Gorran's page

You're assuming I don't know what it takes to keep a FAQ up to date.

I assure you that as a computer programmer and software developer I'm well aware of what it takes to keep information orderly and available to large groups of people.

As far as I can tell there is only 1 FAQ that Paizo itself has any responsibility for keeping up to date, and that's the one here on their own site. FAQs on other sites are the responsibilities of those sites.

As for keeping lists up to date, that's as simple as changing the rule to state a Paladin or Cavalier can select any animal classified as a Riding Animal as a bonded mount, with the restriction that the mount must be Large or smaller. That would allow them to use any mount they can already purchase from the list of available riding animals as their chosen mount. Such a change would not cause them any extra work since they already classify animals in this fashion in the books as they're printed. At worst they'd have to make a clarification on the Additional Resources page about what animals are legal choices, which they already do as the resources are released.

I'd be far less inclined to complain about this if I didn't understand how easily it could be changed or there wasn't a list of mounts available for anyone to purchase that wasn't included in the list of animals available to Paladins and Cavaliers as mount.

It's not ridiculous because it's not allowed, it's ridiculous because I AM allowed to purchase and use an animal as much as I want, but I am NOT allowed to use that same animal as a part of a core feature of my class. They made this great list of things to enhance the variety of flavors available to players, and then told a small portion of those players they're not allowed to use them while everyone else can.

Edit:
Please note that a Fighter using the Roughrider archetype doesn't suffer any sort of restriction at all about what kind of mount he can choose to use.

I could legally build Gorran as a Roughrider with a Ram mount and there would be no issue.

Why then is there are problem when I try to build him as a Paladin archetype that focuses on mounted combat in the same way the Fighter archetype does?

Half-elf fighter on a tiger is acceptable, but a halfling paladin on a ram is not. This is the problem.

OK, so what doors do I need to go knocking on to get alternate mounts allowed for Paladins and Cavaliers?

Maybe I'm the only person that thinks the rulings on this are ridiculous, but I may as well try to do something about it and find out.

Ya know what...I just noticed that the cool things I get from Shining Knight work with any mount, not just my bonded one.

Since the PFS FAQ says I can have a mount and an animal companion I'll just take the riding dog at level 5 and not use him as a mount and keep riding the ram. I'll be able to control the dog as a free action using Handle Animal and still use the mount I want to use.

It's not the way I want to deal with the situation, but it's how I can deal with it within the rules. Sure the ram won't get all awesome with extra feats and stats, but as long as I'm riding him he'll benefit from my class abilities. I don't even need to worry about trading a feat for an armor prof for him because he's never going to take any actions so the ACP won't matter.

Animals are clearly an issue in organized play, an issue that PFS has gone to great lengths to deal with as is evident by the number of rulings surrounding them and the extensive list of Tricks available to be taught to those animals.

With so many rulings and so much time already invested in clarification of animals and companions already it doesn't make sense to me that they haven't expanded the mount lists.

There's nothing stopping me from keeping the ram as a mount and instead using the bonded weapon class feature, except that the archetype I chose (the Shining Knight) forces me to take a bonded mount. I'll probably just do a rebuild on Garron and use a different archetype so I can keep the ram as a mount because it's the core idea of the character. I just find it ridiculous that I have access to the animal as a mount through a vendor, but I don't have the option of using that same animal to support a core feature of my class.

Ok, I don't have to like it, but at least I understand it.

Personally I'd have gone with option 2.

Every book that added animal companions would flag a few of those animals as added to the list of legal mount choices for Paladins and Cavaliers. It seriously doesn't take much to update the FAQ, and they do it on a regular basis already so they're not creating much additional work.

Limiting player options on the basis of 'we have better things to do with our time' is insulting to the players in my opinion. Are we not worth the extra effort involved?

Gorran wrote:

Indeed. As a GM I'm usually on the side of common sense, but being new to PFS I'm trying to be prepared for GMs that aren't.

Tryin to make sure everything's 'above board' cause I dislike the idea of getting called out for cheating or something foul like it.

