OK, a Horse in the Bestiary has a Strength of 16, and a Heavy Horse (according to the 'Advanced Simple Temple') has a Strength of 20. Now, look at Table 7-9 on Page 174 of the Core Rules. The only way the Light Horse and Heavy Horse should have those weight limits are if they have Str 14 and Str 16, respectively. So, which Strength/table is correct?
And let's not get into the fact a Heavy Horse has an Intelligence of 6 if we are to use the 'Advanced Simple Template'.
OK, a Horse in the Bestiary has a Strength of 16, and a Heavy Horse (according to the 'Advanced Simple Temple') has a Strength of 20. Now, look at Table 7-9 on Page 174 of the Core Rules. The only way the Light Horse and Heavy Horse should have those weight limits are if they have Str 14 and Str 16, respectively. So, which Strength/table is correct?
And let's not get into the fact a Heavy Horse has an Intelligence of 6 if we are to use the 'Advanced Simple Template'.
I think in your first point, yes, you've clearly found an error. It appears to be baggage from 3.5 that wasn't corrected in the PF changes to heavy warhorses.
On the second point, no animal can have an intelligence over 2 and still be called an animal. Barring magic (which the advanced simple template does not grant), the creature's intelligence cannot be over 2.
Yeah... That's what I would assume as well. But Animal Companions get ability score increases so someone will likely want their companion to be smarter. Once they hit Int 3 things get a little weird (i.e. do they need to be taught tricks anymore?)
Back to the Horse Strength thing, the only reason I noticed it is because and unencumbered horse can move 50', and it's almost impossible to have rider and gear equal under 175 lbs. If a Horse's Strength is 16 that would solve a lot of problems, and a Heavy Horses's Strength of 20 would be very helpful to lift those Full-Plate armoured Paladins and whatnot.
I also noticed that in a Ranger's list of Animal Companions, Heavy Horse and Dire Rat are listed by they are not in the Druid section. Nothing major but it's a little confusing and Players shouldn't need the Bestiary to make their characters.
Horses are large creatures, and thus have different encumberance loads. IDHMBIFOM, so you might know that and I may have missed it.
They give those in the table correctly (3x I believe). The problem is that the base strength score doesn't reflect the changes with the advanced creature simple template.
|
You are correct that the table on pg 174 of the PFRPG book is incorrect. The PFRPG bestiary updated the horse (from 3.5) to have a base STR of 16 and a heavy horse has a STR of 20. This wasn't shown in the Core Rulebook it seems (as it's word for word the same as the 3.5 SRD). Since the Bestiary is the "newest" product it should be the most up to date. This is something that will hopefully be fixed in errata and for future versions.
Note: The correct carrying capacities should be 228 and under for a Horse and 399 and under for a heavy horse. Any heavily armored character would be using a Heavy Horse and that capacity seems fine.
Note: The correct carrying capacities should be 228 and under for a Horse and 399 and under for a heavy horse. Any heavily armored character would be using a Heavy Horse and that capacity seems fine.
Yay! Fast horses for all!
| 6 people marked this as FAQ candidate. Staff response: no reply required. |
AACK! This really plays havoc with an adventure line like Kingmaker. The impacts on travel and exploration are significant enough, but the impact on military encounters where suddenly light horse skirmishers are slower than heavily armored knights on destriers due to the light horse's encumbrance are extremely out of sync.
How is it the Dog and Riding Dog warrant each getting it's own stat block, but the vastly more common light and heavy horses do not. Simply making a Light Horse "Advanced" is not a reasonable way to model a heavy horse.
Also take note that the animal companion is the exception to the "animals must have an Int of 2 or less" rule.
Simply making a Light Horse "Advanced" is not a reasonable way to model a heavy horse.
Agreed. That said, fixing this issue at least makes the current situation work as it should. Hit the FAQ button, everyone.
I didn`t like Warhorses being cut either...
Though that is where I could see a Template working, which you apply if it has the right training.
Also take note that the animal companion is the exception to the "animals must have an Int of 2 or less" rule.
I`m curious, I can`t find anything actually stating that exception in the Animal Companion rules...
Though it clearly discusses the possibility of AC`s whose INT is raised above 2, it doesn`t deal with the conflict with the Animal Type (i.e. state they remain Animals even with higher INT, or change to different type). I don`t really see the difference between Animal Companions` wording discussing the possibilities of INT increases, and `Heavy Horses` directing one to apply a Template which increases INT. Both would seem to technically no longer qualify as `Animals`, thus being in `no man`s land` in terms of Type. ...?
It was officially confirmed on another thread.
Here:
EDIT:Sorry, That one has good examples supporting, but no real proof. I'll keep looking.