If you have a mount (not a special mount), do they gain experience points?
Driver 325 yards wrote: If you have a mount (not a special mount), do they gain experience points? I have never heard of mounts gaining experience. But that doesn't mean it cant happen.
No. Mounts that are not class features are NPCs. If they level up at all, they do so only when the GM says they do.
Mounts, that are a class feature, improve as you level.
blackbloodtroll wrote: Mounts, that are a class feature, improve as you level. Yes, I am concerned with mounts that are not gained through a class feature. It never crossed my mind that they do or don't level until I read a thread where people were saying that cohorts are NPCs.
Cohorts do level. So I thought that mounts would level as well as they go through a dungeon and make it through encounters.
The only thing that gave me pause was whether or not leveling has something to do with your intelligence. Otherwise, NPC or not, I was having trouble understanding why a mount would not level.
Well, Mounts gained through Leadership, do level.
So, if you got a Pegasus Mount, through the Leadership feat, it would level, as you level.
I am talking about mounts that are not gained through leadership (though I don't get the distinguishing point here) and that are not special mounts gained through a class.
By the way, I just checked the character advancement charts and NPC do gain experience. So it would seem (if mounts are NPCs), unless I am missing something (and sometimes a do miss things) that the mounts I am inquiring about do gain experience points.
Regular mounts as animals. Animals do not have class levels. Experience is only used for advancing class levels. Ergo, mounts do not gain experience.
ShadowcatX wrote: Regular mounts as animals. Animals do not have class levels. Experience is only used for advancing class levels. Ergo, mounts do not gain experience. Checking the advancement chart again, it does not say that it grant experience points for class level. It suggest that it grants experience point for character levels.
Are you saying that character level and class levels are the same thing?
I don't think they are, but they just may be for some purposes because I found this language under the character advancement,
Quote: When adding new levels of an existing class or adding levels of a new class (see Multiclassing, below), make sure to take the following steps in order. However, this language seems to suggest that experience point can be used to add new class levels. So even if you did not initially have a class, you could use your experiences points to gain a class. Could you not?
Further, regular mounts could include more than just animals. It could be a griffon. I don't know whether that has anything to do with your point. I just wanted to point it out for clarity.
The first line of Character Advancement is "As player characters overcome challenges, they gain experience points".
Damir wrote: The first line of Character Advancement is "As player characters overcome challenges, they gain experience points". Yes, but once again, it is not limited to PCs. Look at the chart. The chart applies to NPCs as well.
Character Level is in most cases synonymous with Class Level, some exceptions include Multiclass characters (who add all classes to gain Character Level), any race that may have a Level adjustment (though I do believe PF completely got rid of ECL races), Horses (or other mounts) purchased at random often do not have a Character Level as they do not have 1. an NPC class, 2. a PC class 3. a Monster Class. exceptions include mounts obtained via class features, or Leadership feat which usually Follow the rules for Animal Companions (I believe)
Driver 325 yards wrote: Damir wrote: The first line of Character Advancement is "As player characters overcome challenges, they gain experience points". Yes, but once again, it is not limited to PCs. Look at the chart. The chart applies to NPCs as well. Why does it apply to NPCs as well? Experience points are never mentioned in the context of NPCs (class based NPCs or creatures/monsters) and leveling.
The chart and text refers to "characters", but it often prefaces this with "player characters" or "your character" or "you" - I don't see any indication that its use of the term "character" isn't just shorthand for PC.
Meanwhile, sections for the GM like Creating NPCs and Bestiary information don't give any indication of experience based leveling of NPCs. Neither do the rule for Hirelings or other PC influenced NPCs (surely if it was intended for a horse to gain xp, they would make it clear - explaining what level they were considered to be at to begin with, for example, and explaining what advancements they get by level).
Leadership Cohorts and Animal Companions, "NPCs" which do advance by level, have specific rules set out in order to let them level with the players. These don't say that they are replacing, modifying, or combining with some "normal" experience progression for the NPCs.
The Druid's Animal Bond ability (where the main Animal Companion rules all point to) says:
"Unlike normal animals of its kind, an animal companion's Hit Dice, abilities, skills, and feats advance as the druid advances in level."
