Stewardship, companion or leader?

[Rintaro]

Im like 40hrs into this game, restarting now and then atleast 4-5 times(just to learn stuff)

Am I missing anything, is there any reason for your main character to take it, since all the perks can be gained with a quartermaster companion?

[MooreBilly]

My play style is I level Stewardship as it gives me bigger parties. Companions can die. I would hate to have to get rid of half my troops because the quartermaster companion died

[RJboxer]

Thats how I did it.. Played 15 campaigns, for about 2-5 hours each.. before I thought I knew enough to try a full one. (I didnt lol)


Anyway,, that's a huge huge debate. Most people are WRONG in why they want it this way or that way.. Their "theory" is incorrect, and MATHEMATICALLY PROVABLE.

There are pros and cons to both.

I will say, FOR ME (based on MY playstyle... and I've tried many styles... in the last 2.5 years) I still like to give my Main character ALL THE JOBS. In other words, steward, engineer, Medic, Scout. There are many many many many many mannnnnnnnt benefits for doing this. and almost ZERO negatives...

there are advanced matrix breakdowns that would show you might want to let a companion/heir have such n such job for a bit, until such n such happens. etc...

But a hard fast rule imo is "You keep jobs".

You pick perks that benefit PLAYER/CLANLEADER/PARTYLEADER/ARMYLEADER/General/JobPerson etc... You just dont take GOVERNOR perks (since u can never be the governor).

If you give the job to someone else, as they level in that skill (Let's say steward) there will be a TON of wasted perks. that wont benefit YOU.. since he is ONLY steward. Not player, not governor, not army leader, NOT PARTY LEADER. etc.......

That really should be the only answer needed. Regardless, there are even more reasons..

But do what you are comfortable with. And dont feel bad if u make a mistake. You can just make a new campaign. (though its no big deal... as u get more experienced you can win the game with any build u want, even a random build, with trash skills)

:)


I'd recommend PICK one Melee skill... Pick One Ranged Skill.
Then do as u wish (though some choices are smarter than others).

dont pick more than one ranged, or melee skill. and dont take that attribute high. (4-6 is good) Probably dont add more than 4 focus points to that skill either.. 200 sword is about the same as 275 sword.. and not worth the investment in POINTS or Time to try to hit 275 (example)

[RJboxer]

Originally posted by MooreBilly:

My play style is I level Stewardship as it gives me bigger parties. Companions can die. I would hate to have to get rid of half my troops because the quartermaster companion died

and thats what happens. they DESERT.. gone forever.

[Rintaro]

Originally posted by RJboxer:

Thats how I did it.. Played 15 campaigns, for about 2-5 hours each.. before I thought I knew enough to try a full one. (I didnt lol)


Anyway,, that's a huge huge debate. Most people are WRONG in why they want it this way or that way.. Their "theory" is incorrect, and MATHEMATICALLY PROVABLE.

There are pros and cons to both.

I will say, FOR ME (based on MY playstyle... and I've tried many styles... in the last 2.5 years) I still like to give my Main character ALL THE JOBS. In other words, steward, engineer, Medic, Scout. There are many many many many many mannnnnnnnt benefits for doing this. and almost ZERO negatives...

there are advanced matrix breakdowns that would show you might want to let a companion/heir have such n such job for a bit, until such n such happens. etc...

But a hard fast rule imo is "You keep jobs".

You pick perks that benefit PLAYER/CLANLEADER/PARTYLEADER/ARMYLEADER/General/JobPerson etc... You just dont take GOVERNOR perks (since u can never be the governor).

If you give the job to someone else, as they level in that skill (Let's say steward) there will be a TON of wasted perks. that wont benefit YOU.. since he is ONLY steward. Not player, not governor, not army leader, NOT PARTY LEADER. etc.......

That really should be the only answer needed. Regardless, there are even more reasons..

But do what you are comfortable with. And dont feel bad if u make a mistake. You can just make a new campaign. (though its no big deal... as u get more experienced you can win the game with any build u want, even a random build, with trash skills)

:)


I'd recommend PICK one Melee skill... Pick One Ranged Skill.
Then do as u wish (though some choices are smarter than others).

dont pick more than one ranged, or melee skill. and dont take that attribute high. (4-6 is good) Probably dont add more than 4 focus points to that skill either.. 200 sword is about the same as 275 sword.. and not worth the investment in POINTS or Time to try to hit 275 (example)

I actually like this, in warband I was always the leader in a sense where all my points went to making the army and party better(max leadership and trainer for example)

The big question I have is, could I do charm,leadership,steward,medicine,and roguery and have enough points for them all? Im unsure how many points you get for everything. My current build on vlandia playthrough is 2 in everything, but 4 social and 9 int.

[xao2099]

Early game i sometimes will { if i find one close } get a doctor to heal myself faster, and troops die less often but, mid game i take the job myself and all jobs ,because i want my character to level up as much as possible. The rest of the jobs i keep the whole game because if they die, i'll hafta do the jobs anyway with lower level. You won't get much out of having someone else doing the jobs,except maybe engineer but, you probably won't be sieging much anyway that early,if you get medical up you get perks that make life easier but, your playstyle will most likely be different than mine at 1800 hrs in vanilla warband and quickly approaching 1700 hrs in bannerlord with no sign of me getting bored with it yet{no mods until i get bored}.Definitely keep steward for your main character it's worth it,because you shouldn't need that many units early game. you will struggle to pay for them

[adobo]

As someone who just ran 10 vigor/endurance, the only I have a companion do is Engineering and scouting. Surgeon has too much good perks to leave to a companion even if you only have like 100 on it. Steward has the perk to turn looted gear into exp. If you really want more troops, you just make more parties with companions and form an army with them. At that point, your limit is just money.

