| 15 people marked this as FAQ candidate. Answered in the FAQ. |
With the new FAQ system put up I thought it would be a good idea to throw this out there for clarification. I was hoping the APG and cavalier class would clear this up... but if it did I missed it.
1. Does the Handle Animal Tasks of Combat Training or Fighting teach an animal to use barding.
2. If animals do not get it with the training how do normal mounts get the feats to be able to use barding?
3. Per the Bestiary an Animal is • "Proficient with no armor unless trained for war."
How does an animal get the phrase "trained for war."
With the Cavalier class the mounts get light armor proficiency for free and is considered combat trained.
|
I clicked the faq button, but wouldn't a logical conclusion be that you have to Handle Animal Train a mount for Combat (using the outlined trick package) and then say it qualifies for Light Armor proficiency (which could then be upgraded as needed)?
Of course, once combat trained, it would have to take the Light Armor Profiency feat.
The problem with that is I don't know how a normal heavy horse from the bestiary or any other animal that is not a players pet could ever get the feats to be able to wear barding and still be able to attack in combat with any effectiveness.
This may be one of those things were a "monster" gets the feats for free if the DM handwaves the phrase "Trained for War" while a players pet would use separate rules and leveling to get the feats to eventually be able to wear armor at higher levels.
The problem with that is I don't know how a normal heavy horse from the bestiary or any other animal that is not a players pet could ever get the feats to be able to wear barding and still be able to attack in combat with any effectiveness.
Well, they wouldn't. A monster is assumed to be proficient with any gear it is listed with. IIRC, there is only one animal [by type] that has armor in it' description, and that is the heavy war horse. I also agree that "trained for combat" would give at least light armor proficiency, but fail to see why one would WANT more armor than that for a mount. Between the armors speed penalties, and the encumbrance from the rider, you'd slow a horse/mount down REAL fast, and that isn't good for anyone. A non-mount druid pet would be a different case, but even then you'd be hard pressed to make a case for anything heavier than medium. IMO, of course.
I also agree that "trained for combat" would give at least light armor proficiency, but fail to see why one would WANT more armor than that for a mount. Between the armors speed penalties, and the encumbrance from the rider, you'd slow a horse/mount down REAL fast, and that isn't good for anyone.
I think that you are assuming the only reason anyone would ride a mount is for sheer speed and mobility. If you take the classic knight-in-shining armor, I could see the primary purpose of the mount as adding a full ton of mass and power behind a lance strike, particularly when you start considering feats such as Spirited Charge. In that instance, the guy riding the horse would have a reasonable expectation that his mount might regularly be in the thick of melee combat and likewise might want to drop as much armor onto the horse as they can afford to increase its survivability.
Also, with 50 feet of base movement, even if a horse is wearing full plate barding and/or carrying a heavy load, it is still going to have a modified movement of 35 feet, which is significantly better than the armored knight riding it with his 20 feet of movement (assuming a base speed of 30 and heavy armor).
Of course not everyone who rides horses is going to use them in the middle of melee, but I do think this is a case where the rider might want as much barding as they can get.
As far as the OP, I believe it was stated in a prior post that the Combat Training general purpose under the Handle Animal skill constitutues "training for war."
-Brooks
re: horse as mass- I agree, but i think that aspect is poorly modeled in game terms, outside of certain feats.
As even heavy cavalry rarely got bogged down in hand to hand fighting in any serious way. The primary aim of the heavy lance charge was to break formations of foot, thus allowing your own infantry space to maneuver. Any general or war leader who had his heavy cavalry charge another group of the same would be considered nuts. And even when deployed against foot, they cavalry would charge, withdraw, reform, and charge again (when possible, of course), not get bogged down in a melee. Too many opportunities for the groundlings to injure the horse, cut saddle straps, take control of reigns, etc.