This, along with all the other things noted above, would be an odd statement if normal animals or NPCs leveled with XP. Surely the rules would at least mention how such rules would interact, if they existed? If certain normal NPCs could advance by XP like a player character, why wouldn't they at least mention this when talking about:
- Monster Advancement
- NPC Development
- Basic Monster rules for GMs
- Leadership
- Animal Companion rules
- Hireling rules
- Ultimate Campaign's discussion about followers, companions, etc.
- Player character advancement
- The rules for purchasing horses and other animals
...all of which would have some reason to say "this replaces the normal way they can advance" or "when leveling up this creature, add..." or so on?
In general, mounts should not gain levels with the PCs.
Why? Think about it from this perspective, if you can just buy an animal and have it level with you, it would severly devalue the asset of having an animal companion as a class feature. Depending on how the creature leveled (if it kept pace with the party) it is likely to be stronger than the animal companion of an equivalent level druid. Which to me, is a clear sign that they shouldn't.
Also, I'm pretty sure you need an intelligence score of 3 or higher to take class levels. Mounts don't level up because they can't.
EDIT: So, I can't actually find any such thing in the PRD, so there is a high chance I'm mistaken. I am forced to retract this statement for now.
Albatoonoe wrote: Also, I'm pretty sure you need an intelligence score of 3 or higher to take class levels. Mounts don't level up because they can't Such a rule doesn't exist. Or it it does, its not in the section of the rules about adding class levels to monsters, which is where you would expect to find it.
Mounts don't level in the same way as swords and backpacks don't level. They are equipment and not characters. Animals, yes, but still a cash-bought resource rather than class feature.
First, thanks for all of the responses. I can't respond to all of them individually because I have other things to do. That said,
1) The heading in the chart for character advancement mentions NPCs and PCs. I don't know how else to say it. Its there. If you want to deny what is in plain eyesight then so be it, but it is there for all to view. This is not debatable. It is what it is.
2) Mounts are not equipment so... By the way, per RAW, an NPC and everyone that is not a PC.
3) Character level is normally not synonymous with class level. There have been a lot of threads on this and some FAQs too.
4) Yes, it make sense for NPC to level. Why would a mount gained through leadership level and a mount not gained through leadership not level. They both should work off of the advancement chart. Why would not all mounts work the same way? That said, I have come to know that the rules don't need to make sense. I just want to know what the rule is.
5) I will admit that the intelligence things would seem to matter, but I can't find in FAQ or RAW that says so.
Driver 325 yards wrote: 4) Yes, it make sense for NPC to level. Why would a mount gained through leadership level and a mount not gained through leadership not level. They both should work off of the advancement chart. Why would not all mounts work the same way? That said, I have come to know that the rules don't need to make sense. I just want to know what the rule is. But it doesn't make sense.
The reason an animal companion or a mount gained through leadership gains levels is because they are a class feature and a feat, that specifically say they gain levels. (Actually an animal companion doesn't gain levels, instead it gains bonuses depending on the master's level but that is a relatively unimportant distinction.) They also take up relatively limited resources such as class levels and feat slots to get.
A combat trained heavy horse costs 300 gold. Do you really think you should get the equivalent of the leadership feat for 300 gold? Leadership is widely considered to be one of the most overpowered feats in the first place, and now rather than having it cost a feat slot you basically want to turn it into a 300 gold purchase?
That's ludicrous to me. It would be unwise of GM to allow such, and unfair to classes that gain animal companions or characters that are allowed to take Leadership.
I just want to respond to Damir specifically because several points are made
Quote: Experience points are never mentioned in the context of NPCs (class based NPCs or creatures/monsters) and leveling. Quote: The chart and text refers to "characters", but it often prefaces this with "player characters" or "your character" or "you" - I don't see any indication that its use of the term "character" isn't just shorthand for PC. Not completely true. The headings in the character advancement chart specifically call out NPCs
Quote: Leadership Cohorts and Animal Companions, "NPCs" which do advance by level, have specific rules set out in order to let them level with the players. These don't say that they are replacing, modifying, or combining with some "normal" experience progression for the NPCs. The fact the cohorts have their own set of rules does not mean that other NPCs don't advance according to the advancement chart that specifically calls out NPCs. It just could mean that cohorts are exceptions to the rule.
Quote: The Druid's Animal Bond ability (where the main Animal Companion rules all point to) says:
"Unlike normal animals of its kind, an animal companion's Hit Dice, abilities, skills, and feats advance as the druid advances in level."
So does this mean that animals never advance or that they advance like an NPC would.
