Malzel's page

Wow, druids too, huh? That does make it seem kind of weird.

What class actually gets just "Animal Companion" then, as opposed to receiving an animal companion from something else?

I know it's a long shot, but is there any way to get an author to actually comment on the feat then to clarify? Disallowing druids seems unintentional to me.

I've been using Curious Companion for quite some time on Cavalier, and thus far, all of my DM's that I play with when I want to run it have had no problem. Mixing this with Saurian Champion is a fine way to simulate having a Juggernaut Beetle (Don't forget to slap the draconic archetype on there to add on its acid resistance and acid spray!) while playing a Duergar, for instance.

But another player just pointed out to me that by RAW it shouldn't work.

Indeed, I misread and thought it said that you must have an animal companion. Not that you must have the animal companion class feature.

Does having an animal companion (granted through mount) count as having that class feature? The few instances I can find of others discussing this, that seems to be how they interpret it, but I wanted more opinions. Does this work by RAW?

Does it work with RAI? Had Paizo ever intended for this sort of combo to work?

In the end, I get that we can home brew whatever, but it got me curious!

Sithis, that is a hypothesis, but there's no direct evidence for it. Namely, suaropod trackways do not demonstrate them employing the unusual flexibility of either their front or hind claws while walking in difficult terrain. Suggesting that they did not use their claws for stability. Brachiosaurus lacks this flexibility in its thumb claw, and it is reduced to merely being a spike. Titanosaurs don't have the thumb claw at all and you would expect the heaviest land animals to exist to evolve stronger traction, not to abandon it entirely.

Also, concerning how many feet they could lift off the ground, most sauropods were probably capable of rearing up, especially the Titanosaurs, which are both known for their morphology lending themselves the most to doing such (out of sauropods in general) and for their exceptional size... Oh and their armor. Why don't we have any cool armored sauropods, Paizo? Ampelosaurus seems like a shoe in for such a high fantasy setting!

Sereno's studies on Jobaria strongly indicate that even at 20 tons, the animal could probably move about on its hind legs faster than we can on ours. Although I should note, I'm not a big fan of Sereno. I think sometimes he jumps too readily to a conclusion.

Of course, Brachiosaurus' weight is heavily distributed towards the front, making a rear with out some kind of support to put a foot on unlikely for balance purposes. But it was only an example since Indricotheres get their stomping attacks in PF and they are definitely bigger than Amargasaurus. It was also very definitely heavier.

As well, up until the Brachiosaurs reach "Gargantuan" size, the two animals share an extremely similar silhouette while growing up. Maybe you could argue that once they reach Gargantuan sizes, that they are less likely to perform a girafee-like kick with the front legs, but up until then, it seems like a common technique herbivores, even big ones, use to defend themselves.

There is also Brontomerus, whose unusual adaption for a powerful kick from its hind limbs suggests these animals were naturally inclined to use their limbs for defense. Probably because their tails provided reach, but no close in defense, I would guess.

As such, I would argue that all of the sauropods present in the game COULD in fact kick their opponents.

So, I don't mean any disrespect, but I feel you are wrong in your assessment that they could not kick at their predators.

1. If you were to make a classic raptor rider type character, how would you go about that? Which dinosaur would you flavor to equate that? I noticed the allosaurus is illegal and that would have been my go to. Are there any other good options to proxy in? Which class do you think would best emulate it? Is Druid really the only option for that?

2. Do you need special gear to ride an Amargasaurus? Logically, how would that work, with the spines running down its back? Would you require a side mounted carriage? Would this make you vulnerable to attacks from medium sized opponents? What about a Stegosaurus?

3. Do we know what the official reason is for why some dinosaurs are not allowed? I assume some like Diplodocus and Allosaurus were OP somehow but other options seem odd. Notably, the modest Iguanodon and Parasaurolophus are out.

4. On a more general Pathfinder and not just PFS question. Is there a reason why Sauropods don't get to use their claws in combat? I find it strange that Brachiosaurus' mammal equivalent, Baluchitherium, gets to stomp its enemies, but Brachiosaurus, who actually has a wicked claw on each front foot, doesn't get to do the same.

5. Not just pertaining to dinosaurs I suppose, but are huge mounts worth armoring? Or should you focus instead on a high ride to get around their AC issues with Mounted Combat? Or some other tactic, perhaps, to keep them alive?