But again, that is mass combat, not the more raider/bandit like operations one sees in an adventuring group. There, a mount IS very much about mobility (IME), and hit and run, mounted archery, and even dragoon tactics (ride to maneuver, dismount to fight) are more common tactics. Though charging a group of PCs with lance armed Gnolls mounted on Dire Hyenas was one fo the most pants wettingly fun moments I've had as a DM. They about poo-ed themselves :)
SNIP
As far as the OP, I believe it was stated in a prior post that the Combat Training general purpose under the Handle Animal skill constitutues "training for war."
-Brooks
But if Combat Training is the same thing as Trained for War, then why does a Cavalier have the following comment.
"The mount is always considered combat trained and begins play with Light
Armor Proficiency as a bonus feat."
If they were the same then all pets that took the combat training skill task would have all three feats for free so there would be no reason to spell out light as a bonus feat. And as the mount is a huge part of the cavalier I would be surprised if the comment was to limit a cavaliers mount over others.
I really think that the intent is to make "pets" different then random animals. They can have armor but they have to spend feats... and the phrase "Trained for war" is there to allow a DM to give monster animals extra stuff when needed.
My main goal in the clarification is to find out what if any feats are given for free with the Fighting and Combat Trained skill tasks. This will help in my house game to be consistent with future rules. Also, in Hero Lab it gives you all the feats for free... and when you make a Cavalier that gives you too many feats. This is something they can change if we get an official clarification or FAQ.
Not trying to beat a dead horse or be obtuse, just looking to clarify my original question.
Any word on the matter? How does a creature become "trained for war" and what benefits does it get from it exactly?
Any word on the matter? How does a creature become "trained for war" and what benefits does it get from it exactly?
Q: When a mount or animal companion like a horse is "War Trained" does it gain all Armor proficiencies (light, medium, heavy), no armor proficiencies, or just the light armor as indicated under the cavalier?
A: (Official FAQ 10/21/10) No, using Handle Animal to train an animal, or mount, in this way does not grant it a free bonus feat. It is not unreasonable, however to assume that an animal specifically designed to be ridden (such as a horse or dog) could be purchased with Light Armor Proficiency as one of its feats (swapping out Endurance or Skill Focus respectively) for the same cost. [Source]
-So they've changed that. War trained basically gives horses and ponies the ability to use their hooves as primary weapons, and the tricks attack, come, defend, down, guard, and heel. If you have anormal animal with a 2 int, thats all of their tricks. Note that the attack trick will only let the animal attack humanoids, monstrous humanoids, giants, or other animals without being pushed, and you can't train an animal for combat and then train it to attack unless it has extra tricks from being an animal companion.
What about my animal companion (horse) who gains the combat trained special quality since my ranger level is high enough to warrant it?
What about my animal companion (horse) who gains the combat trained special quality since my ranger level is high enough to warrant it?
Its probably MEANT to just let the horse use its hooves as primary attacks (just like everything else really. Horses seem to be underpowered as animal companions) But with RAW and the FAQ it would
1) allow the horse to use its hooves as primary weapons
2) give the animal 6 "free" bonus tricks.
|
What about my animal companion (horse) who gains the combat trained special quality since my ranger level is high enough to warrant it?
If you're a ranger, the horse becomes trained for combat as per the Handle Animal skill at 4th level (I don't believe this is a bonus trick, thus it changes the horse's known tricks). I think you could teach it the attack (any creature) trick using one of its bonus tricks, stacking with the attack trick that it gets from combat training.
If you're a cavalier or samurai, your mount explicitly is proficient with light armour. This needed to be stated as a class ability because it's not part of the standard animal companion (horse) progression. As far as I can see, this is a bonus feat. The mount is also combat trained. edit: In summary, at 1st level, the cavalier's mount has two feats: Light Armour Proficiency and one feat as a 1st-level animal companion, and 7 tricks: the six listed for combat training, plus one bonus trick.
So essentially Combat trained does nothing except help attack rolls? (Which isn't really true as other companions don't get penalized in the first place).