Care to comment on the dilemma of wanting to keep my Ram as my Bonded Mount when I get to level 5? I've got what seems a 50/50 split on that one so far. Half telling me it's not legal, the other telling me it is.

You absolutely cannot keep your Ram as your bonded mount. This is not ambiguous.

If that's the case I'd be interested in learning why this ruling was made.

It's almost like they're telling Paladins and Cavaliers that they don't want them buying books to expand their options like they do for other classes.

Indeed. As a GM I'm usually on the side of common sense, but being new to PFS I'm trying to be prepared for GMs that aren't.

Tryin to make sure everything's 'above board' cause I dislike the idea of getting called out for cheating or something foul like it.

Care to comment on the dilemma of wanting to keep my Ram as my Bonded Mount when I get to level 5? I've got what seems a 50/50 split on that one so far. Half telling me it's not legal, the other telling me it is.

And that's part of the clarification I'm looking for :)

Nope, the Riding Dog comes trained as for Combat Riding, 6 tricks (attack, defend, down, guard, come, and heel), normal Riding is only 3 tricks (come, heel, and stay).

There's a discrepancy in the descriptions used for combat trained dogs, dire bats, and other exotic mounts and the descriptions for more traditional mounts such as Horses and Ponies.

Use common sense.

if the animal is listed as a "riding" animal, assume it is trained for riding.

Otherwise it wouldn't be called a "riding" version of the animal.

Lets not get overly pedantic with the RAW please.

Yeah, but the PFS FAQ RAW state an animal not purchased with Combat Training is completely untrained. So RAW says common sense doesn't apply.

Either RAW need to be rewritten and a clarification needs to be made, or 'Riding' animals don't come trained for Riding.

For that matter, what about Mules, Oxen, or Horses purchased for pulling carts, wagons, or carriages?

Do they come trained for the Heavy Labor purpose and are accustomed to using the Work Trick to carry, push, or pull a medium or heavy load? Or does your average farmer purchase a work animal and then have to spend time training it (if he even has ranks in Handle Animal) or be forced to try to Push the animal to get it to do what he purchased it to do? Would a lowly farmer even have enough skill ranks and attributes to pass the DCs to train or push an animal for those purposes?

This ruleing is much better than what we had 18 months ago... (before guide to irganized play 4.0 came out) at that point you could only train one trick per scenario, period, so is not a holdover from 3.5

That's disappointing. More so if riding animals aren't purchased already trained for Riding.

Regarding the limited selection of animals that are legal as Paladin bonded mounts, the PFS FAQ states:

As a paladin or cavalier, what mount can I have?

As a paladin, your divine bond mount must be at least one size category larger than you starting at 1st level. If you’re a Medium PC, your mount must be Large. If you’re a Small PC, your mount must be at least Medium. You may only select a mount from the listed mounts on page 63 of the Pathfinder RPG Core Rulebook unless another source grants access to additional creature choices. As a cavalier, you may select a mount from those listed on page 33 of the Advanced Player's Guide. No additional mounts are legal in Pathfinder Society Organized Play except when granted from another legal source.

In the list of legal sources it lists the PFC: Animal Archive, to which I sadly do not access at this time. It states:

Animals: all animal companions on pages 28–29 are legal for purchase. Animals on pages 14–15 are legal for purchase except dinosaurs and megafauna (unless already allowed in this document in Bestiary 1, Bestiary 2, Bestiary 3, or Ultimate Equipment) and dire animals. Additionally, only creatures of the animal type of size Large and smaller may be purchased. Goblin dog is restricted for purchase and only available to goblin PCs;

Without access to the book I don't know what's listed on those pages, but I do have access to Bestiary 2 which has the Herd Animal, Ram entry on page 154 right next to the entry for the Camel. The page even has a small blurb about Rams as Animal Companions. Also on the list of legal sources under Bestiary 2 it lists the Ram as being added to the list of legal animal companions.

