A buddy of mine and I were looking at making a cavalier and concluded a medium cavalier such as a human is better than a small cavalier such as a halfling. Now, we both know that the advantage a small cavalier has is riding his mount virtually anywhere but stats wise the medium cavalier is superior. So is our conclusion correct that the medium cavalier is better or are we missing something?
A buddy of mine and I were looking at making a cavalier and concluded a medium cavalier such as a human is better than a small cavalier such as a halfling. Now, we both know that the advantage a small cavalier has is riding his mount virtually anywhere but stats wise the medium cavalier is superior. So is our conclusion correct that the medium cavalier is better or are we missing something?
Depends on what you think you are likely to be doing most of the time. If your campaign is going to be dominated by outdoor adventures with plenty of room to maneuver, definitely a medium (or even large if your DM allows alternate races) cavalier will be better. If you know you're going to be doing lots of dungeon delving and operating in tight spaces or different environments that will not permit a horse, then the small cavalier will be mechanically better.
Personally, as style is at least as important as mechanical substance to me, the question is really: what do you want to play? When the idea of halfling dogriders first came out I thought it was pretty cool and unique to play something so different. Now that the powergamers have gotten ahold of the concept and shown how devastating it can be in certain settings, and you have lo9ts of players wanting to play one, I'm kind of cold to the idea. It's no longer unique and interesting to me. Frankly, the idea of a halfling cavalier kind of makes me want to giggle. Mechanically, it definitely works, but it doesn't pass my giggle test, so I probably won't ever play one. YMMV.
During the playtest, I ran a halfling cavalier in a one-shot adventure. It was built around charging, which is probably how most cavaliers will be built. (I think the class even gets additional bonuses for charging.) I also had Ride By Attack, so that I could end up far enough away to charge next round.
There was a mixture of inside and outside combat. Since I was small and my mount was medium, I was able to charge about half the time during combat. If I had had a medium mount, I would almost never have had enough room to charge.
Actually, I might be confusing remembering when I could charge with when I could ride-by. However, assuming you challenge the BBEG so you only want to charge him, between minions and fellow party members, it is difficult to set up a ride-by attack each round.
In the games that I have been in, 90%+ of fights are inside (building, cave, dungeon...) so specializing in riding a large mount like a horse would gimp a character because he'd rarely be in his ideal element. If you went with a small one then you could be mounted in most places.
I realize the cavalier is focused on his mount and charging and as such a small cavalier is better because of the ability to have a mount in most situations but once you get rid of the mount the medium cavalier is better. The medium cavalier is better when both are without a mount because you can make him/her better stats wise. My human cavalier has already been in situations where even a small cavalier would not have his/her mount, which is what prompted this post. And I know, I will be in more situations in this adventure path where a mount will not be used even for small cavaliers.
Your forgetting one important detail...
The small cavaliers can
I rest my case. Small cavaliers win.
Oh, and they can actually take their mounts around with them rather than having to leave them outside all the time...
I think goblins on war pigs is an excellent idea.
A buddy of mine and I were looking at making a cavalier and concluded a medium cavalier such as a human is better than a small cavalier such as a halfling. Now, we both know that the advantage a small cavalier has is riding his mount virtually anywhere but stats wise the medium cavalier is superior. So is our conclusion correct that the medium cavalier is better or are we missing something?
If you're talking about just the numbers, rather than situational benefits, then yes the medium cavalier is better. Medium characters basically always outclass small characters when it comes to physical combat. (When we're talking class vs. same class)
Unless I was playing in "The Great Plains - Adventures On The Prairie" I would never build a Medium character heavily focused on being mounted. A small Ranger, Cavalier, Paladin, or Druid on a high quality Medium mount can use the mount to make up for his size penalties quite nicely.
It's safe to assume you can't have a horse in 50-75% of situations. So compare an unmounted human Cavalier compared to a mounted halfling/gnome cavalier, and see how the numbers compare. My estimate is that the small mounted cavalier will be slightly more powerful.
|
I think goblins on war pigs is an excellent idea.Your forgetting one important detail...
The small cavaliers can
I rest my case. Small cavaliers win.
Oh, and they can actually take their mounts around with them rather than having to leave them outside all the time...
In my Kingmaker game, the players picked up a Kobold as a tag-a-long.
