Recent Posts
If I have evasion and am riding a mount that does not and we are targeted by, say, a fireball, does my evasion apply to my mount?
What happens if the converse is true and my mount has evasion (for whatever reason) and I do not?
I was discussing this with my GM tonight and we couldn't come up with a reasonable answer that either of us were satisfied with.
If you have evasion and your mount doesn't, your mount doesn't get the effects of evasion.
If your mount has evasion and you don't, you don't get the effects of evasion.
This is due to you and your mount not being the same creature.
If you need to think about it in a more fluffy way, think about it like this:
Your mount has evasion and manages to find a place that's safer from the effect for itself, that leaves you sitting on it's back completely exposed to the effect since it's not worrying about you at the moment.
You have evasion and manage to find a place that's safer from the effect for yourself. The thing is it's more then likely that place is the opposite side of your mount from the effect. By ducking down to one side and using the mount itself as cover you keep yourself safer at the cost of your riding companion.
James Risner
(Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules Subscriber)
If I have evasion and am riding a mount that does not and we are targeted by, say, a fireball, does my evasion apply to my mount?
What happens if the converse is true and my mount has evasion (for whatever reason) and I do not?
Neither convey the ability to the other. So if you have it, but your mount doesn't nothing changes. You get it, he doesn't. Same for the opposite.
Mosaic
(Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Roleplaying Game, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Battles Case Subscriber; GameMastery Superscriber)
Yeah, this is the saving grace for familiars that have evasion. Per the rules, when a fireball affects a mage whose familiar is in a coat pocket, the familiar must roll the save as well (separate creatures and all).
Now most people will say that the mage's possessions don't need to save unless the mage rolls a natural 1, but creatures are never possessions per RAW. Only objects are. So a dead familiar wouldn't need to save (the body is an object, not a creature) but that's not very useful. ;)
You can also run afoul of the familiar treating its master as a mount! Normally there isn't any benefit to doing so, but I saw some interesting builds back in 3.0 that were able to take advantage of this.
Okay, so it is well established that mounts/riders do not confer evasion from one to the other. That's fine to me and (as I have now discussed this with them) my group. We would, however, find some way to make this possible.
Discussing things with the primary GM, we are wanting to craft a feat that (with a clever use of the Ride skill) allowed the mount to confer evasion to its rider.
Something like this:
Skilled Rider
Prerequisite: 7 ranks in Ride, Mounted Combat
Benefit: By succeeding on a Ride check (DC = 10 + 1/2 damage taken) a rider may gain the benefit of Evasion if your mount has Evasion.
Normal: A rider does not gain the benefits of Evasion from his mount.
Just a rough stab at a feat. I'm sure it needs a lot of polishing. Also, maybe their needs to be a "greater" version that allows Improved Evasion.
Thoughts?
You can use the ride skill to take cover behind your mount as an immediate action, DC 15. We play with a house rule that you can gain Improved Cover with a DC 20 check. Improved cover gives you the effects of improved evasion.
What if you take cover behind a mount that has evasion (A druid's companion, for instance)? It might evade you out of cover!
(Note: this would be a supremely dickish thing to do to a player...)