This is just a logic question, but why does having a familiar/mount reduce your leadership rating? IMO I would be more inspired/ would have more morale to follow someone on a mount/familiar. It just makes no sense to me.


closed as primarily opinion-based by Miniman, doppelgreener, Maximillian, mxyzplk Dec 30 '14 at 5:00

Many good questions generate some degree of opinion based on expert experience, but answers to this question will tend to be almost entirely based on opinions, rather than facts, references, or specific expertise. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ This seems like a rant in disguise for remarking on this thing being dumb (which it might be, it wouldn't be the first feature that works out dumb). Is it? If it's a sincere question, it is probably one we can't actually answer. \$\endgroup\$ – doppelgreener Dec 30 '14 at 2:42

There's no RAW answer to this, and probably no RAI that can be supported, because the authors simply haven't said. There are, however, some clues that can point us at something both likely and sense-making.

The most important of these, in my opinion, is which list that penalty is on. Leadership has 3 separate lists of penalties to your leadership score. One applies to everything, one only when determining followers, and one only when determining the cohort. Only getting a cohort (representing a close, loyal friend with a significant share of your attention) is affected by having a class-based companion creature (also a close, loyal friend who, forgotten familiar syndrome aside, is at least nominally expected to receive a lot of attention from the character). To me, this strongly suggests spreading your attention too thin and cohort jealousy as likely mechanisms.


Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.