Mounts are generally creatures without free will. So if you were to lobotomize a character and destroy it's mind, then it might work.
Most characters however might put up a bit of a fuss about being lobotomized.
Now if you're talking about characters riding on other characters, that's not riding... that's baggage.
In Rise of the Runelords, we had a PC synthesist summoner (class subsequently banned...) with a cohort Paladin riding him into combat.
Synthesist casts buff spells, if required, Paladin casts Saddle Surge (I think). The the Synthesist pounced into melee, while the Paladin did humungous damage via Smite + Lance + charge + Saddle Surge...
GM decided this was too OP to allow again. :)
I don't remember how does it work in Pathfinder but in 3.5 I remember that you couldn't use anything vaguely humanoid as a mount, it had to be quadruped or similar.
I don't think that you cannot be intelligent to qualify as a mount as many dragon mounts are probably more intelligent than their riders.
Paladin mounts are always fairly intelligent.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Paladin mounts are always fairly intelligent.
But still subservient and largely lacking free will.
One character can carry another, but i dont think the mount feats or riding skill will qualify.
The rules for mounted combat aren't great in the first place, trying to use another PC as a mount...just gets weird.
My recommendation is just don't do it and find a normal way to get a mount.
My deterministic character decides you all are without free will.
Hi ho Silver!
Griffons are intelligent and can understand common and can be used as mounts.
In Rise of the Runelords, we had a PC synthesist summoner (class subsequently banned...) with a cohort Paladin riding him into combat.
Synthesist casts buff spells, if required, Paladin casts Saddle Surge (I think). The the Synthesist pounced into melee, while the Paladin did humungous damage via Smite + Lance + charge + Saddle Surge...
GM decided this was too OP to allow again. :)
So the two characters and eidolon all work together to get one extremely powerful attack off under very specific circumstances. Is that really all that more powerful than two or three characters simply attacking with more traditional methods? Sounds to me like the GM may have made a knee-jerk reaction.
God only knows I wish my players cooperated more like that!
Your GM should account for the lost action economy for that one big hit; is it really doing more damage than two or three smaller hits would have?
A simple fighter/archer and a druid with a tiger would probably do the same by attacking individually. What's more, if one of them took down an enemy, the others could change targets. Not so with your eidolon-mounted paladin! If he does 400 damage on an enemy with only 200 hit points, he's wasting resources! Contrast that to the archer, tiger, and druid who each do 100 damage to multiple 200 hp enemies. They take down two foes, rather than one in that round, and have dramatically reduced the ability of the enemy forces to hurt the party over the ediolon-mounted paladin.
Point that out to the GM, and maybe the combo will be permitted again.
My dwarven fighter used to ride my buddies frenzied beserker Minotaur all the time
In Society play in our area, we had a player that purchased an exotic saddle that the character always wore, and small character were given a change to ride him. He had a build that would give insane AC to both the rider and "mount."
Try this with a sohei monk.
In Rise of the Runelords, we had a PC synthesist summoner (class subsequently banned...) with a cohort Paladin riding him into combat.
Synthesist casts buff spells, if required, Paladin casts Saddle Surge (I think). The the Synthesist pounced into melee, while the Paladin did humungous damage via Smite + Lance + charge + Saddle Surge...
GM decided this was too OP to allow again. :)
So the two characters and eidolon all work together to get one extremely powerful attack off under very specific circumstances. Is that really all that more powerful than two or three characters simply attacking with more traditional methods? Sounds to me like the GM may have made a knee-jerk reaction.
God only knows I wish my players cooperated more like that!
Your GM should account for the lost action economy for that one big hit; is it really doing more damage than two or three smaller hits would have?
A simple fighter/archer and a druid with a tiger would probably do the same by attacking individually. What's more, if one of them took down an enemy, the others could change targets. Not so with your eidolon-mounted paladin! If he does 400 damage on an enemy with only 200 hit points, he's wasting resources! Contrast that to the archer, tiger, and druid who each do 100 damage to multiple 200 hp enemies. They take down two foes, rather than one in that round, and have dramatically reduced the ability of the enemy forces to hurt the party over the ediolon-mounted paladin.
Point that out to the GM, and maybe the combo will be permitted again.
This was for the cohort paladin (nicknamed Zeetha Killsteal) to attack. With Pounce, The Eidolon PC got all his attacks too...
Pounce (Ex)When a creature with this special attack makes a charge, it can make a full attack (including rake attacks if the creature also has the rake ability).
Next step up is all the adventurers in the party joining together to become MEGA ADVENTURER!!!