The group I'm playing with has both a cavalier and a paladin, and we have run into so small problems regarding the mounts. We're level 2, and the cavalier is using the horse animal companion from the druid list, while the Paladin is using a purchased heavy warhorse that he intends on making his Divine Bond. Here are some of the things we've noticed:
1) Heavy warhorses are incredible combatants at low level, getting multiple attacks with attack bonuses and damage in the ballpark of PCs. In a stand up fight, the H. Warhorse would beat the cavalier hands down, and would give the paladin a run for his money. Yes, yes, the characters are smart enough to not get in stand up fights with their own horses, but my point is that the H. Warhorse is a formidable combatant in it's own right. Even more so with a rider to negate hits via mounted combat.
2) The Cavalier is feeling that his special mount is being overshadowed by the store bought mount right now. While everyone in the party agrees that the Animal Companion will eventually be better than its for sale equivalent; it still seems weird that there is such a gap at low level. For example, the Animal Companion's hooves are secondary attacks, and always will be, even though it is combat trained. (This is because the bestiary horse has the special quality docile, which the Companion horse does not have, RAW). The difference in abilities is so wide that the cavalier is considering getting a H. Warhorse as well, and using his Companion as a gear mule until higher level, when it might actually be able to compete.
3) Under the paladin's divine mount, it mentions that paladins typically use H. Warhorses as their mounts, but they use the rules for Animal companions. Is that what the Animal Companion is suppose to be imitating? If so, ability score wise it falls far short. Or is the implication that it is possible to get the horse Animal Companion with the advanced template added to it? I assume neither, but it will cause an awfully big change in the H. Warhorse's stats, as it will immediately have most of its stats and attack bonuses lowered significantly, in exchange for a few feats. Again, while the Animal Companion version will eventually be better than the H. Warhorse, level 5 might not be the tipping point, so the paladin may end up with a second horse as well.
4) The effect that they are having on combat is distorting what kind of challenges are appropriate for our level. Today we fought 3 CR2 Boars, which at our level should be a respectable fight. The horses, particularly the H. Warhorse, did half the damage for the encounter. If not for a connection with a lance charge, they would have done more. The DM dropped the xp award by about 20%, and honestly, none of the players particularly disagreed. The benefit they are providing us far out stripes the cost of acquiring them.
So, what kind of experiences have everyone else had with Animal Companion mounts and/or purchased H. Warhorses? Is there some downside to the H. Warhorse we've overlooked, or some clever way of building the Companion to catch him up to the Warhorse? At what point do you think the balance will tip into the Animal Companions favor? Any other thoughts?
EDIT: Punctuation.
-- snip --
Search the forums.. there were previous threads raised on this topic.
The Heavy Warhorse reference has caused a good deal of confusion. The Paladin gets the same Horse as the Druid (and Cavalier... ) he can't actually take a Heavy Warhorse as his Divine Bond. It might also be in the FAQ for the Core Rulebook, but I am not sure of that.
-- snip --
Search the forums.. there were previous threads raised on this topic.
The Heavy Warhorse reference has caused a good deal of confusion. The Paladin gets the same Horse as the Druid (and Cavalier... ) he can't actually take a Heavy Warhorse as his Divine Bond. It might also be in the FAQ for the Core Rulebook, but I am not sure of that.
Yeah, that's what we figured on the third section's mechanics, even mentioned so. But what do you think about about that, or the other points raised?
To be clear, I did a search before posting, and I'm not asking about how the rules work, which is what the handful of other threads address. I'm asking about what other people think about the possible merits and flaws about how the rules work.
So tell me, what do you think about horses? :)
The animal companion rules overtake the general rules.
I don't see an issue with it. The paladin was willing to pay the gold, and later on when the paladin gets his mount the two horses will be equal.
|
The Heavy Warhorse reference has caused a good deal of confusion. The Paladin gets the same Horse as the Druid (and Cavalier... ) he can't actually take a Heavy Warhorse as his Divine Bond. It might also be in the FAQ for the Core Rulebook, but I am not sure of that.