[RJboxer]

Originally posted by majikero:

As someone who just ran 10 vigor/endurance, the only I have a companion do is Engineering and scouting. Surgeon has too much good perks to leave to a companion even if you only have like 100 on it. Steward has the perk to turn looted gear into exp. If you really want more troops, you just make more parties with companions and form an army with them. At that point, your limit is just money.

engineering is PROBABLY the only one worth giving to a companion.. but it levels so slowly it doesnt really matter.

i just keep em all for myself.

[Balekai]

I like to give away scouting and engineer like some others. Those two don't really give enough benefits to warrant taking as leader when you can specialise in all the others and still obtain pretty good martial stats.

My core finished Battanian build is 3 attribute points in vigor, 3 in control, with 5 focus points in One-Handed/Bow for 232 skill. 1 throw away focus point into throwing from high smith for flexible fighters trait and 72 skill max.

7 endurance for 288 athletics + 288 smithing and 1 focus point in mounted for 128 skill.

2 in cunning with 18 in all max. Job of high tactics and scouting goes to a companion(s).

8 in social for 302 max charm, leadership and trade.

7 in intel for 288 Steward, Healing and 88 engie (for scaffolds making shield better and military planner for 25% more ammo for my fians during sieges). Job of engie goes to me or a higher level engie once I have one.

[Minoris]

That's likely not the answer you swek OP, but if you don't want to min-max: don't. I'm a roleplayer at heart and refuse to min-max to hell and back. In my roleplays usually the jobs are indeed done by a companion, each and every one of them. I'm a party leader, or even a Baron/Duke/King/Emperor. I don't have time to start fixing broken bones, get ahead of my troops to scout the land or worry about every little things in my party.

Optimal? Nope. Doable? Certainly!

If that's what floats your boat, don't worry about the rest and do what's fun. And if what's fun is having the most OP, min-maxed character, well there are pretty good advices up there.

[RJboxer]

Originally posted by Minoris:

That's likely not the answer you swek OP, but if you don't want to min-max: don't. I'm a roleplayer at heart and refuse to min-max to hell and back. In my roleplays usually the jobs are indeed done by a companion, each and every one of them. I'm a party leader, or even a Baron/Duke/King/Emperor. I don't have time to start fixing broken bones, get ahead of my troops to scout the land or worry about every little things in my party.

Optimal? Nope. Doable? Certainly!

If that's what floats your boat, don't worry about the rest and do what's fun. And if what's fun is having the most OP, min-maxed character, well there are pretty good advices up there.

very very true.. and probably the MOST CORRECT answer.


this game DOES NOT need min/max..... and I probably could figure out a near perfect min/max since I've played for a billion hours. But since I have a billion hours, and have never came close to needing one... I'd say it isnt needed.

I do remember (as I mentioned) some debates long ago, with some smart people about "keep all, or give all jobs away". I was of the "Keep all jobs" camp. and put (imho) a very detailed explanation of why, and the benefits, and cons. The opposing side did the same.. With equally compelling arguments.

We ended up kinda like "Yeah keeping them all is PROBABLY considerably better, but you could argue it isn't needed and u PROBABLY want to invest in a Specific SCOUT companion, and have him jacked up.. and ALWAYS the scout". This was based on TOTAL xp and TOTAL points given/available in campaigns.

Sadly the xp formulas, and how it is earned changed A LOT. A LOT LOT LOT... so the debates aren't very accurate anymore. But... yay for me, it works even better for my argument now I think. You get MORE xp than before so have even more points than before, so you REALLY have no drawback to keep all four jobs.


But back to the post I quoted. PLAY AS YOU WISH (which I hate reading as well, sounds generic and as a cop out in most posts.. but here it is spot on). but you really cant go wrong in Bannerlord. Pick your perks as you want your DUDE to be.

I wanna cavalry/glaive/Noblebow my way to 50-100 kills per fight. and I want to lead large parties, and have a boat load of HP. So I build my guy around that.

I want Trade perk for RENOWN for workshops, and I want high charm for massive influence (late game.. Influence is the most valuable resource.. by far).

That's kinda my style.. and easy to achieve.. so I just keep every job and still have far more than enough points. FAR FAR more than enough.. to do what I want (and yeah I still put way more in smithing than I should, Because I have OCD and want all the unlocks... even though I dont use smithing for money.. but DO USE IT to make my weapons for myself)

[AfLIcTeD]

I would say do Steward, Medic and Engineer at least. They are all governed by the same attribute so may as well pump it up. You could give scout to a companion as most scout perks are affected by the scout. Where the others will affect the clan, party leader or personal etc, which basically means you. Companions will not benefit from these.

I personally wouldn't do scout myself as it means putting points into cunning, which those skills are pretty trash for the player. Even Rougery. Those points could be spent elsewhere.