Is there a rule stating that a small sized rider has to have a medium sized mount? Or a medium sized rider has to have a large sized mount?
Could a medium sized rider concievably ride a medium sized mount so long as it could bear his weight?
Could a halfing ride a dog? Not a Riding Dog, but a normal Dog with a saddle. Like a Lab or something.
Could a human ride a pony?
Could a dwarven druid at first level have an ankylosaurus animal companion (medium sized) and ride it? What if it had muleback cords?
But basically... if the mount can support the rider's weight can it be ridden by something of the same size category? Why? Why not?
I think RAW the mount has to be one size larger.
But as it is very much possible for me to ride a pony, donkey or mule and centuries of men have done so in the past I ruled that a medium mount can carry a medium mount if it is strong enough to so so with medium load but counts as being one step more loaded.
So if the mount would be lighty loaded with its rider instead treat it as being under medium load.
But that is a HR and thus here in the rules section the answer has to be: Not possible.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Umbranus: Is this just a guess on your part or do you have a rule to back up your opinion?
If you attempt to ride a creature that is ill suited as a mount, you take a –5 penalty on your Ride checks.
[...]
Fast Mount or Dismount: You can attempt to mount or dismount from a mount of up to one size category larger than yourself as a free action, provided that you still have a move action available that round. If you fail the Ride check, mounting or dismounting is a move action. You can't use fast mount or dismount on a mount more than one size category larger than yourself.
I don't think there is a rule per se... but just going with creature size and carrying capacity, you'll notice that most ponies will have trouble carrying a medium-sized creature (+equip) and the medium-sized creature's feet will probably touch the floor when sitting on that mount.
the ride skill shows that you can try to ride an ill suited mount... but it's more difficult
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I mean, personally? I would allow it. Because of the above mentioned AWESOME. I just would prefer rules to backup my AWESOME. ;)
Kyoni: As far as carrying capacity is concerned there are several mounts with high strength scores that are quadrapeds (thus increasing carrying capacity) which can bear a rider +gear. For those that can't then there are Muleback Cords. So the question still really boils down to: if they CAN bear the weight can they act as a mount per RAW.
The only rules I could find mostly amounted to flavor text. Like in the section for a Beastrider Cavalier archetype where it talks about "suitable mounts". And the ride skill although that is more vague. I couldn't find any specific ruling. I had imagined that it was just an asthetic taste thing left up to individual DMs. Maybe it was purposefully vague?
In the fluff for Mites it says they're fond of giant spiders. It also says they like to ride their vermin around as mounts. One bit of fluff even described a mite firing from the back of a spider.
Giant spiders are Small, and so are mites. How then could one conceivably be riding it? Answer: see Gorbacz' comment above.
@OP: I've looked in the hardcover of the Core book and on the SRD; I couldn't find a rule to state either case definitively. The ride skill and many fluff bits such as the mite description seem to hint at the idea that its possible for mount and rider to be the same size, but there's no RAW that I can find.
Personally I'm hr'ing the same as Umbranus. My PC's are going to be fighting mites in a sewer dungeon and they get around the tight tunnels and slippery sludge by riding giant spiders on the walls and ceiling. I think it's going to be a lot of fun!
Yeah, man! Sounds like a plan.
I just don't like to have a character concept and pitch it to my DM to have him turn around and ask about how I'm riding a mount of the same size and have my only retort be to challenge him to find a rule that prohibits it.
The mites are at least a good example (fluffy or not).
Kyoni: As far as carrying capacity is concerned there are several mounts with high strength scores that are quadrapeds (thus increasing carrying capacity) which can bear a rider +gear. For those that can't then there are Muleback Cords. So the question still really boils down to: if they CAN bear the weight can they act as a mount per RAW.
it's carrying capacity AND size: if your feets are dragging on the floor while riding that dog, the dog can be as strong as he wants... your legs are getting in it's way.
Otherwise what's to stop you from saying that your pseudodragon familiar with muleback cords could fly you from one city to another? ;-)
the size of it's wing is just to small... even going colibri-speed, his wings will be too small, no matter how strong your familiar is
I dunno. You tell me what would stop the pseudodragon. Cause RAW ... I got nuthin.
Honestly, even the leg thing isn't strictly an issue. Who says that all saddles use sturrups. Elephant saddles don't. I would imagine an ankylosaurus saddle wouldn't as they have fairly broad backs yet they are kinda a low rider mount as well. Even the mites on the backs of giant spiders would likely be dragging legs.
Is there a problem with legs being dragged on the ground? If it really bothers the character in question sit cross legged. Probably want to make a custom saddle so that it would be more comfortable.
The only thing that size seems to affect is carrying capacity.
Str still not high enough I'm thinking on the tiny dragon due to the size modifier but I see where you're going.
It is an unwritten rule of the game. See riding dogs, paladins bond, etc.
http://paizo.com/forums/dmtz5mkb?PFS-Beast-Rider-Cavalier-and-the-Horse-Mas ter#24
dev team clarification.
Dwarves riding horses instead of pony's is just blasphemy.