6. If I took the Ceratosaurus as my animal companion with Mad Dog, would its blood rage ability stack on top of the shared rage? Would this be considered advisable?

"FAQ disallowing the mixing of lists"

I saw the FAQ on Paladins and Cavaliers getting more "from legal sources"

I didn't look up any other questions.

The one I looked at also had questions concerning setting up events and such, it was not the one you linked me to. I don't know if the same question was asked there but if it was, I missed it, or had forgotten as I had with the fact that the Paladin question also covered Cavaliers.

Thank you Tallow.

I think it's much easier to get a direct answer from the writers as opposed to discussing "well it could mean this."

That helped a lot.

Well.. now I'm confused. I definitely want to find what Mike said concerning what a legal source is.

Also, concerning "The Druid class has all animal types on its own list, but does not grant more animal types to the Cavalier or Paladin list. As such, you would have two animal companions."

I don't see that as being disallowed? The rules, if I recall, say you can only have one combat pet in action, but you're allowed to have as many noncombat pets as the DM feels is appropriate for not bogging down play. So you can couple mounts with companions and familiars and such.

Even if it didn't give them its animals to their allowable mount list, you'd STILL have an animal companion that probably isn't trained to be a mount and an animal companion mount. You could just switch them in and out depending on what kind of fights you might encounter in City X or Dungeon Y.

This is why some classes, like Mammoth Rider, specify that they replace your old mount IF you elect to take the one they offer. Because the pet cheese starts to sky rocket.

"legal source" - Now see, I read source as being another class or other legal way to get the animal, not as a book. That would make it much more cut and dry.

Although sadly also quite boring.

I would like to see that clarification if anyone has the link, though. So I can tuck it away for reference.

EDIT: Probably sounds crazy, but is it possible to just e-mail them and ask them instead of hunting down whatever thread had the clarification in it?

I don't see that in the Mammoth Rider class at all? I read it as that it doesn't allow you to pick up a second animal, it specifically says "You can" not "You must" when it lists its optional mounts. The replacement line at the end I believe is specifically to disallow cheese like having a giant tanky beast running up and smacking the enemy while you dance circles around it from a distance on a hasted horse.

Edit: My question isn't whether these classes by their rules disallow extra mounts, because if one explicitly says you can't then you can't, otherwise I don't think there's any room for discussion on that by RAW. Which means, specifically, I want clarification on the vague area where no hard rule is written on cross class mount allowances when it comes to non-Paladin or non-Cavalier classes.

Nefreet, that seems to contradict the faq as far as Paladins are concerned, at least. As it doesn't specify that they have to be a feat, but simply a legal source to have obtained the animal.

Also, I completely forgot that the FAQ covered Cavaliers as well, which also have the same statement attached to them.

Where did you see the ruling that classes which legally grant other animals can't be coupled with the Paladin? Because I feel like the FAQ specifically would permit that.

I saw in the FAQ that a Paladin's mount options expand if they have unlocked other mounts through other sources, such as Beast Rider or Monstrous Mount.

Does this apply to other classes with mounts or animal companions?

For instance, could you use Druid to get your Varisian Cowboy (Spellscar Drifter) a wicked Desert Scorpion Mount (Scorpion, Giant)? Or use Beast Rider to give your Tolguth Armored Escort (Mammoth Rider) a now huge sized Brachiosaur?

If this is a PFS specific question, you might have more luck getting an answer there.

You're probably right. I'm sorry. Still learning my way around here. I'll take my question there. Thank you for the heads up! =)

It was recently suggested to me that the Mammoth Rider's new steeds by default replace your old one.

I argued in return that they are an option, offered to replace your old selections (in case you were stuck with a pony or dog, for instance, due to being small).

Specifically, my argument is that the word "can" is used as opposed to "must." That the line about them replacing your mount later on is specifically to avoid you trying to cheese in multiple combat animals.

I was under the impression due to previous statements that if you have a mount unlocked for yourself from something else, such as due to beast rider or monstrous mount, then it counts as something you can use with your the class features that apply to mounts.

The statement I was looking at in particular is from the PFS FAQ about Paladins which says "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."

Edit: Removed a bit of commentary to keep it cleaned up and easy to read.