Follow the Leader???? - Downloaded from the Wizards Community, all coding removed by Solauren

Follow the Leader????

Post/Author/DateTime Post
#1
kitsunefearn
Jul 27, 2008 10:42:04 Ok, I am about to lose it....

So, bout 4th game session, me and my friends are all getting used to our PC's, (Wiz, Clr, Ftr, Pld, Rog), I am playing the Wizard.

So we get into a "situation", for the most part i have been making the decisions for the group, the DM basicly had everyone join get hired on to help me in a mage quest (but they all have there own stuff as well), Ever since then I've kind of been playing group leader. Till one of my comrades in a certain situation goes "well follow the leader, after all he is the leader of the group..." My jaw fell open, seriously jealousy aside, i was frustrated that my group decided that the title of the class was in fact what made up there minds of who should lead...

that being said, it was know a quite war of doing what either i wanted the group to do or what they thought the cleric should suggest (since he is very inactive in decisions they often have to ask him to make the choice...) That being said, i often played along, until then the paladin was deemed the leader due to his...paladin-esk (i guess some things from 3.x just doesn't rub off???

So now we have like a three way struggle and up in the air of who really is the leader, The paladin who seemingly argues his charisma makes him the best to lead, the cleric who has the leader title in class for a reason, and me, the intellegent one, and the one with bad charisma so i don't mind cracking a few eggs to make the omelet per se'.

I just wanted to vent that...

by the way, anyone else run into this, "the leader is the leader, type of thing???" I mean even in the RAW it says it doesn't neccisarily make them the better leader!!!!

I simply just put forth that since i consult with the party on everything, have the intellegence, and wisdom to back up good decision making in game, and r better a leader than everyone else out of game, i dare say, RP wise, i should be the leader, but thats just MY opinion....
#2
raze_
Jul 27, 2008 11:29:56 Defender, Leader, Striker, and Controller are combat roles. These titles indicate what the class does best once swords are drawn and blood is spilled. Beyond combat, their descriptive power is limited.

Any class can be an effective "leader"--in the sense of someone who takes stock of the group's desires and interests to make a sanctioned decision about where to travel next, for example. Often the leader in this sense will be different from the "face-man"--a charismatic individual who can negotiate with NPCs on the group's behalf.

Raze
#3
Jon_of_the_North
Jul 27, 2008 14:33:09 I view the gaming group/ adventure party as a democracy. Even when I end up being the party leader, due to either A) Others don't care, they just want to kill stuff, B) Character is best suited due to skills, setting, etc. I tried to involve the entire party in medium to major decisions. Honestly I prefer to be 2nd in command/ adviser/ debate team captain.

I've also played in groups when the party has had to rein in a player. One guy like to talk, which is fine, but he wasn't a good party spokesman. So if we were negotiating with a king and his gnome thief wanted to talk, I'd have to say, "Let the Paladin with +13 Diplomacy talk." ESPECIALLY when the GM has us roll it. Or the ship pilot/ captain (sci-fi game) would be outvoted 4 to 1 and still set the course to Planet X instead of Y.

Enough about me, let's talk about you and your group. Yes, the LEADER class isn't necessary the party leader. BUT... a big part of leadership is getting people to want to do what you think they should do. Most people don't like being told what to do and get enough of it in real life.

Now this isn't a personal attack against you. I'm not there; all I have to go on is 1 rant (your word, not mine) by you. So, when you consult the party do you listen and modify the plan based on their suggestions? How well do your plans work out? Is your stated position "r better a leader than everyone else" and, in short, should lead because you're the best? Related to the last question, are you playing an elf, especially with typical elf attitude? How much, if at all, do you try to micro-manage things like chosen powers and which powers are used when? In short, are you A) a good planner and B) someone others' want to follow? 50% doesn't pass.

Now I could be wrong and hope I am. But I think you should talk to other players in private and ask if they have any trouble with your leadership. Make it clear you want honest feedback. Talk to the GM, see if he's noticed anything. Talk to the entire party and get their definitions of "party leader" and what they want. If you really want, have the party formally vote for leader. And if you lose, that's it then.

Sorry to interrupt the rant, but better to solve the problem then just blow steam.
#4
kylarus
Jul 27, 2008 15:37:21 If the DM is padding your pocket to pay these "mercs" (other PCs) with, then withhold funds when they decide to not help you. You only need to pay for services rendered to you/your quest, not because it's fair/equal/right. If they don't like it, tell them you'll hire someone else. This may not be the most tactful way to do it, but in the situation, it seems to fit.
#5
maulorn
Jul 27, 2008 16:37:04 Eh seems like the big problem is you are playing a game and you and others are taking stuff that happens in game out of it. Take a step back...talk to the others and go with the flow...if the characters are trying to hold the title of pack-leader...then make it clear and concise that it is the characters and not the players...

