When assigned a follower for a PC that a player can construct

PC's Level -2. So they're never too far behind.

>>51977231
Are there any points in any of the source books or is itnpretty much left up to the dm?

>>51977092
>>51977231
>>51977414
In 3.P, players could obtain sidekicks ("Cohorts") through the Leadership feat once they hit 6th level. They used a complicated table with a "Leadership score" based off of the PC's level, CHA and other situational modifiers to determine followers and max Cohort level, which also capped at player level -2. Due to how this all worked, basically no one took Leadership that didn't have at least a passingly good Charisma score, and they always ended up with Cohorts of their level -2.

Note though that Leadership is also considered one of the most potentially overpowered feats, depending on how it's utilized and interpreted. Being able to spend a single feat (or if I'm understanding you correctly, none at all) to essentially get a free animal companion which is 100% customizable is insanely powerful. One time I got Leadership, I built the most min/maxed item crafter I could imagine who singlehandedly supplied the entire party- She had literally no combat abilities, but she didn't need any. I just told her to craft things all day, every day. Another time I got Leadership, it was on a squishy tactical leader, and I specced my cohort as a super bodyguard. You get the idea. It's extremely flexible and can nearly double a player's options at any given point. I'd be very careful about giving out a sidekick like that, unless all players got one, or other limitations were imposed.

Simple limitations would be:
"They only work X days a week"
"They refuse to risk their lives for you"
"They can only have levels of an NPC class"
"You can pick the general concept, but I as the GM get to build it"
etc. etc.

>>51977482
Personally, I find the limitations besides you as the GM building it as bullshit, though that's just my opinion. Leadership in Pathfinder also comes at 7th level, not 6th, but big whoop, not much of a problem.

Anyways, I would say that, in PF at least, you shouldn't allow followers (the really low level dudes you leave at the base) and cohorts should be combat-related and not craft-related. Again, the player should give you the concept, and you should build the character OR have the rule be that you strongly prefer the cohort to have been an NPC that the player recruits IC.

>>51977482
>>51977581
These are all great points for reference, but the reason I'm asking is because I'm a player in this scenario and not the DM. All PC's have recieved some sort of buff, and my fighter's buff was to have a loyal follower. My follower is currently set to be at 1/4 my fighter lvl. My fighter is currently lvl 8, meaning her follower is lvl 2 and won't reach lvl 3 until my fighter reaches 12. I feel this is a will grow less effective as time goes on, an I was looking for something to base a fair leveling system for the follower off of.

>>51977581
I totally get that many of those limitations are literally just BS intended to nerf the ability. Also yes, my mistake on level- For some reason, I thought the req was level 6 still, so someone could use a bonus feat or something to get it then.

I frequently see the houserule that the followers are strictly non-combat and are used as more of a source of menial labor. As for the cohort being combat-only, I still see potential problems with that. Take a cohort who's a Bard and just constantly buffs the whole party, take a fullcaster who provides ridiculous amounts of utility for a single feat slot, take a lockdown fighter (reach build with Stand Still and so on) and plant him next to squishies or just in the way of opponents. These are all concepts general enough that you could get them workable even from GM making them, but that are still extremely potent given the cost is a single feat slot. That is to say, as Fighter, I could choose to either spend one of my many many feats on another small combat improvement, or I could spend it to get a pet Wizard who casts whatever I want. You're essentially one feat to get the utility of a completely separate character two levels below you. In the vast majority of cases, I'd call that a deal too good to refuse, and that it would be optimal for virtually every PC to take it.

>>51977676
It really depends on what exactly the purpose of the follower is. The Cohort rules of PC level -2 are intended for a Batman and Robin style relationship, with a competent sidekick who you can safely bring into combat regularly. However, this potentially has some issues, as mentioned above. With 1/4 level, bringing them into combat with you is likely suicide, but that doesn't mean that they aren't useful. They're more like the Loyal Aid option which Pathfinder Vigilantes can get (it's based on Batman's butler). While definitely not used for combat, they are potentially useful for a variety of other mundane tasks, such as-

Sending messages
Purchasing items
Preparing lodgings
Making arrangements (digging a hole at X location, to be used when we eventually lead the ogre there)
Hunting/making food
Acting as a wingman
etc. etc.

>>51977676
Jesus, that's not a buff for you at that point. If anything, that's a liability for you to constantly have to nanny. At that point, why even bother giving you it?

Tell your GM either make the level better in ratio (-2 or maybe -3 below your level), or tell him to stop putting unneeded weight on you to manage. At that point, there's no purpose to interacting with the character since if something appropriate for your level comes for them? Kiss their ass goodbye.
>>51977730
Based on it supposed to be a buff, I think it's supposed to be combat appropriate, so... yeah, should probably be Batman/Robin relationship.
>>51977681
See, this is why Followers are a difficult concept to deal with in any campaign. There's just too much with them that could make them overpowered. I think the only time I've seen it done fine with GM and player working together was when I recruited a 'villain' (lawful neutral monk who didn't want to stick with her job as a consort, and my TN character beating her in a honorable nonlethal duel was enough to satisfy her need) to my swordlord's growing assembly of future teachers at a school of martial arts and fighting. Mostly, we just covered each other and cut away at the smaller fries that came at us as the bloodrager and barbarian hulked out and took out the bigger baddies and the cleric provided support. Essentially, the monk satisfied a need we had for an additional flanking partner who didn't go into a blind rage that prevented strategic planning and acted as my character's trusted comrade, the two of them having friendly duels to train and eventually deciding that they should be together as lovers as well as comrades because they could always trust each other to help when the other was in pain in some way.

Same level.

>>51977676
If your DM doesn't buff the minion in some way, I'd probably just build them to be either non-combat or very, very backrow (but not 100% backrow, since you theoretically also have to worry about enemies sneaking around behind you).

I'd say 1/2 your level is probably about the minimum to not just be a pinata, though more would be better. On the other hand, level -2 like 3.X's Leadership feat is too much unless everyone else got super amazing buffs.

>>51977730
>Batman/Robin/Alfred comparison
I am so using this next time I have to explain this sort of thing to someone.