|
Your trying to ride you mount up stairs? Ya that is a bit cheesy. Medium size cavs can't do that, you think you can just because your small? Your mount is still medium and with you on top that would be one hell of a ride check. Sometimes you need to dismount nature of the beast.See . . . :D DMs get all in a bunch when nothing in the rules say stairs require ride checks. Also, I have yet to see a dog, wolf or cat have a hard time moving up or down stairs. I'm not even sure why YOU think a horse would have a hard time navigating stairs if it was large enough.
I'd buy it if the horse was trying to run up the stairs. But walking? Really? Do a google on riding horse up or down stairs. Hope that's enough to convince you . . .
I served in the cavalry, the term dismounted patrol isnt just for modern warfar. GMs are there to interpert rules where there is none, and riding a dog up the stairs is going to be rough terrain.
|
|
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lGdhu9tBV6s You wanted me to find a horse going up stairs here you go, a police horse going up only a few stairs at a time, the horse slows considerably every attempt and this is starting with a flat platform. If this horse had to go up an entire flight of stairs there would be trouble, and this is a well trained horse.
|
The problem cavaliers have isn't the GMs. It's the nature of organized play itself.
First problem is that the GMs can't write their own adventures. Furthermore, most adventures begin literally right at the entrance of a dungeon, so you're even denied your mount for some possible random encounters en route to the adventure proper.
Second problem is that in OP you don't have continuity of who you play with. In a home/private game that decided to only run PFS OP sanctioned modules, the GM could still cherry pick mount-friendly adventures. Not gonna happen in practice at a public game.
One way to think of it is if you play a cavalier going in on mounted combat feats, you're playing a feat-less fighter in most adventures. Trying to force the mount in is going to annoy some GMs, since they'd think you knew full well that you were picking such a narrow (and often pointless) specialization.
The best idea I've seen for OP is to treat the mount as a simple fighty animal companion (that is, don't ride it), and have potions of Reduce Animal/Pup Form on hand to deal with ladders/tightropes/etc.
Me, I'm biased but I believe a cavalier should be played in OP as a fighter that gives up feats for social skills. The rare times PFS OP modules offer chance for mounted combat you can still rely on class abilities for credible mounted combat.. you don't need a Spirited Charge in order to lay out a smackdown.
|
...Inconsistent DCs for jumps...
I see this all the time - not just for mounts but for characters in general. I find it a tad frustrating, since jump checks are rather frequent, but that's just a personal pet peeve. And, honestly, I'm sure I've been wrong on DC rulings on occasion. For sake of the game - sometimes it's just preferable to come up with a reasonable DC quickly, off the top of your head, than to slow down the combat/flow of the game for everyone to look things up.
In any case, I find it easier just to give a GM the benefit of the doubt in a situation and go with their ruling, whatever it may be (especially with new or inexperienced GMs, but also just as a general practice). It's hard to know all the rules perfectly, all the time, you know? Especially with some of the more unusual classes. Even when a GM gets something wrong, and you know it, if it isn't too unreasonable a DC that he's requesting, it's generally just easier to go with the flow and do as he says than halt everything to look up a (potentially) unusual/grey rule.
The exception to this (for me) would be if it were and absolutely outrageous DC/ruling - I know I'd be inclined to speak up and politely ask if we could review the rule(s) on the matter after the session. Then the flow of the game won't be interrupted and the GM would find out the proper ruling/you'd both come to some agreement on the matter for a future session.
As a side note, I love it when a player has notes or print outs of specific rules pertaining to their character if there are unusual things they may try in combat/in game. In the very least it keeps us from having to pull out our books to check.
|
|
Well you've just proven my point. Somehow a cavalier is now considered a powerbuild. When a halfling takes -2 to strength, and takes smaller damage dice, and has to pay for magic items for both the mount and himself, I'd say he barely keeps up with a rogue. Anyway that was the very point I wanted to make, some GMs just can't take the class and go out of the way to make the class do nothing. Which isn't fun . . .
It becomes a power build when you want to take a mount somewhere they can not go. You get many bonuses to be on your mount. GMs can take the class fine in a house game where they can define there interpretations prior to you makeing a character and getting upset about it, in PFS things are grey in some areas, as you said.
Find me a video that proves your point, I proved mine as asked. In PFS halfing/gnome summoners and cavalers go out of there way to cry foul when a GM prevents them from doing something that is clearly not correct just because it is not in the "rules". Stop trying to break tables and I am sure you will find more reasonable GMS.
|
Your trying to ride you mount up stairs? Ya that is a bit cheesy. Medium size cavs can't do that, you think you can just because your small? Your mount is still medium and with you on top that would be one hell of a ride check. Sometimes you need to dismount nature of the beast.
