social sphere, the PC does the intrigues, the PC does the interactions with others, at least as a general rule. The cohort can tag along and help, sure. And depending on the nature of the cohort, he may well veer off to do the sort of interactions the PC won't do, or cover ground if those eight time slots you can be at during one day should be twelve. But if the cohort is the primary social hitter, who's the main character and who's the sidekick? And I would have the general expectation that the cohort gets enough screentime to show off his personality, though not at the expense of showing of the personality of the PC. Basically requiring extra roleplay effort.

Hence why I can't get a cohort, because it would have to be a social bee, that my character is not.

I debated making Rudolph a cohort but eventually decided against it. I do not think I could keep my RP close different enough to justify it. Although iido think that having a seedy character using his own ends to accomplish some of the Septon's objectives could be fun

Although iido think that having a seedy character using his own ends to accomplish some of the Septon's objectives could be fun

That thinking is why I considered a cohort as well during offseason 01, but in the end I was not sure I could make him interesting enough to make it work.

IMO, Cohorts are secondary characters at best. Treating them like PCs gives the player a substantial unfair advantage over players who do not have a Cohort. It would mean that the player with a Cohort is effectively playing two characters.

Cohort already has substantial advantages. They give a +2 to Defence in Combat and Intrigues when present. They can operate independently in certain situations, and they are unswerving loyal, which means they will never backstab the PC (and will try not to act against the PCs interests). They can also gain experience.

I think that is more than enough without elevating them to the level of a PC. Even as written, the Cohort advantage is stronger than most if not all the other advantages in the game.

Athelstan wrote:Hence why I can't get a cohort, because it would have to be a social bee, that my character is not.

That depends on what the social bee does. If it uses such abilities to do sneaky skullduggery or wander off to do things Athelstan wouldn't in the first place, I don't necessarily see the problem.

Theomore Tullison wrote:

Athelstan wrote:Hence why I can't get a cohort, because it would have to be a social bee, that my character is not.

That depends on what the social bee does. If it uses such abilities to do sneaky skullduggery or wander off to do things Athelstan wouldn't in the first place, I don't necessarily see the problem.

Well said. Cohorts that add to the game's plot are welcome. In story 1, Benedict's Ellie had several solo threads and helped show a different side to several PCs. Raff was an entertaining plot driver. The game would have been poorer for either's absence.

Cohorts that are just social beat sticks to cover for a combatant or vice versa are less welcome.

Nathaniel's points on Cohort's strength are well-made - it has already been powered down and only some people are capable of playing two characters well.

I wouldn't necessarily see it as a problem for a schemer to have a bodyguard cohort. The thing to watch out for there is that since such a cohort is less likely to engage into anything else, he might be specialized enough to possibly steal the glory of other PC's, but that is avoidable.

On the other hand, if he is, his intrigue stats might be shoddy enough that he could potentially be knocked out in the first round of intrigue. Cohorts are likely to have achilles heels, might be they won't willingly betray their PC, that doesn't mean they can't be tricked into doing stuff they ordinarily wouldn't same as any other character...

Theomore Tullison wrote:I wouldn't necessarily see it as a problem for a schemer to have a bodyguard cohort. The thing to watch out for there is that since such a cohort is less likely to engage into anything else, he might be specialized enough to possibly steal the glory of other PC's, but that is avoidable.

On the other hand, if he is, his intrigue stats might be shoddy enough that he could potentially be knocked out in the first round of intrigue. Cohorts are likely to have achilles heels, might be they won't willingly betray their PC, that doesn't mean they can't be tricked into doing stuff they ordinarily wouldn't same as any other character...

Rofl, somebody turning a bodyguard is hard as the benefit itself makes them loyal, but they can still be intrigued in to doing something foolish.

Top scheming, now I'm sad there's not really a candidate for this kind of trickery.

I have no interest in obtaining a cohort. For me, that's more maths, and I don't find doing maths fun.

As i am owner of cohort character, thats little sad, if benefit i have chosen, cant even assist xD first it was downgrading masdive benefit, now its cohort one...

But. Investigation can be done per day by cohort or pc- in all other things they can live separately. Thats fine. The only thing which seems little missed got me, is that not investivating character cant even assist, if in different place than investigating one- thats little strange, because it is automatically sticking my 2 guys together. And for example now i have situation that my cohort was asked to be somewhere to help in investigation and teach someone..