Are you saying creatures with an intelligence of 2 or less, can take levels in PC classes, or even NPC classes?
First off, this is the definition of NPC from the CRB:
NPC definition wrote: Nonplayer Character (NPC): These are characters controlled by the GM. So, technically the GM has control of your horse and determines what it does according to how you want to use it.
Second, I don't know what chart you are looking at (a link would be helpful) but the character advancement section and table in the CRB (PRD) never once mentions NPC anywhere.
HERE is a link to the PRD
I am still researching relevant info so I may add more soon.
Claxon wrote: Driver 325 yards wrote: 4) Yes, it make sense for NPC to level. Why would a mount gained through leadership level and a mount not gained through leadership not level. They both should work off of the advancement chart. Why would not all mounts work the same way? That said, I have come to know that the rules don't need to make sense. I just want to know what the rule is. But it doesn't make sense.
The reason an animal companion or a mount gained through leadership gains levels is because they are a class feature and a feat, that specifically say they gain levels. (Actually an animal companion doesn't gain levels, instead it gains bonuses depending on the master's level but that is a relatively unimportant distinction.) They also take up relatively limited resources such as class levels and feat slots to get.
A combat trained heavy horse costs 300 gold. Do you really think you should get the equivalent of the leadership feat for 300 gold? Leadership is widely considered to be one of the most overpowered feats in the first place, and now rather than having it cost a feat slot you basically want to turn it into a 300 gold purchase?
That's ludicrous to me. It would be unwise of GM to allow such, and unfair to classes that gain animal companions or characters that are allowed to take Leadership. Okay, I don't want to debate what makes sense and what does not. I just want to know the rule. I am not trying to make a rule. I don't have any other agenda other than wanting to know what the rule is.
That said, yes, you point out some very significant game balancing reasons for a FAQ coming back which says no.
With that, let me counter if I may.
If I purchase a griffon for whatever (5000 gold; I don't know the amount work with me). Then he dies. I have to pay 5000g all over again and he starts back at the level I intially bought him at.
If I have leadership and he dies, I just get a new co-hort at no expense. So yes, leadership would still have value. Yes, animal companions would still have value.
anthonydido wrote: First off, this is the definition of NPC from the CRB:
NPC definition wrote: Nonplayer Character (NPC): These are characters controlled by the GM. So, technically the GM has control of your horse and determines what it does according to how you want to use it.
Second, I don't know what chart you are looking at (a link would be helpful) but the character advancement section and table in the CRB (PRD) never once mentions NPC anywhere.
HERE is a link to the PRD
I am still researching relevant info so I may add more soon.
I am looking at this link
Also, this is not a question about who controls the NPC.
blackbloodtroll wrote: Are you saying creatures with an intelligence of 2 or less, can take levels in PC classes, or even NPC classes? I am not saying one way or another. I have admitted that the intelligence issue does bother me a bit. I just can't find the rule that says anything about it.
D20PFSRD is NOT an official rules site and does tend to change some things.
Most importantly though, that chart doesn't mean that just because it's an NPC that it gains levels. NPCs that have classes (such as aristocrat, expert, etc.) can surely gain XP as determined by the GM, but you can't gain levels if there is no class to gain levels in. A horse and most other animals are just animals. They don't have classes. And again, since the GM controls all NPCs (and gives out all of the XP) then it is ultimately up to them if they want an NPC to advance.
Driver 325 yards wrote: 2) Mounts are not equipment so... Yes they are. Unless a special feature of a class or feat (in which case, as been pointed out, they follow their own rules), they are simply something that you go out and buy with gold. You'll find them in the Goods and Services table in the Equipment section of the rulebook, page 159, with the fuller description on page 162.
They are not characters, PC or NPC, they are a commodity that you buy. That many players chose to name them and describe them more fully than their shield does not make them characters.
Driver 325 yards wrote: By the way, per RAW, an NPC and everyone that is not a PC. Yes, but that is a character, not a mount. You can play them as having a personality if you wish, but that does not make them a character in RAW. They do not get experience points or class levels, they do not improve with experience and they do not substantially alter from one example to the next. Your warhorse will be pretty much identical in game terms to the next warhorse you buy in town.
If you want to train a bear to be a mount, it will have the same statline as every other bear in the woods. You can train mounts to have 'tricks' but that is still not making them a character.