He leveled,had been mimicking the Cavalier, and is now a Kobold Rogue (Er, 'Hero) 1/Cav 3. He rides a Thylacine,btw.Adding his Rogue Sneak plus Precise Strike, he makes a pretty badass Flanking buddy for the party's Cavalier and Inquisitor (Both of whom have Precise Strike).
-Uriel
Axebeak mounts for the win! They can attack on a charge, available from a free resource, can accept small or medium riders...
...
Plus they have really good theme music.
???
???Axebeak mounts for the win! They can attack on a charge, available from a free resource, can accept small or medium riders...
...
Plus they have really good theme music.
The yellow ones look like chocobos (chocoboes?) from Final Fantasy.
Personally, when I saw the Cavalier I first came up with a flaming red haired gnome riding a red velociraptor. But I tend to go for "interesting" instead of mechanically sound.
Actually small cavaliers tend to be mechanically sound since most of their bonus comes from things unaffected by size.
For example a halfling cavalier(order of the sword) has a lot going for him -- especially if he takes boar.
He gets his mount's strength bonus to damage, and if he takes just a 13 strength to start with and power attack putting a single point into strength from levels he can have a 24 strength at level 20 (using a +4 book and +6 belt) with a +5 weapon and his mounts strength of 24 (single level into strength) with weapon focus on the lance plus challenge (+20 points) he's looking at:
7+5+7+20+12=51*5(charging at level 20 with spirited charge) = 5d6+255 points of damage -- and we haven't even gotten fancy yet (like actually having a strength score or putting some actual level investment into it).
As you can see most of the cavalier's damage will come from sources other than dice that are completely independent of size. The fact that halflings get bonuses to all their saves, a bonus to hit from size and AC bonus from size just helps them be in that much better of a position to deal good damage as a cavalier.
In short (pun intended) small cavaliers can rock out on all levels -- strictly speaking they are completely better than medium cavaliers in every sense.
Just out of curiosity, in all this discussion about small Cavalier mounts going "anywhere" (presumably into "dungeon" type situations) has anyone noticed that most animals don't want to go into strange smelling underground places? I don't care how well the animal is trained, a dog (for example) is not going to want to take it's sensitive nose into something with as many wierd / strange / dangerous smells as a typical dungeon... they are, in the end, basically normal animals. If you could get one underground you would probably have a nervous, distracted mount that might not function well, or would, at least, require extra care and handling. My 2 cp.
As an aside, some exotic mounts that might be at home in one environment (say underground) might be equally uncomfortable above ground under an open sky...
"Normal"?
Normal animals don't have 16 hit dice +6 to dex and strength, evasion, multi-attack and an additional +12 to natural armor. They also aren't specifically trained by an adventurer to help with adventuring.
Just out of curiosity, in all this discussion about small Cavalier mounts going "anywhere" (presumably into "dungeon" type situations) has anyone noticed that most animals don't want to go into strange smelling underground places? I don't care how well the animal is trained, a dog (for example) is not going to want to take it's sensitive nose into something with as many wierd / strange / dangerous smells as a typical dungeon... they are, in the end, basically normal animals. If you could get one underground you would probably have a nervous, distracted mount that might not function well, or would, at least, require extra care and handling. My 2 cp.
In real life, animals have been trained to all sorts of strange and difficult tasks. I don't think that dungeon crawling is much different from what disaster rescue dogs do.
I think goblins on war pigs is an excellent idea.
I have a goblin pally with a dire bat mount.
Just out of curiosity, in all this discussion about small Cavalier mounts going "anywhere" (presumably into "dungeon" type situations) has anyone noticed that most animals don't want to go into strange smelling underground places? I don't care how well the animal is trained, a dog (for example) is not going to want to take it's sensitive nose into something with as many wierd / strange / dangerous smells as a typical dungeon... they are, in the end, basically normal animals. If you could get one underground you would probably have a nervous, distracted mount that might not function well, or would, at least, require extra care and handling. My 2 cp.
As an aside, some exotic mounts that might be at home in one environment (say underground) might be equally uncomfortable above ground under an open sky...
By this logic, warhorses would not trample enemies, because the nature of a horse is such that an untrained one will stop before making contact with an obstacle, or jump it. Wild horses don't trample people unless stampeding, yet warhorses (particularly the Royal Lipizzaners) are bred to do just that. After all, that's what all that fancy dressage stuff is - warhorse training movements.
A trained dog is very similar - a dog removed from the pack, trained as an attack dog, then returned to the pack will instantly overcome its previous nature and become the alpha, regardless of what its previous standing was. Thus, a dog would undoubtedly have no problems journeying through a dungeon.