Lune: elephants, ankylosaurs and such are big enough to make sure your feet do not touch the floor, exotic saddles got nothing to do with this
Jak: if your feets are dragging on the ground I'd give you that -5 to ride checks because your feet getting in the way is making it harder to ride (but not impossible)
These thick leather cords wrap around the wearer's biceps and shoulders; when worn, they make the muscles appear larger than normal. The wearer treats his Strength score as 8 higher than normal when determining his carrying capacity. This bonus does not apply to combat, breaking items, or any other Strength-related rolls except the amount of equipment or material the wearer can carry.
Your familiar might be strong enough to lift you while standing on the floor, but his wings didn't grow larger so he couldn't start flying while carrying you.
One of the base rules is common sense. ;-)
Could you ride a constrictor snake? It's medium sized and doesn't have legs. It's strength is 17.
Or a Giant Centipede? its str is only 9 but it's got pleeeeenty of legs. (not accounted for in the rules) In the worst case: Muleback Cords?
Imho you should get severe penalties for trying to ride these... but you could try. 8-)
Cheapy: Ah, thank you for the link. So the designers say it wasn't explicitly spelled out but they state what their intention was. I wonder what that means for the mites. And BigNorseWolf has an excellent point with Dwarves on horseback. If Lord of the Rings didn't teach us a lesson on that issue I don't know what will.
Kyoni: Ankylosaurus start out as medium creatures. They are the same size category as the dwarf. I'm not talking about the full grown variety here. The -5 check would seem appropriate though.
You know, I thought about a riding snake. I'm not sure how you would mount a saddle. I think that is the biggest issue. Plus, I don't see the advantage of riding a snake. A centipede is class though. Particularly for some deep dwelling race.
I dunno, maybe my issue is my imagination has few limits.
Jak: if your feets are dragging on the ground I'd give you that -5 to ride checks because your feet getting in the way is making it harder to ride (but not impossible)
One of the base rules is common sense. ;-)
Imho you should get severe penalties for trying to ride these... but you could try. 8-)
If the mount is inappropriate then you take a -5 penalty. So well yeah.
There aren't any rules that dictate which part of your body has the strength so in accordance with the rules and oddly enough logic if the pseduodragon can carry you it can fly with you. Stipulating that muleback cords only make your arms stronger is silly. If this were the case then they would be useless because your most of your carrying weight is generally distributed across your back and shoulders.
Mind you unless you're pretty freaking tiny the pseudodragon isn't going to be carrying you at all even with muleback cords, because size modifiers affect carry weight, and even if you are he isn't going to be flying very fast due to weight and travel restrictions.
Yes I know strength has little to do with flight, but if we start breaking out the formulas for aerodynamics then we have to take flight away from pretty much every nonmagical flier in the game particularly dragons. If you apply the real world logic in one situation you should probably apply it in all corresponding situations.
|
This is some good advice, as I'm just trying out a mounted Summoner. I went with a gnome on a medium quadruped because that made sense.
Also consider the spell Ant Haul, and that the Summoner can share it with his eidolon. My build in particular has Extend Spell and Improved Share Spell for things like this.
Giant spiders are actually medium size.
Personally I think the beastrider is pretty specific as what is an appropriate sized mount. Small size riders need a medium or large mount, medium riders need a large or huge size mount.
If you're GM, and want your son to fire arrows with his half-elf arcane archer from his medium sized Roc AC, fine but there are several areas that state what is the appropriate size by example that are not "fluff".
edited for grammer, clarification, question sparked by discussion
This is a classic GM ruling. Rule what makes sense to YOU. It's your world.
If you do require a mount to be a size category larger, it does have some weird consequences. Notably, a first level goblin cavalier cannot select a goblin dog as his mount--it starts at small size, and can't bear a goblin until the 4th level upgrade. Suddenly, a thematic choice for goblins is locked off, and all goblins with special mounts end up riding wolves instead. The goblin may be pleased by that outcome, but that shouldn't be so common.
If you do require a mount to be a size category larger, it does have some weird consequences. Notably, a first level goblin cavalier cannot select a goblin dog as his mount--it starts at small size, and can't bear a goblin until the 4th level upgrade. Suddenly, a thematic choice for goblins is locked off, and all goblins with special mounts end up riding wolves instead. The goblin may be pleased by that outcome, but that shouldn't be so common.Goblins do not typically use goblin dogs as mounts. Just like Humans generally don't use their dogs as mounts either.
Yes. This means that certain thematic choices are locked off. But a world or game that allows EVERY conceivable thematic choice, doesn't have much of a defining character. In some ways, what you leave out is as much definition as what you include within.
Yes, they do typically use goblin dogs as mounts. Goblin dogs are explicitly described as goblins' favored mounts. Goblin dogsdogs were introducedgonna being ridden by goblins. They also like wolves 'when they can get them--i.e. that is a very rare occurrence. Yet it is the only possibility for goblin cavaliers, which would otherwise be a perfect class for the likes of the Goblin Commandos in RotRL.