Driver 325 yards wrote: Okay, I don't want to debate what makes sense and what does not. I just want to know the rule. I am not trying to make a rule. I don't have any other agenda other than wanting to know what the rule is.
That said, yes, you point out some very significant game balancing reasons for a FAQ coming back which says no.
With that, let me counter if I may.
If I purchase a griffon for whatever (5000 gold; I don't know the amount work with me). Then he dies. I have to pay 5000g all over again and he starts back at the level I intially bought him at.
If I have leadership and he dies, I just get a new co-hort at no expense. So yes, leadership would still have value. Yes, animal companions would still have value.
I don't think there is a clear or obvious rule about it. To my knowledge there isn't really any rules on this sort of thing, and no one has really ever brought it to the table before that mounts should gain experience and level up. At least, not that I have seen.
If you purchase a griffon and it dies, regardless of the initial cost, you're unlikely to let it simply die. Instead, you will likely use raise dead or any of the other various magics that can bring back a PC on this "NPC" mount. So no, you don't have to start over from scratch. A Griffon costs 8000 gp to purcahse. Resurrection cost 10,000 gp. Assuming you could level a griffon up, why would you ever let it die permanently instead of spending 10,000 gold (instead of 8,000) to bring it back as it was instead of getting an unleveled 1 for 8,000. There just isn't much loss there.
Also, there is expense when you have leadership and a cohort dies. The maximum level of a cohort you can attract goes down. For paladin mounts they can't get a new one for 30 days (or until they level), and they take -1 attack and damage penalty until they do. Rangers and Druids get away with only needing a 24 hour ceremony to get back an equivalent animal companion. A cavalier has to spend a week of mounring before they get another mount, and the new mount does not gain link, evasion, devotion, or improved evasion special abilities until the next time the cavalier gains a level.
Claxon, all I am saying is that there still would be advantages to having an animal companion or a co-hort through leadership. We could keep going back and forth, but I think I get your point and you get my point.
Sadurian wrote: Driver 325 yards wrote: 2) Mounts are not equipment so... Yes they are. Unless a special feature of a class or feat (in which case, as been pointed out, they follow their own rules), they are simply something that you go out and buy with gold. You'll find them in the Goods and Services table in the Equipment section of the rulebook, page 159, with the fuller description on page 162.
They are not characters, PC or NPC, they are a commodity that you buy. That many players chose to name them and describe them more fully than their shield does not make them characters.
Driver 325 yards wrote: By the way, per RAW, an NPC and everyone that is not a PC. Yes, but that is a character, not a mount. You can play them as having a personality if you wish, but that does not make them a character in RAW. They do not get experience points or class levels, they do not improve with experience and they do not substantially alter from one example to the next. Your warhorse will be pretty much identical in game terms to the next warhorse you buy in town.
If you want to train a bear to be a mount, it will have the same statline as every other bear in the woods. You can train mounts to have 'tricks' but that is still not making them a character. We can just agree to disagree because I feel silly arguing with someone who says that a mount (which would include griffons and the like), heirling,etc... are equipment.
You are arguing against the rulebook. Mounts are in the Equipment section. You buy them.
Griffons are essentially no different. You can buy them or train them, just as you can buy or make a sword. I have no idea what you mean by heirling, but I assume its a typo of hireling. If so, then yes, they are Equipment. They do not appear in the Equipment section of the Core Book but are in Ultimate Equipment. They do not advance in experience. They are cookie-cutter services who will be identical to the next.
Animals are not sufficiently intelligent enough to acumulate Experience on their own, only if a player extends to them their guidance that this is possible, depending on GM discretion.
Animals are NPC's as such their exact rules are invariably up to GM discretion. The general consensus is that NPC's dont gain XP and levels unless a player is involved directly via class features or indirectly via story.
A good way to gain a leveling mount is to take one as a Cohort. This not only enables a leveing moun, but enables a variety of exotic mounts as they appear.
Sadurian wrote: You are arguing against the rulebook. Mounts are in the Equipment section. You buy them.
Griffons are essentially no different. You can buy them or train them, just as you can buy or make a sword. I have no idea what you mean by heirling, but I assume its a typo of hireling. If so, then no, they are not Equipment. They do not appear in the Equipment section.
Whatever?