Ser Walton Dulver wrote:As i am owner of cohort character, thats little sad, if benefit i have chosen, cant even assist xD first it was downgrading masdive benefit, now its cohort one...

But. Investigation can be done per day by cohort or pc- in all other things they can live separately. Thats fine. The only thing which seems little missed got me, is that not investivating character cant even assist, if in different place than investigating one- thats little strange, because it is automatically sticking my 2 guys together. And for example now i have situation that my cohort was asked to be somewhere to help in investigation and teach someone..

Cohort is a strong benefit. People can disinvest and buy something else if they're unhappy.

I'm not allowing one character to investigate while the other assists in the same scene or elsewhere for balance reasons. It makes cohort way too strong if all the cohort PCs have a (minimum) +1 to all roles. Why bother with talented if this is allowed?

The cohort and PC can be apart for roleplay purposes, they're not bound together, but I'm afraid the balance gods require a little metagaming separation. Your cohort can help and teach somebody, they're just not contributing an assist.

Yes, well the only reason to bother with talented to begin with would be fluff. You get twice the fun out of BoA for example.

Thing is, it's easy enough to min/max whatever you do. Famous throws your charm up into dice pools that outguns everyone else, I don't see you reacting to that, even if that quality so far has been considerably more powerful for events/investigations than a cohort that could have assisted on everything. A +1/+2 here and there is generally a minor deal, assuming that cohorts are otherwise handled with care. If a +2 is thrown on top of a 5D+2b+2, then I'd say we're entering questionable territory. If it's on top of a 3 or 4D dice pool, there's always some min-maxed PC that will beat you most of the time.

Theomore Tullison wrote:Yes, well the only reason to bother with talented to begin with would be fluff. You get twice the fun out of BoA for example.

Thing is, it's easy enough to min/max whatever you do. Famous throws your charm up into dice pools that outguns everyone else, I don't see you reacting to that, even if that quality so far has been considerably more powerful for events/investigations than a cohort that could have assisted on everything. A +1/+2 here and there is generally a minor deal, assuming that cohorts are otherwise handled with care. If a +2 is thrown on top of a 5D+2b+2, then I'd say we're entering questionable territory. If it's on top of a 3 or 4D dice pool, there's always some min-maxed PC that will beat you most of the time.

I can manage Famous by capping bonus dice (and I have done so). Somebody could get to a similar pool via expertise and a high ability.

Reader wrote:[Why bother with talented if this is allowed?

In fairness, Talented is the absolute weakest advantage in the game.

Omegonthesane on the Green Ronin boards once said to never take Talented...

Omegonthesane wrote:Ever ever ever ever ever. Ever. This is like buying a +1D that only ever rolls a 1, only worse, because then you could swap it out for a bonus die. Saying that this benefit sucks is an insult to vacuum cleaners.

I tend to agree with him.


The DP 'as' a DP is actually considerably more useful.

We actually increased the Talented bonus to +2 in our game just so the NPCs that had it could get some use from it.

Nathaniel Mason wrote:

Reader wrote:[Why bother with talented if this is allowed?

In fairness, Talented is the absolute weakest advantage in the game.

Omegonthesane on the Green Ronin boards once said to never take Talented...

Omegonthesane wrote:Ever ever ever ever ever. Ever. This is like buying a +1D that only ever rolls a 1, only worse, because then you could swap it out for a bonus die. Saying that this benefit sucks is an insult to vacuum cleaners.

I tend to agree with him.


The DP 'as' a DP is actually considerably more useful.

We actually increased the Talented bonus to +2 in our game just so the NPCs that had it could get some use from it.

Talented is weak, true, but Omegon's exhaustive analysis is a little flawed by the fact he's (she's?) using a 50xp benchmark for qualities. While you can buy destiny for 50xp, destiny is in reality granted in parallel with experience according to the core rules (and in my game!). It seems to be a quirk of that poster's games - he/she noted never having received destiny in over a year of play. This does not match the core rules, so I can see why his/her analysis would differ.

Therefore his/her analysis, while lengthy and useful in placesm is not to my tastes.