The only thing I can see stopping me from keeping my Ram as my bonded mount is the vague restriction of 'No additional mounts are legal in Pathfinder Society Organized Play except when granted from another legal source' and no source actually stating that the animals it's adding to the list of legal animal companions is also adding any or all of those companions to the list available to Paladins or Cavaliers. So is it assumed that all of the animals added are added to the list for Paladins and Cavaliers as long as they satisfy the only other requirement of being at least one size category larger than you, or are none of them added regardless of them being otherwise viable as mounts?

Well, since I'm the whole reason this started I figure I should drop in and lay my 2 copper on the table.

Here's the question:

In the PFS FAQ it says:
Do purchased animals come fully trained or do I have to train them myself?

The entry for Handle Animal on pages 97–98 of the Pathfinder RPG Core Rulebook details which animals come trained—namely, some riding horses and riding dogs have training, but they only come trained to bear a rider into combat. All other animals are subject to Handle Animal to learn additional tricks. See the “Mounts and Related Gear” table on page 159 of the Pathfinder RPG Core Rulebook for additional details.

This seems to state that non-combat animals come with no tricks learned which seems seriously inconvenient if you purchase a horse, pony, or mule for the purpose of transportation or as a pack animal. I'd think that such an animal would at least come trained for the Riding purpose listed under Handle Animal (3 tricks: Come, Heel, and Stay) or the Heavy Labor purpose (2 tricks: Come and Work). With the DC to 'Push' an animal being 25 it's extremely difficult to be able to control an animal at low levels, even out of combat, if they don't know at least the Come or Heel tricks.

Also in the FAQ it says:
How can I teach tricks to an animal using Handle Animal?

You can teach any animal a trick so long as you follow the rules for Handle Animal on pages 97–98 of the Pathfinder RPG Core Rulebook. A GM must observe your Handle Animal check, and must initial what tricks the animal gained in the "Conditions Gained" section of the scenario's Chronicle sheet. The first time a character with levels in druid, ranger, or any other class that grants an animal companion gains an animal companion, the animal enters play knowing its maximum number of tricks as dictated by the animal companion's Intelligence and the character's effective druid level. If the character replaces the animal companion for any reason, the new animal starts with no tricks known, save for bonus tricks granted based on the PC's effective druid level. Once per scenario, you may attempt to train the animal companion a number of times equal to the number of ranks you have in the Handle Animal skill. Each success allows you to teach the animal a single trick; a failed attempt counts against the total number of training attempts allowed per scenario, and you may not attempt to teach the same trick until the next scenario. Alternatively, you may train one animal for a single purpose as long as you have enough ranks in Handle Animal to train the animal in each trick learned as part of that purpose. You may take 10 on Handle Animal checks to teach an animal companion tricks.

This is the part that really bothers me, according to this a level 1 character that purchases a animal can only teach it 1 trick per scenario if the character has a rank in Handle Animal. If riding animals don't come trained with at least the Riding purpose already trained that means a level 1 character's purchased mount can only begin play with 1 trick known unless it's purchased as a combat mount (which by PFS character creation rules is extremely difficult to afford if you want a balanced set of gear given the 150gp limit to starting gold), in which case the animal will begin play knowing the 6 tricks listed under the Combat Trained purpose. This means a level 1 character that doesn't get a mount or companion as a class feature not only has to invest a good portion of starting cash in the mount, but also needs to spend up to 3 scenarios getting the animal trained for the Riding purpose and up to 6 scenarios teaching it tricks before it's fully Combat Trained. The character will likely increase in level and be able to shorten that to 3 or 4 scenarios if they put more points into Handle Animal, but that's still an incredible amount of time to wait for your mount to be ready for combat if you opted to not(or more likely couldn't afford to) purchase it already Combat Trained.

If you're trying to build a level 1 character with the intention of specializing in mounted combat this is a serious problem if you don't want to play a Druid or Cavalier. Rangers, Fighters, and Paladins all have archetypes that specialize in mounted combat, but they're seriously hamstrung by this limitation, Fighters especially since they never gain the benefit of a special mount.

Is it possible this rule is a hold over from 3.5 rules where you gained more skill ranks at first level and is in need of an update to follow the current rules? It makes more sense if you'd be able to train 1 trick per skill rank +3 if it's a class skill.