Why is that cheesy? Stairs usually only constitute difficult terrain, and large dogs (Think Mastiff, Wolf hound, and Great Danes) can easily walk up stairs. Additionally, mounts have encumbrance ratings too. It doesn't matter if a character is mounted on them or not. The character and the character's gear just adds to the weight the mount is carrying to help determine the mount's encumbrance. If they are medium encumbered, they are affected just like anyone who was medium encumbered, as far as strength and dex skill checks go.
The GM in question is being silly.
|
|
Why is that cheesy? ...
The GM in question is being silly.
My main character is a cavalier and I still gotta throw the 'I question this' flag. It is cheesy to expect to be riding around making mounted charges in combat whist in a dungeon environment. Or whislt indoors, excepting on a giant arena type floor.
Making excuses (about size, terrain, etc) is just an attempt to quibble away at the ultimate goal of 'getting away with being cheesy'.
Just one cavalier's opinion ;)
Goes to show however that a GM isn't just being silly when putting his foot down about permitting riding around in unreasonable situations.
(inconsistent Jumping DCs notwithstanding)
|
|
Your trying to ride you mount up stairs? Ya that is a bit cheesy. Medium size cavs can't do that, you think you can just because your small? Your mount is still medium and with you on top that would be one hell of a ride check. Sometimes you need to dismount nature of the beast.
Why is that cheesy? Stairs usually only constitute difficult terrain, and large dogs (Think Mastiff, Wolf hound, and Great Danes) can easily walk up stairs. Additionally, mounts have encumbrance ratings too. It doesn't matter if a character is mounted on them or not. The character and the character's gear just adds to the weight the mount is carrying to help determine the mount's encumbrance. If they are medium encumbered, they are affected just like anyone who was medium encumbered, as far as strength and dex skill checks go.
The GM in question is being silly.
Dogs can go up stairs sure, dogs with riders another story. I didnt say it would not be allowed, I said you should expect a hell of a ride check. It is not just about weight, it is about weight distribution. You would have to control yourself on that mount while going up stairs to avoid being to top heavy. That is were the penalty would come in.
Venture-Captain, Ireland—Belfast
|
Our local assembly parliamant buildings were build in the 1920's. One the design features built in was that the stairs be constructed so that someone could ride a horse to the top rather than having to dismount and climb them! Some stairs are easy for horses, others are not. The same with dogs, if my 6 month old Daschound/terrier could make it up 4 flights of stairs carrying a stuffed bear, twice it's size, in her mouth then a trained riding dog can make it up most stairs.
I would urge GMs not to try and rebalance the game on the fly by adding hurdles to builds like small cavalier or paladins. If you would not harrass an AC don't harrass a mount even if it seems in the heat of the moment that the gnome on a dog is having their cake and eating it. The system balances most things out.
W
|
|
Dogs can go up stairs sure, dogs with riders another story. I didnt say it would not be allowed, I said you should expect a hell of a ride check. It is not just about weight, it is about weight distribution. You would have to control yourself on that mount while going up stairs to avoid being to top heavy. That is were the penalty would come in.
Your trying to ride you mount up stairs? Ya that is a bit cheesy. Medium size cavs can't do that, you think you can just because your small? Your mount is still medium and with you on top that would be one hell of a ride check. Sometimes you need to dismount nature of the beast.
Why is that cheesy? Stairs usually only constitute difficult terrain, and large dogs (Think Mastiff, Wolf hound, and Great Danes) can easily walk up stairs. Additionally, mounts have encumbrance ratings too. It doesn't matter if a character is mounted on them or not. The character and the character's gear just adds to the weight the mount is carrying to help determine the mount's encumbrance. If they are medium encumbered, they are affected just like anyone who was medium encumbered, as far as strength and dex skill checks go.
The GM in question is being silly.
There are no rules in the book that account for this. In a home game a GM is more than allowed to create his own. In PFS, not so much.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lGdhu9tBV6s You wanted me to find a horse going up stairs here you go, a police horse going up only a few stairs at a time, the horse slows considerably every attempt and this is starting with a flat platform. If this horse had to go up an entire flight of stairs there would be trouble, and this is a well trained horse.Really? you only found 1 video? I search and it seems a pretty common riding trick with even steeper inclines then that.
Do these folks seem well trained to you?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lXqRGSsS90M
Once again this is a short bit of stairs with the horse starting from flat ground. Notice the rider has to make his profile low to the horse to do this? Now do that with Fullplate and barding.