If you all cannot keep player and character separate...then play ro-sham-bo for the title of leader...
#6
mooncalf
Jul 27, 2008 18:44:33 Leadership is a tricky thing. Some groups (mostly small ones) never need a leader, since the group's actions coincide well enough. Other times, you have party members that need to be led and instructed either due to the character or the player.

Often, the leader should just be an informal thing. The person who decides if the group takes the right or the left passage. The one who arranges boat fare or carries the artifact or speaks for the group. They shouldn't have authority over the group unless the group explicitly allows it.

Sometimes, though, you get a player who tries to take the leader title because they think it allows them to boss the group around. You should remember, though, they can't make you do anything you don't want. So it doesn't usually work very well.

From what I can tell, you filled the role of an informal leader fairly well. But do they really want you to lead, or do they want you to guide them only? Maybe you should iron out the thing out of game. Maybe another player would make a good official leader, who knows?

And I do remember a situation when the DM made one character leader of the party based entirely on his character having the highest INT. Sadly, the same could not be said for the PLAYER. His most common tactical decision was "Uhh, I dunno." And he'd go off-track all the time doing things like haggling with prostitutes or babbling about his class features. Even worse, when another player, whose character had the lowest INT of the group, would make sensible suggestions to bring the plot back, he'd get a "Shut up, stupid" from the leader...
#7
stealthmarmot
Jul 27, 2008 20:42:26 In our 1st edition group we generally didnt necessarily have a leader, we just had a tendency to follow whoever pushed us toward a goal. Also we tended to favor the higher level characters as leaders.

Very rarely was leadership claimed, except for one character who was afflicted with meglomania (later cured).

My character once ended up as a de facto leader at one point, it was sort of interesting seeing as he was both chaotic and a multiclass thief.

What makes one a good leader though is not necessarily their class or even their charisma score, sometimes it comes down to a willingness to lead.

Sometimes leadership can be divided, such as the wizard being the strategist and the cleric being the active leader.
#8
That_Blasted_Somoflange
Jul 27, 2008 22:24:39 I don't see this as a problem. Think about it, the wizard is the smart one, so the brains of the operation, he rules from behind the scene, and uses the cleric as the leader, and thus scapegoat, should anything go wrong. Now, the paladin can lead in matters with dealing with people. He's the liason, or the spin doctor for the group.

Not being the leader, means never having to take blame for when things go wrong.