Animals can advance through adding racial hit-dice (not through class levels). See the "Monster Advancement" section in the core rulebook (or, if you are curious about the RAI and missing context, see the "improving monsters" section in the 3.5 monster manual). However, I am not aware of any rules text suggesting that monsters gain hit-dice through xp--all mentions of adding hit-dice to creatures I can find are written from the perspective of the GM just deciding to add hit-dice to a creature because he/she wants that particular creature to be stronger, and the GM doesn't need to worry about xp.
Forgetting everything else, let's assume for the moment that animals purchased with gold that participate in adventures do infact get XP.
Given that premise the logical extension that is see is everyone buying the cheapest attack animal possible, effectively doubling the party size and doubling their action economy.
Heck why stop at doubling, everyone buys 3 of the cheapest attack animal possible, most of them die but those that don't get stronger and stronger.
Gaining a whole other character is a big deal, that's why it takes a feat (that a large percentage of games including PFS ban) or a class feature.
- Torger
tsuruki wrote: Animals are not sufficiently intelligent enough to acumulate Experience on their own... I think you are on the right track towards the real answer.
Something lead me to look at the awaken spell. From that (though not explicitly stated) the languages seems to suggest that only upon being awakened do animals become sentient and gain the ability to take on experience and class levels. It does not tell you how you go about figuring the level of the awakened animal and the experience he needs to take a level in fighter, rogue, etc...; but that is another issue for another day.
So, I am pretty sure that the intent is that animals can't level in a class. I also concede that the chart is for advancement in classes. Therefore, I concede that the advancement charts do not apply to animals.
I am left with the question of what to do with griffons and other magical beast, however. If those were mounts, I think they may advance as NPCs.
http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/classes.html wrote: As player characters overcome challenges, they gain experience points. As these points accumulate, PCs advance in level and power. There's the rule. Nothing about NPCs accruing XP. I agree that non-class-feature, non-cohort mounts are probably better handled as equipment rather than NPCs (although there is a precedent, because slaves are listed in the equipment section, and they're definitely NPCs). Nonetheless, if you do consider mounts NPCs, there are no rules out there for granting NPCs XP. There are rules for advancing NPCs, but they are strictly the purview of the GM (the monster and NPC advancement rules). XP is just for PCs.
Charlie Bell wrote: http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/classes.html wrote: As player characters overcome challenges, they gain experience points. As these points accumulate, PCs advance in level and power. There's the rule. Nothing about NPCs accruing XP. I agree that non-class-feature, non-cohort mounts are probably better handled as equipment rather than NPCs (although there is a precedent, because slaves are listed in the equipment section, and they're definitely NPCs). Nonetheless, if you do consider mounts NPCs, there are no rules out there for granting NPCs XP. There are rules for advancing NPCs, but they are strictly the purview of the GM (the monster and NPC advancement rules). XP is just for PCs. That is the rule for PCs. That is telling you how PC advance. It is not telling you that NPC do not advance the same way.
Charlie Bell wrote: There are rules for advancing NPCs, but they are strictly the purview of the GM (the monster and NPC advancement rules). XP is just for PCs. You mention NPC advancement rules. Could you provide the link? I can't find it. That may answer my question.
So, if I carry a chicken around, whilst I adventure, this chicken will eventually turn into a badass chicken, just because it was near me when I killed an Orc?
Better still, you'll have heroic level body lice eventually. No need for going for a character class with Animal Companion or the like, just buy a pet hamster at level 1 and watch him rip apart the townsfolk by level 6.
blackbloodtroll wrote: So, if I carry a chicken around, whilst I adventure, this chicken will eventually turn into a badass chicken, just because it was near me when I killed an Orc? See a couple of post above that I have already admitted that based on the Awaken spell that animals are not sentient and thus can not gain levels in a class. We are now discussing magical beast purchased by a PC and participating in battle alongside the PC (not being carried around by a PC just to be clear).
Driver 325 yards wrote: I just want to respond to Damir specifically because several points are made
Quote: Experience points are never mentioned in the context of NPCs (class based NPCs or creatures/monsters) and leveling. Quote: The chart and text refers to "characters", but it often prefaces this with "player characters" or "your character" or "you" - I don't see any indication that its use of the term "character" isn't just shorthand for PC. Not completely true. The headings in the character advancement chart specifically call out NPCs
Not in the official PRD. There is absolutely no mention of NPCs in relation to the character advancement chart and the other information on character advancement.