As far as rules go, chapter 8 combat covers rough terrain giving you half movement speed, and chapter 13 covers conditions of floors adding difficulty as well. Most important thing to read on 402is that GM are the law of the game, pg 402 for those of you that want to go by the book when it comes to rulings against you, then throw the book out when it doesnt suit you.
|
|
I would urge GMs not to try and rebalance the game on the fly by adding hurdles to builds like small cavalier or paladins.
I think this is the disconnect. What some are calling 'enforcing realism', others are calling 'making up stuff'.
Me, I find myself firmly in the 'riding when you weren't meant to is cheese' crowd. And again, my main IS a cavalier. Just go with the flow rather than bucking it, and you'll have a more fun time. Cavalier class abilities give you all you need in the realm of mounted combat for those handfuls of times it'll even be relevant over the course of your 12 level career.. don't bother 'wasting' mounted combat feat chain since most of the time in PFS OP you'll be that featless-fighter. Focus on something besides mounted combat, and you won't suck/fight with GMs.
|
|
Wow. . . Just wow.
I'm loathe to put words in Nimon's mouth (lol, I made a mess of that last time ;) but I think what he's getting at is the very important distinction between ordinary navigation and tactical movement. They ain't the same, no matter what the rulebook says. And if you wanna play something without having a GM's interpretation, play a MMO or video game.. it's the nature of a RPG.
What *I* was getting at is while one may very reasonably navigate around through a dungeon on the back of a dog, I'd support a GM leaning against even this reasonable act because if you allow the player to move through hallways/up & down stairs outside of the pressures of combat, they'll 99.9999999999999999999999% of the time whine when you lay down the 'in this case you can't ride' card. Sure sure, SOME combats it's feasable to ride a dog around in some dusky cellar. But far from ALL.. there's just infinite reasons why a particular terrain layout is just simply mount-impractical and it's bound to happen, sooner rather than later.
So when confronted with those inevitable impracticalities, having been given a free pass up to that point, many players whine and complain. Compound this with the nature of OP play where a GM is playing with people he doesn't know and hence doesn't know how a player would react, can you blame him for erring on the side of preventing a mid-game blowup?
|
|
Would you be feeling the same way if you played another character who had a very narrow focus of specialization?
For example, is it the player's fault or his various GMs' if a Desert Druid rarely finds adventures that feature his strengths? Or a Sea Witch often being forced to leave her Octopus Familiar behind on adventures out of the water?
Just because you pick a narrow focus doesn't mean adventures need to be reconsidered they way you want them to be in order to accomodate your narrow focus.
Again I feel for you in that so many adventures simply out and out prevent mounted combat options. Really, I do. What I'm against is chosing a small size PC/med size mount as an attempt to get around that. It's legal, sure. IMO it's also cheesy, and I don't believe I'm alone in the opinion, based on your experiences with GMs ;)
|
It puzzles my why GMs in a fantasy game will well "realism" when a Gnome tries to ride a dog up a flight of stairs, but won't bat an eye six (game) seconds later when he channels the wrath of a god through his sword to slay a ghoul.
I played a Halfling paladin in Kingmaker, which is mount-friendly, and was still out-damaged by the raging half-orc Barbarian, so I also don't see why GMs are quick to yell "power-gaming" at this particular melee build.
And that's not even getting into the kind of spells the party wizard can fire off by the time a Paladin/Cavalier can take Spirited Charge.
|
|
And that's what I am pointing out, GMs feeling justified in warping published scenarios in organized play to punish perfectly legal mounts. And as you can also see, I am not alone in being baffled by all the hate.
The forums are a great place to vent when you're angry, mebbe get some 'amens' from a choir agreeing with you :) Very occasionally you'll find a gem of wisdom, and maybe there were none in this thread.
Not much else is gonna happen. Doesn't matter who's right or who's wrong on this, because opinions aren't changing. Fact remains things at the gaming table are gonna be as they were, no matter how a thread discussion goes. I hope either some wisdom or some satisfaction was found. :)
Edit: Mebbe a good name for your halfling cavalier should be Sisyphus :)
|
Venture-Captain, Ireland—Belfast
|
And that's what I am pointing out, GMs feeling justified in warping published scenarios in organized play to punish perfectly legal mounts. And as you can also see, I am not alone in being baffled by all the hate.The forums are a great place to vent when you're angry, mebbe get some 'amens' from a choir agreeing with you :) Very occasionally you'll find a gem of wisdom, and maybe there were none in this thread.