Wrong. The paladin gets his mount at 5th level, unlike the cavalier which gets it at 1st. The paladin mount entry specifically mentions that it's a heavy warhorse. So in effect, as a result of waiting all the way to 5th, the pally is rewarded with a better horse (statted as per a druid level 5 horse companion PLUS the advanced template)
Please note that the paladin horse also gains spell resistance later, and that you can also summon it from a celestial plane a certain number of times per day. These are actually huge advantages in game play, compared to other mounts. This is no accident. The pally was always meant to have the best mount.
This new cavalier guy is just a paladin wannabe! :)
|
So, what kind of experiences have everyone else had with Animal Companion mounts and/or purchased H. Warhorses? Is there some downside to the H. Warhorse we've overlooked, or some clever way of building the Companion to catch him up to the Warhorse? At what point do you think the balance will tip into the Animal Companions favor? Any other thoughts?
Feats: Power Attack, Armor Prof Light(Free), Medium Armor Prof
Armor: Breastplate Barding
STR:20
DEX:14
CON:17
INT:2
WIS:12
CHA:6
Saves:
F: 7 R: 6 W: 2
CMD: 21
AC: 23
HP: 33
Attacks (Power Attack)
Bite: +6 -> 1d4+9
Hooves(2) +1 (1d6+4) (As written, secondary does not go away at 4th)
Horse, Heavy CR 2
XP 600
N Large animal
Init +4; Senses low-light vision, scent; Perception +8
DEFENSE
AC 19, (assuming light armor as it's single feat wearing a chain shirt barding)
hp 19 (2d8+10)
Fort +8, Ref +7, Will +3
OFFENSE
Speed 50 ft.
Melee bite +5 (1d4+5), 2 hooves +0 (1d6+2)
Space 10 ft.; Reach 5 ft.
STATISTICS
Str 20, Dex 18, Con 21, Int 2, Wis 17, Cha 11
Base Atk +1; CMB +7; CMD 21 (25 vs. trip)
-- snip --
Search the forums.. there were previous threads raised on this topic.
The Heavy Warhorse reference has caused a good deal of confusion. The Paladin gets the same Horse as the Druid (and Cavalier... ) he can't actually take a Heavy Warhorse as his Divine Bond. It might also be in the FAQ for the Core Rulebook, but I am not sure of that.
Yeah, that's what we figured on the third section's mechanics, even mentioned so. But what do you think about about that, or the other points raised?
To be clear, I did a search before posting, and I'm not asking about how the rules work, which is what the handful of other threads address. I'm asking about what other people think about the possible merits and flaws about how the rules work.
So tell me, what do you think about horses? :)
My apologies.. that's what I get for posting in a hurry.
I think what we are seeing here is the result of backwards compatabiliry and changes that did not complete in transition to Pathfinder.
In older editions, the Paladin did get a Heavy Warhorse as a mount.. so for tradition's sake, I can see the developers leaving those references in, but I think the biggest issue is that the legacy reference creates confusion.
There is no "Heavy Warhorse" in the Bestiary, nor ANY "Warhorse" for that matter.
I *believe* that the reference to Heavy Warhorse in the Paladin entry is an oversight, and nothing more. I'd like to see that addressed in the FAQ, as well, to put that to rest if it is so.
The key point is that, as I read the Mount entries, the character gains a new animal companion (described as unusually strong and intelligent); any one he purchased before does not suddenly become an Animal Companion.
That allows the low-level characters to sink a pile of money into a combat-trained Heavy or Light horse if they wish, and that may prove worthwhile for a time, but becomes less of a "great idea" when the action shifts to places the animals cannot go. In a campaign where most or all of the action is in places where horses can be used readily, then those purchased warhorses can be a problem for balance. In a game with a mix of environments, especially at low levels, less so.
In 2nd Edition, I once had a party that spent their money on war dogs. Six PCs bought 9 War Dogs at 1st level. THAT was a problem I had not expected, and it continued until the monsters targeted the dogs. :D
|
Also, don't forget that that the Paladin must spend a move action to use Handle Animal if he's not riding his horse (in which case it's a Ride check); his heavy warhorse doesn't have the Link special ability that the Cavalier's mount does. Those are two skills, and the Paladin only gets a measly 2 skill points per level.
|
|
The "Heavy" is actually a holdout from Advanced Dungeons and Dragons 1st ed. I checked my old PHB from 1st ed and here is the entry...