???Axebeak mounts for the win! They can attack on a charge, available from a free resource, can accept small or medium riders...
...
Plus they have really good theme music.
"Can you tell me how to get...How to get to Sesame Street"....
As typically the INT gets raised to 3 to avoid tricks and handling, it's a special case that we can even call them animals.
That actually working is a common misconception. Giving an animal 3 intelligence doesn't give it an extra language, so it's still limited to the mundane tricks you taught it as that's all you can really communicate to it (unless you have speak with animals or some such).
The whole raising Int to 3 so tricks aren't necessary whiffs horribly of cheese anyway, and I haven't yet met a DM in RL who would actually let it fly.
I'd let you cast Awaken on your axebeak. Shortly thereafter you'd wish it would shut up and quit talking about finding Mr. Snuffleupagus.
I'd let you cast Awaken on your axebeak. Shortly thereafter you'd wish it would shut up and quit talking about finding Mr. Snuffleupagus.
You have won the thread, sir. Flawless victory!
As typically the INT gets raised to 3 to avoid tricks and handling, it's a special case that we can even call them animals.That actually working is a common misconception. Giving an animal 3 intelligence doesn't give it an extra language, so it's still limited to the mundane tricks you taught it as that's all you can really communicate to it (unless you have speak with animals or some such).
Unless you have it take a rank in linguisitics -- at which point it understands you and can write with it's hoof, or such (elephants have been noted for learning to paint with their trunks).
At the point it has more than 2 Int it's fully "intelligent" and can learn to do things just like anyone else.
Consider all the things the beast master got his pets to do, and they aren't Int 3. Also consider all the things we regularly get normal animals to do -- at Int 2 in pathfinder terms -- I'm pretty sure that an Int 3 animal -- even without linguisitics -- is going to be doing much better than the Int 2 animals.
As typically the INT gets raised to 3 to avoid tricks and handling, it's a special case that we can even call them animals.That actually working is a common misconception. Giving an animal 3 intelligence doesn't give it an extra language, so it's still limited to the mundane tricks you taught it as that's all you can really communicate to it (unless you have speak with animals or some such).Unless you have it take a rank in linguisitics -- at which point it understands you and can write with it's hoof, or such (elephants have been noted for learning to paint with their trunks).
At the point it has more than 2 Int it's fully "intelligent" and can learn to do things just like anyone else.
Consider all the things the beast master got his pets to do, and they aren't Int 3. Also consider all the things we regularly get normal animals to do -- at Int 2 in pathfinder terms -- I'm pretty sure that an Int 3 animal -- even without linguisitics -- is going to be doing much better than the Int 2 animals.
That's a good point. A rank in linguistics ought to solve the problem just fine.
Without it though, you are going to be making a lot of DC 20 Push Animal checks.
That's a good point. A rank in linguistics ought to solve the problem just fine.
Without it though, you are going to be making a lot of DC 20 Push Animal checks.
Oh no! Not a DC 20 handle animal check! I'm only +8 at level one on that check with my animal companion!
Also: The whole idea that an animal wouldn't fight things or wouldn't go places that its master tells it to is nuts "loyal companion" doesn't mean "pet" it doesn't mean "friend" it doesn't mean "follows you around when it's convient" after all that wouldn't be a companion.
Also please note that all cavalier mounts aren't just animals -- they are war trained animals that are loyal to their owner and a step above the common animals -- hence why they gain things like "devotion" (hm... with an ability like that you'd think maybe it's going to stick with the guy?).
Again -- these aren't "normal" animals -- they are combat trained (which gives them several tricks in and of itself) with bonus tricks and a loyalty beyond that of a normal mount.
If I was to say "I'm taking this ordinary mule into the cave" -- well bad example since humans have regularly been using mules in caves for centuries -- so if I said "I'm taking this ordinary guard dog" -- oh wait, another bad example of something humans have been doing for a very long time -- so if I was to say "I'm taking this pig into..." drats again we've put pigs into caves -- or barns to be exact -- and cows, and horses, and chickens -- heck none of these animals have acted out for being placed in "odd" places for centuries --
Why again would they suddenly start doing so now? Especially when they are not "normal" animals in the first place?
The whole raising Int to 3 so tricks aren't necessary whiffs horribly of cheese anyway, and I haven't yet met a DM in RL who would actually let it fly.