Not much else is gonna happen. Doesn't matter who's right or who's wrong on this, because opinions aren't changing. Fact remains things at the gaming table are gonna be as they were, no matter how a thread discussion goes. I hope either some wisdom or some satisfaction was found. :)
Edit: Mebbe a good name for your halfling cavalier should be Sisyphus :)
I would not be so sure that the issues we raise on the forums (fora?) won't result in some clarification from on high. Since coming to the new job Mike Brock has addressed issues that come up here and I trust he will keep on doing so. In fact if he so desired he could clarify that medium mounts are or are not very able to navigate underground in much the same way that a medium person can.
It is clear which camp I am in: find the idea that cats are to be treated as less nimble than e.g. Dwarves! rather odd.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Most important thing to read on 402is that GM are the law of the game, pg 402 for those of you that want to go by the book when it comes to rulings against you, then throw the book out when it doesnt suit you.
One thing I'd like to point out, and I'm sure Nimon already knows but is neglecting to apply. In Society play the GM is not the law of the game, the Society guidelines are. A GM does not have the authority to subtract or change any of the rules that exist in the core assumption, only make judgement calls when something comes up outside the rule set.
While there are no rules about what circumstances mounts of various sizes can navigate, there is a rule called Play, Play, Play! It is the theme of this rule (and I believe the responsibility of the GM) to make sure the players all have fun. If making a ruling against a player inhibits their fun, was it really worth it for an added sense of reality? Is a medium sized mount's mobility such a crucial part of the game system that a player such receive enough conflict to come post here about it? If a player walks away from the table because of the GM's attitude, then the GM has broken the first rule of Society play.
Now if you feel that cavaliers are over powered and that their mounted combat doesn't belong in dungeons, feel free to bring that up with Paizo. But since they deemed the cavalier balanced and didn't see the need to specifically state the mobility of mounts, I don't think one's going to break your table.
This is a fantasy game with magic and divinity and epic heroes that battle against the powers of ev... well the Aspis Consortium actually. But still, I don't see the need for a GM and player to ever be arguing over such a minute part of the game, especially when Society games typically have a limited amount of time to finish.
|
|
A few things, I never said you could not go up the stairs with a mount. I said you need to make one hell of a ride check. There is armor penaltys in the book, so not sure why that is even being disputed, ride requires dex so it is subject to AC pen. That is why I mentioned Full plate and barding. Chapter 13 talks about check pen applied when ground is uneven for things like acrobatics ect. Realize the core and many older scenarios were made prior to APG being released. There are many factors to consider when going up stairs. Are they slippery? How steep are they? what is the clearance to the ceiling?
Lastly, if you have a problem with your GM, be a man and talk to him about it. If that doesnt get resolved, talk to your VC.
|
|
A few things, I never said you could not go up the stairs with a mount. I said you need to make one hell of a ride check. There is armor penaltys in the book, so not sure why that is even being disputed, ride requires dex so it is subject to AC pen. That is why I mentioned Full plate and barding. Chapter 13 talks about check pen applied when ground is uneven for things like acrobatics ect. Realize the core and many older scenarios were made prior to APG being released. There are many factors to consider when going up stairs. Are they slippery? How steep are they? what is the clearance to the ceiling?Lastly, if you have a problem with your GM, be a man and talk to him about it. If that doesnt get resolved, talk to your VC.
There is no ride check to take your mount on difficult terrain. Stairs are considered difficult terrain. Yes, the speed is halved. But no ride check needs to be made.
The rules are quite clear. You can reduce the mount's speed for encumbrance, and then halve it for difficult terrain. So it doesn't do this quickly. But you can't just make up stuff.
In a home game, make up stuff to your heart's content. But in PFS, this is organized play. The GM is Mark Moreland and Michael Brock. Us table GM's just facilitate games for them. But we follow their rules.
Right now, their rules are to follow the core rules except for the few exceptions that are noted in alternate resources, PFS Guide, and the FAQ.
Any rules for checks you want to make up that the rules do not support, are just that, made up rules, that have no place in PFS organized play.
|
|
There is no ride check to take your mount on difficult terrain. Stairs are considered difficult terrain. Yes, the speed is halved. But no ride check needs to be made.
Well if you want to go by the book then, a GM could easily argue that getting your horse to go up stairs is a push. Animal Handling DC 25 until it is trained for that task.
|
|
In Society play the GM is not the law of the game, the Society guidelines are. A GM does not have the authority to subtract or change any of the rules that exist in the core assumption, only make judgement calls when something comes up outside the rule set.
Heh, I wanted to be done with this thread, but there's one last thing I gotta say here.
Opionions about whether something is allowed or disallowed when it is not covered by the rules (such as riding a dog indoors) becomes arguments about the rules (whether something not covered is legal: "It doesn't say I can't" or not: "It doesn't say you can.") In this case as Nimon says, the GM has say so, unless he's contradicting OP play. Nowhere in OP play does it say you're allowed to ride indoors w/o situational penalties as levied by a GM. But as he pointed out, the core rules assumption DOES say the GM gets to 'make up stuff'.