For the d20pfsrd page you linked, it has handily added in information about NPC wealth by level. NPC isn't mentioned anywhere else in that information (I CTRL+F'd to check this). This information is from the Core Rulebook information for GMing and creating NPCs (which lists the wealth by level without any connection to experience or gaining levels).
Quote: The fact the cohorts have their own set of rules does not mean that other NPCs don't advance according to the advancement chart that specifically calls out NPCs. It just could mean that cohorts are exceptions to the rule. But surely it is odd that they wouldn't make any mention about this supposed normal set of rules (which, as noted above, are not specifically called out anywhere)? Many feats have descriptions of what happens normally. For example, Light Armor Proficiency says:
"Normal: A character who is wearing armor with which he is not proficient applies its armor check penalty to attack rolls and to all skill checks that involve moving."
Other feats and abilities will specifically mention if their bonuses are replacing or changing an existing ability. Despite the fact that NPC leveling would be extremely relevant to explaining how Leadership works, the feat says nothing about it (not even a one line "instead of" statement).
One might also note that Advancing a Monster (or any non-class-leveled creature) is not a simple and intuitive process - even if you're just adding class levels. If NPCs, including those with non-class HD, leveled up - why wouldn't the Core Rulebook ever mention how to do so?
I did find this langauge in the NPC gear section
Quote: Note that these values are approximate and based on the values for a campaign using the medium experience progression and a normal treasure allotment. If your campaign is using the fast experience progression, treat your NPCs as one level higher when determining their gear. If your campaign is using the slow experience progression, treat the NPCs as one level lower when determining their gear. If your campaign is high fantasy, double these values. Reduce them by half if your campaign is low fantasy. If the final value of an NPC's gear is a little over or under these amounts, that's okay. It seems to suggests that NPC do gain experiences points.
Wait, you want to be able to buy and sell sentient creatures? Isn't that... slavery? According to the rulebook it certainly is.
Quote: Characters eager for griffon mounts, however, should note that buying or forcibly domesticating intelligent creatures like griffons is still recognized as slavery by most good deities, and winning a griffon's allegiance of its own free will is no easy task. Or perhaps those magical beasts are cohorts or special mounts as per the class feature and feats rules?
Driver 325 yards wrote: blackbloodtroll wrote: So, if I carry a chicken around, whilst I adventure, this chicken will eventually turn into a badass chicken, just because it was near me when I killed an Orc? See a couple of post above that I have already admitted that based on the Awaken spell that animals are not sentient and thus can not gain levels in a class. We are now discussing magical beast purchased by a PC and participating in battle alongside the PC (not being carried around by a PC just to be clear).
So, you are saying they need to just not be of the animal type, or they just need a 3 or higher intelligence?
Also note that it is explicitly stated that Followers do not gain experience or levels.
Driver 325 yards wrote: I did find this langauge in the NPC gear section
Quote: Note that these values are approximate and based on the values for a campaign using the medium experience progression and a normal treasure allotment. If your campaign is using the fast experience progression, treat your NPCs as one level higher when determining their gear. If your campaign is using the slow experience progression, treat the NPCs as one level lower when determining their gear. If your campaign is high fantasy, double these values. Reduce them by half if your campaign is low fantasy. If the final value of an NPC's gear is a little over or under these amounts, that's okay. It seems to suggests that NPC do gain experiences points.
That talks about the gear you give them...it says nothing about them receiving XP.
Sadurian wrote: Wait, you want to be able to buy and sell sentient creatures? Isn't that... slavery? According to the rulebook it certainly is.
Quote: Characters eager for griffon mounts, however, should note that buying or forcibly domesticating intelligent creatures like griffons is still recognized as slavery by most good deities, and winning a griffon's allegiance of its own free will is no easy task. Or perhaps those magical beasts are cohorts or special mounts as per the class feature and feats rules?
you can buy a griffon.
blackbloodtroll wrote: Driver 325 yards wrote: blackbloodtroll wrote: So, if I carry a chicken around, whilst I adventure, this chicken will eventually turn into a badass chicken, just because it was near me when I killed an Orc? See a couple of post above that I have already admitted that based on the Awaken spell that animals are not sentient and thus can not gain levels in a class. We are now discussing magical beast purchased by a PC and participating in battle alongside the PC (not being carried around by a PC just to be clear).
So, you are saying they need to just not be of the animal type, or they just need a 3 or higher intelligence? sentient
Recent threads in Rules Questions
|
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 16