I disagree. But, then, the "2 int only" rule is utterly moronic anyway, and has been since 3.0. There are many, many, many examples in real life of creatures categorized as animals in D&D learning human languages or even having languages of their own.
The whole idea that an animal wouldn't fight things or wouldn't go places that its master tells it to is nuts "loyal companion" doesn't mean "pet" it doesn't mean "friend" it doesn't mean "follows you around when it's convient" after all that wouldn't be a companion.
Also please note that all cavalier mounts aren't just animals -- they are war trained animals that are loyal to their owner and a step above the common animals -- hence why they gain things like "devotion" (hm... with an ability like that you'd think maybe it's going to stick with the guy?).
Again -- these aren't "normal" animals -- they are combat trained (which gives them several tricks in and of itself) with bonus tricks and a loyalty beyond that of a normal mount.
If I was to say "I'm taking this ordinary mule into the cave" -- well bad example since humans have regularly been using mules in caves for centuries -- so if I said "I'm taking this ordinary guard dog" -- oh wait, another bad example of something humans have been doing for a very long time -- so if I was to say "I'm taking this pig into..." drats again we've put pigs into caves -- or barns to be exact -- and cows, and horses, and chickens -- heck none of these animals have acted out for being placed in "odd" places for centuries --
Why again would they suddenly start doing so now? Especially when they are not "normal" animals in the first place?
You seem to be addressing a matter somebody else brought up. I don't recall saying anything about animals not attacking or not going with their masters into places.
I merely meant that, despite having 3 intelligence, you kind of need to default to the trick system ANYWAYS with animal companions for lack of a better method of communication in the rules. I suppose you could pantomime I suppose and hope the 3 intelligence animal "gets it," but that isn't going to be more efficient than the trick system most of the time. As mentioned earlier, a rank in linguistics or the speak with animal spell is a good way to get around this as well.
Now I see what you are saying.
I would suggest that an animal with a 3 Int but no ranks in linguisitics should be treated like a friend that doesn't speak your language -- you both might learn a few key phrases to communicate with and learn each other well enough to anticipate the other's moods and wants but that doesn't mean fine details can be easily shared.
"Normal"?
Normal animals don't have 16 hit dice +6 to dex and strength, evasion, multi-attack and an additional +12 to natural armor. They also aren't specifically trained by an adventurer to help with adventuring.
In a fantasy game? Yes, they do, just like people. As for hit dice and armor, go talk to the elephants :) I'm familiar with the training of animals, from medieval warhorses on to modern police dogs. They tend to be well trained for their specific tasks, not jacks of all trades. In short, they don't multi-task that well. To an extent the warhorse is closer to that "do it all" concept. Larger, stronger, more intelligent than typical horses and combat trained. And a good one cost about as much as a small manor house.
By this logic, warhorses would not trample enemies, because the nature of a horse is such that an untrained one will stop before making contact with an obstacle, or jump it. Wild horses don't trample people unless stampeding, yet warhorses (particularly the Royal Lipizzaners) are bred to do just that. After all, that's what all that fancy dressage stuff is - warhorse training movements.
A trained dog is very similar - a dog removed from the pack, trained as an attack dog, then returned to the pack will instantly overcome its previous nature and become the alpha, regardless of what its previous standing was. Thus, a dog would undoubtedly have no problems journeying through a dungeon.
It takes a lot of time and training to get horses to do specific things. Warhorses were very intelligent and extremely well trained, but they had limits. How many years does it take to train a Lipizzaner? As I recall, the average is about 6. And that doesn't involve actual combat.
As for dogs, the best at any job tend to be "one trick ponies". Pun intended :D They sniff drugs. They are guard dogs. They are hunting dogs. There may be, in fact are, crossovers in skills or a natural aptitude but their are limits to that. As for dungeons, I'd think twice about the environment, the smells, the sounds, etc, before I'd breezily say a dog should have no trouble with that. Do it? Yes. If well trained. Have issues with parts of it? Definitely. This should be taken into account and strange environments / tasks should require more control (checks) to do with appropriate modifiers. My 2 cp.
Also: The whole idea that an animal wouldn't fight things or wouldn't go places that its master tells it to is nuts "loyal companion" doesn't mean "pet" it doesn't mean "friend" it doesn't mean "follows you around when it's convient" after all that wouldn't be a companion.
"Slave" and "robot" aren't in the description either. Animals have instincts and intelligence. They act on them, as well as their training.