Also, if you want to be in charge so much, let the other characters do so, and just keep the smug wizard 'I told you so' attitude when things go wrong. If you want, you can also be snide and say things like "Yes, oh omnipresent authority figure" and bow to the cleric or paladin.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 kitsunefearn Jul 27, 2008 10:42:04	Ok, I am about to lose it.... So, bout 4th game session, me and my friends are all getting used to our PC's, (Wiz, Clr, Ftr, Pld, Rog), I am playing the Wizard. So we get into a "situation", for the most part i have been making the decisions for the group, the DM basicly had everyone join get hired on to help me in a mage quest (but they all have there own stuff as well), Ever since then I've kind of been playing group leader. Till one of my comrades in a certain situation goes "well follow the leader, after all he is the leader of the group..." My jaw fell open, seriously jealousy aside, i was frustrated that my group decided that the title of the class was in fact what made up there minds of who should lead... that being said, it was know a quite war of doing what either i wanted the group to do or what they thought the cleric should suggest (since he is very inactive in decisions they often have to ask him to make the choice...) That being said, i often played along, until then the paladin was deemed the leader due to his...paladin-esk (i guess some things from 3.x just doesn't rub off??? So now we have like a three way struggle and up in the air of who really is the leader, The paladin who seemingly argues his charisma makes him the best to lead, the cleric who has the leader title in class for a reason, and me, the intellegent one, and the one with bad charisma so i don't mind cracking a few eggs to make the omelet per se'. I just wanted to vent that... by the way, anyone else run into this, "the leader is the leader, type of thing???" I mean even in the RAW it says it doesn't neccisarily make them the better leader!!!! I simply just put forth that since i consult with the party on everything, have the intellegence, and wisdom to back up good decision making in game, and r better a leader than everyone else out of game, i dare say, RP wise, i should be the leader, but thats just MY opinion....
#2 raze_ Jul 27, 2008 11:29:56	Defender, Leader, Striker, and Controller are combat roles. These titles indicate what the class does best once swords are drawn and blood is spilled. Beyond combat, their descriptive power is limited. Any class can be an effective "leader"--in the sense of someone who takes stock of the group's desires and interests to make a sanctioned decision about where to travel next, for example. Often the leader in this sense will be different from the "face-man"--a charismatic individual who can negotiate with NPCs on the group's behalf. Raze
#3 Jon_of_the_North Jul 27, 2008 14:33:09	I view the gaming group/ adventure party as a democracy. Even when I end up being the party leader, due to either A) Others don't care, they just want to kill stuff, B) Character is best suited due to skills, setting, etc. I tried to involve the entire party in medium to major decisions. Honestly I prefer to be 2nd in command/ adviser/ debate team captain. I've also played in groups when the party has had to rein in a player. One guy like to talk, which is fine, but he wasn't a good party spokesman. So if we were negotiating with a king and his gnome thief wanted to talk, I'd have to say, "Let the Paladin with +13 Diplomacy talk." ESPECIALLY when the GM has us roll it. Or the ship pilot/ captain (sci-fi game) would be outvoted 4 to 1 and still set the course to Planet X instead of Y. Enough about me, let's talk about you and your group. Yes, the LEADER class isn't necessary the party leader. BUT... a big part of leadership is getting people to want to do what you think they should do. Most people don't like being told what to do and get enough of it in real life. Now this isn't a personal attack against you. I'm not there; all I have to go on is 1 rant (your word, not mine) by you. So, when you consult the party do you listen and modify the plan based on their suggestions? How well do your plans work out? Is your stated position "r better a leader than everyone else" and, in short, should lead because you're the best? Related to the last question, are you playing an elf, especially with typical elf attitude? How much, if at all, do you try to micro-manage things like chosen powers and which powers are used when? In short, are you A) a good planner and B) someone others' want to follow? 50% doesn't pass. Now I could be wrong and hope I am. But I think you should talk to other players in private and ask if they have any trouble with your leadership. Make it clear you want honest feedback. Talk to the GM, see if he's noticed anything. Talk to the entire party and get their definitions of "party leader" and what they want. If you really want, have the party formally vote for leader. And if you lose, that's it then. Sorry to interrupt the rant, but better to solve the problem then just blow steam.
#4 kylarus Jul 27, 2008 15:37:21	If the DM is padding your pocket to pay these "mercs" (other PCs) with, then withhold funds when they decide to not help you. You only need to pay for services rendered to you/your quest, not because it's fair/equal/right. If they don't like it, tell them you'll hire someone else. This may not be the most tactful way to do it, but in the situation, it seems to fit.
#5 maulorn Jul 27, 2008 16:37:04	Eh seems like the big problem is you are playing a game and you and others are taking stuff that happens in game out of it. Take a step back...talk to the others and go with the flow...if the characters are trying to hold the title of pack-leader...then make it clear and concise that it is the characters and not the players... If you all cannot keep player and character separate...then play ro-sham-bo for the title of leader...
#6 mooncalf Jul 27, 2008 18:44:33	Leadership is a tricky thing. Some groups (mostly small ones) never need a leader, since the group's actions coincide well enough. Other times, you have party members that need to be led and instructed either due to the character or the player. Often, the leader should just be an informal thing. The person who decides if the group takes the right or the left passage. The one who arranges boat fare or carries the artifact or speaks for the group. They shouldn't have authority over the group unless the group explicitly allows it. Sometimes, though, you get a player who tries to take the leader title because they think it allows them to boss the group around. You should remember, though, they can't make you do anything you don't want. So it doesn't usually work very well. From what I can tell, you filled the role of an informal leader fairly well. But do they really want you to lead, or do they want you to guide them only? Maybe you should iron out the thing out of game. Maybe another player would make a good official leader, who knows? And I do remember a situation when the DM made one character leader of the party based entirely on his character having the highest INT. Sadly, the same could not be said for the PLAYER. His most common tactical decision was "Uhh, I dunno." And he'd go off-track all the time doing things like haggling with prostitutes or babbling about his class features. Even worse, when another player, whose character had the lowest INT of the group, would make sensible suggestions to bring the plot back, he'd get a "Shut up, stupid" from the leader...
#7 stealthmarmot Jul 27, 2008 20:42:26	In our 1st edition group we generally didnt necessarily have a leader, we just had a tendency to follow whoever pushed us toward a goal. Also we tended to favor the higher level characters as leaders. Very rarely was leadership claimed, except for one character who was afflicted with meglomania (later cured). My character once ended up as a de facto leader at one point, it was sort of interesting seeing as he was both chaotic and a multiclass thief. What makes one a good leader though is not necessarily their class or even their charisma score, sometimes it comes down to a willingness to lead. Sometimes leadership can be divided, such as the wizard being the strategist and the cleric being the active leader.
#8 That_Blasted_Somoflange Jul 27, 2008 22:24:39	I don't see this as a problem. Think about it, the wizard is the smart one, so the brains of the operation, he rules from behind the scene, and uses the cleric as the leader, and thus scapegoat, should anything go wrong. Now, the paladin can lead in matters with dealing with people. He's the liason, or the spin doctor for the group. Not being the leader, means never having to take blame for when things go wrong. Also, if you want to be in charge so much, let the other characters do so, and just keep the smug wizard 'I told you so' attitude when things go wrong. If you want, you can also be snide and say things like "Yes, oh omnipresent authority figure" and bow to the cleric or paladin.