Famous is still considerably more powerful even with the (lowest observable) cap in the place. The fact that you could get there with Persuasion 5 and expertise...well let's just say that I would flat out reject any character with that on his sheet. But that's kinda me being me.

And while Omegonthesane thread on the GR forums makes the assumption that the only way to get benefits/DP is to pay 50XP for it and bases his entire guide on comparison to what abilities/specialties can do instead, he is spot on in the obvious cases such as that one. It's generally good for comparing things that directly replicates things abilities/specialties can do instead (basically, improve dice rolls, passive defenses etc), but those assumptions of his tends to underrate utility and flexibility. But he struggles with ranking things that can't be quantified as easily.

Or said in a different way, there's nerds that are good with numbers, there are nerds that are good with math, and then there are nerds that aren't, and some that doesn't want to play around much with numbers.

Omegonthesane is good (well, decent maybe, I could do the same when I was 10) with math, but not with numbers.

Reader wrote:Talented is weak, true, but Omegon's exhaustive analysis is a little flawed by the fact he's (she's?) using a 50xp benchmark for qualities. While you can buy destiny for 50xp, destiny is in reality granted in parallel with experience according to the core rules (and in my game!). It seems to be a quirk of that poster's games - he/she noted never having received destiny in over a year of play. This does not match the core rules, so I can see why his/her analysis would differ.

Therefore his/her analysis, while lengthy and useful in placesm is not to my tastes.

I agree that using experience when comparing advantages to what you can buy with xp other than advantages is a flawed premise, however, I think that if you take that away, comparing advantages on a scale of usefulness is definitely valid.

For example, compare Talented and Expertise. Both cost 1DP. The reality of the game is, while most Abilities have at least two or more specialties, each Ability has a clear winner specialty that is far more useful then the others. With Endurance you will be injured far more than you will be poisoned. With Marksmanship you will be using bows as crossbows and thrown weapons are far inferior. With Stealth I roll Sneak all the time, Thievery only in isolated cases, and I can't remember rolling a Blend-In in any of my games ever. I can't think of any circumstances where I would choose Talented over Expertise... and I can think of many Advantages I would choose before I would choose Expertise.

Rats, so close to damaging a unit. The royal peacekeepers have a lot of offence, but I was set up to give them a bloody nose at least.

- Win initiative: check
- Good attack roll: check
- Realising you forgot the command roll and botching it: Priceless?

viewtopic.php?f=177&
t=1781

A lesson to all of us - 1B or more in Warfare (command) goes a long way.

Hah.. its not that...

The Orokos Gods can smell over-confidence and crush it ruthlessly.

Nice to see they don't play favourites between players and narrators.

Nathaniel Mason wrote:Hah.. its not that...

The Orokos Gods can smell over-confidence and crush it ruthlessly.

Nice to see they don't play favourites between players and narrators.

Sigh they surely can. During that tourney hunt, I rolled 5d6 3 times and got 10,17,9. Sigh what can you do. Embarrassing performance but I blame it on the alcohol...

Luecian LongBow wrote:
Sigh they surely can. During that tourney hunt, I rolled 5d6 3 times and got 10,17,9. Sigh what can you do. Embarrassing performance but I blame it on the alcohol...

Wow... that's a lot of hate from the Orokos Gods.

There is only a 3.3% chance to roll a 10 or less on 5d6... and there is only a 1.7% chance to roll 9 or less.

Nathaniel Mason wrote:Hah.. its not that...

The Orokos Gods can smell over-confidence and crush it ruthlessly.

Nice to see they don't play favourites between players and narrators.

Pfft, there should be a special narrator log-in that I can use to fudge rolls.

Stupid fair rolls taking place in public. :;
):

I think Hardy is the weakest benefit, never used it once

Dunstan Tullison wrote:I think Hardy is the weakest benefit, never used it once

Why not disinvest from it?

Sad to damage your enjoyment of the game by tying up assets in qualities that don't enhance the game for you (from both a roleplay and mechanical point of view?).

"
Once you invest in a quality, you need not do so forever. At any time, after completing a story objective, you can withdraw your investment in a benefit (not a drawback) and regain the Destiny Point(s) or reinvest it elsewhere."