Also please note that all cavalier mounts aren't just animals -- they are war trained animals that are loyal to their owner and a step above the common animals -- hence why they gain things like "devotion" (hm... with an ability like that you'd think maybe it's going to stick with the guy?).
I'd say "war trained" is an obvious qualification for a cavalier's mount. Everything has limits. The war trained mounts of Lydian cavalry supposedly panicked when confronted with the smell of camels for example. Probably because the smell was new to them. Given familiarity I'm sure that could be overcome. How many strange smells do you think a dungeon has? How sensitive are the noses of dogs for example? How many smells do you think might interest, frighten or set off a dog? H3ll, you can stun a dog with a smell that poor nose blind people might only find annoying.
Again -- these aren't "normal" animals -- they are combat trained (which gives them several tricks in and of itself) with bonus tricks and a loyalty beyond that of a normal mount.If I was to say "I'm taking this ordinary mule into the cave" -- well bad example since humans have regularly been using mules in caves for centuries -- so if I said "I'm taking this ordinary guard dog" -- oh wait, another bad example of something humans have been doing for a very long time -- so if I was to say "I'm taking this pig into..." drats again we've put pigs into caves -- or barns to be exact -- and cows, and horses, and chickens -- heck none of these animals have acted out for being placed in "odd" places for centuries --
Why again would they suddenly start doing so now? Especially when they are not "normal" animals in the first place?
A barn or small cave isn't a dungeon. And they get used to any environment over time. I suppose you could have your mount "dungeon trained" over time. Simulated by easier / fewer checks as they advance, but it takes time. People adapt because they are smart. They adapt better with education and experience. In the case of animal mounts you have training and, eventually, experience. I just wouldn't assume they are super dog until they've put in their time.
It takes a lot of time and training to get horses to do specific things. Warhorses were very intelligent and extremely well trained, but they had limits. How many years does it take to train a Lipizzaner? As I recall, the average is about 6. And that doesn't involve actual combat.
Actually, it doesn't take much time at all to train a horse, even when training them not to fall back to instinct. I've owned horses most of my life and they're far less trouble than people think.
Lipizzaner training is specifically different, and high-end warhorses would start off with that kind of training.
Actually, it doesn't take much time at all to train a horse, even when training them not to fall back to instinct. I've owned horses most of my life and they're far less trouble than people think.Lipizzaner training is specifically different, and high-end warhorses would start off with that kind of training.
I agree. I understand the difference. Breaking a horse to ride is one thing, training a warhorse (which is what we're talking about here) is definitely another.
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 8
|
I agree. I understand the difference. Breaking a horse to ride is one thing, training a warhorse (which is what we're talking about here) is definitely another.
Actually, it doesn't take much time at all to train a horse, even when training them not to fall back to instinct. I've owned horses most of my life and they're far less trouble than people think.Lipizzaner training is specifically different, and high-end warhorses would start off with that kind of training.
In the game, it takes 6 weeks. 3 for riding, 3 for combat. Maybe realism isn't what the rules are going for with animal companions/mounts?
Like you say, it's a fantasy game. Fantasy stories are full of heroic animals that do heroic things that no real world animal would ever do.
I say, let Animal Companions be as exceptional as the PCs they follow. After all, how many people do you know who'd willingly go down into a dark, scary, subterranean labyrinth full of monsters?
In the game, it takes 6 weeks. 3 for riding, 3 for combat. Maybe realism isn't what the rules are going for with animal companions/mounts?Like you say, it's a fantasy game. Fantasy stories are full of heroic animals that do heroic things that no real world animal would ever do.
I say, let Animal Companions be as exceptional as the PCs they follow. After all, how many people do you know who'd willingly go down into a dark, scary, subterranean labyrinth full of monsters?
Realism on training time doesn't bother me any more than realism in crafting times :)
Fantasy stories are also replete with stories of animals that can't deal with heroic things. Horses that bolt, dogs that slink away.
A warhorse or a Cavalier... both are exceptional. I just like my exceptional with a bit more reference to real life. As for going into scary situations... pretty much any combat vet I know. The point is to do the heroic thing despite your limitations. I'd rather have to coax
my horse (making a ride check)and get my nerve together to make a pass with the lance against some unnatural monster. Has to do with the tone of the campaign more than the substance. Besides, somehow having the robot wonder horse that will charge dragons without fear just doesn't appeal to me. I want that horse trembling :) It seems more heroic that way.