***
At 4th level - or at any time thereafter - the paladin may
call for his warhorse; this creature is an intelligent heavy
warhorse, with 5 +5 hit dice (5d8 plus 5 hit points), AC 5, and
the speed of a medium warhorse (18"); it will magically
oppear, but only one such animal is available every ten years,
so that if the first is lost the paladin must wait until the end of
the period for another.
***
This is when you used the actual entry and just replaced its HP and AC. 10 year wait if it dies!
stat out a horse companion to 7'th companion level then compare it to a bestiary heavy horse. This is like comparing the big cat companion at level 1 to a bestiary lion. Things are weaker at level 1.....you are new to your field!
The difference being of course, that while a companion big cat is weaker than the lion, nobody else in the party is going to have a tamed lion. ;)
Now lets check the stats you posted...well, I can't think of any reason besides cost to get a heavy horse that isn't combat trained, besides a small price difference. So let's assume the h. horse is combat trained, which will mean its hoof attacks aren't secondary attacks; Melee bite +5 (1d4+5), 2 hooves +5 (1d6+5).
Let's also skip over the feat choices for purchased horses debate, and assume that the heavy horse doesn't have light armor proficiency. That would mean that it could wear armor, but it's armor check penalty would apply to it's attacks, and that's not something we want obviously. So instead of chain shirt barding, we'll give him leather barding, which will lower his AC to 17.
Looking at the two, it seems that the the animal companion has the advantage in defense generally, with a 4 higher AC, 14 more HP, although the heavy horse has an edge in saves, each being 1 higher. The edge is small though, because the companion does have evasion, which helps even the score on that account.
On offense, the h. horse shines however, with three attacks at +5 and each attack having a +5 to damage. While the companion may be more effective against targets with DR with its bite, the secondary attacks lag far behind, even with power attack.
Note, that at this point, the Animal companions is the more expensive of the two however, as the cost of his heavier barding more than makes up for the initial cost of the combat trained heavy horse. Still, at level 4 their seems to be a equilibrium of sorts, in that there is a sound reason to prefer either option, depending on what you want out of your mount.
But lets bump the level up to 5, as that's when the paladin will have to decide if he wants an companion in addition to his trusty H. Horse. We'll also make a few alterations here and there, to try to get as much as we can out of the Horses.
XP 600
N Large animal
Init +4; Senses low-light vision, scent; Perception +8
DEFENSE
AC 17, (leather barding)
hp 19 (2d8+10)
Fort +8, Ref +7, Will +3
OFFENSE
Speed 50 ft.
Melee Melee bite +5 (1d4+5), 2 hooves +5 (1d6+5)
Space 10 ft.; Reach 5 ft.
STATISTICS
Str 20, Dex 18, Con 21, Int 2, Wis 17, Cha 11
Base Atk +1; CMB +7; CMD 21 (25 vs. trip)
Feats: Power Attack, Armor Prof Light(Free), Medium Armor Prof, Weapon Focus (hoofs). (H. Armor was an option, but seems cost prohibitive on the face of it.)
Armor: Breastplate Barding
STR:20 (22, for the cavalier)
DEX:14
CON:17
INT:2 (6, in the case of the paladin)
WIS:12
CHA:6
Saves:
F: 7 R: 6 W: 2
CMD: 21
AC: 23
HP: 37 (5d8+15) (it looks like you gave the companion max health for his first hd)
Attacks (Power Attack)
Bite: +6 (1d4+7) / +7 (1d4+8) (corrected from above)
Hooves(2) +2 (1d6+3) / +3 (1d6+4)
*: 22 in the case of the cavalier, who took the alternate racial trait, eye for talent. I'm adding it both for my sake, and to illustrate an additional benefit that animal companions have over purchased mounts.
Eye for Talent: Humans have great intuition for hidden potential. They gain a +2 bonus on Sense Motive checks. In addition, when they acquire an animal companion, bonded mount, cohort, or familiar, that creature gains a +2 bonus to one ability score of the character’s choice. This racial trait replaces the bonus feat racial trait.
So it looks like even at level 5, the h. horse has the advantage when it comes to offense, although the gap is closing.
@Urath Warhorse is a holdover from earlier editions. When I say warhorse, what I mean is a combat trained horse, sorry for the confusion on that account.
EDIT: Forgot size penalty to attacks.