If one disagrees with the GM you can always play another character instead (as suggested by one person) or play at another GM's table.. that's one big change in OP play from home games.
|
|
In any event, lets look at the big picture. Ok so you get your mount up the stairs in some tower, dungeon what have you. Now you get to engage the boss in mounted combat, which it probably wasnt designed for, but hey you win. Congradulations you found the loop hole and exploited it. If that is the kind of game you want then I guess keep doing what your doing, apparently most of the community will support you.
|
Venture-Captain, Ireland—Belfast
|
Well if you want to go by the book then, a GM could easily argue that getting your horse to go up stairs is a push. Animal Handling DC 25 until it is trained for that task.
There is no ride check to take your mount on difficult terrain. Stairs are considered difficult terrain. Yes, the speed is halved. But no ride check needs to be made.
It strikes me that a GM who would do this is one who has decided that he or she is uneasy with the idea of mounted combat outside of the "real world" historical experience and is seeking a legal pretext to "nerf" it.
Now I "get" why ppl are uneasy. Just beacuse you want to game in a fantasy setting with impossible things like spells and drgaons does not mean that you don't want it to be as close to our world would probably be if there were things like spells etc. In a world where all our experience of mounted travel or combat is on large hooved beasts coming to terms with halflings on dogs bouncing around dungeons challenges us. When a medium rider can't go dungeoneering why allow a small one? I can see why the rules might want to restrict this but I really don't see that they actually did!
To my mind the idea that an animal that can very readily manage real world stairs, like a cat or a dog, trained for riding somehow being unable to trot up some steps while a 60 pound gnome is on their back does not make sense. Getting a hooved animal to go down a spiral staircase makes no sense at all.
What makes zero sense is the idea that it is OK in an OP environment for someone to be told that a GM is going to create their own balancing measures because they feel that small riders are gaining advantage.
If as either a player or organiser I was informed that a gnome on a mountain dog was the suitable level for the teir only to find that the GM didn't approve and would effectively contrue the rules to make it unworkable, I would be, fankly dismayed.
If a GM was letting a warhorse squeeze through a Moria like environment I would be just as unhappy.
Perhaps some offical guidance would be useful.
W
|
|
As the player of a Medium Cavalier who has had to leave his mount behind on more than one occasion, I have to say this. Suck it up. You don't always get to use your class features. Sometimes you have to go through a mod as a fighter with challenge instead of weapon training. Sometimes when you have to climb up a mountain and walk with your legs as opposed to riding your mount. Just appreciate when you can use your mount and thin`gs will seem a lot better.
|
Venture-Captain, Ireland—Belfast
|
As the player of a Medium Cavalier who has had to leave his mount behind on more than one occasion, I have to say this. Suck it up. You don't always get to use your class features. Sometimes you have to go through a mod as a fighter with challenge instead of weapon training. Sometimes when you have to climb up a mountain and walk with your legs as opposed to riding your mount. Just appreciate when you can use your mount and thin`gs will seem a lot better.
As a player of Paladins, since back when D&D was barely Advanced and the demands of a 17 Charisma 13 Wisdom etc meant that you probably had mediocre strength, I know that leaving your warhorse behind at the dungeon door is a necessary evil.
I was wondering if you were urging medium sized riders to come to terms with the (dare I say it "obvious") restrictions of their large mounts or encouraging small ones to accept similar restrictions on their medium ones?
W
|
|
Is it cheesy to play a small sized cavalier simply to have a medium sized mount, in turn simply to have an argument about NOT leaving your mount at the door?
While the infestation of halfling cavaliers in OP would suggest that there are plenty of those who don't.. there are still plenty who would say it is. And those who'd have an issue with the cheese are only going to be further set against you by protestations about how you chose a halfling for roleplaying reasons, rather than an attempt to work the rules to your advantage.
When one of those people is your GM, you just have to suck it up and deal with it (or use the other options voiced earlier)
|
|
I was wondering if you were urging medium sized riders to come to terms with the (dare I say it "obvious") restrictions of their large mounts or encouraging small ones to accept similar restrictions on their medium ones?
What he said.
Just because you're a small character with a medium mount doesn't mean you should expect a free pass. Think about the tough times medium cavaliers have, then go ahead and vent your frustration.
Being mounted is extremely powerful in 3.5/PFRPG. To expect to be able to be mounted all the time, or even the majority of the time, is asking a bit much.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If a GM in PFS is adding rules making it harder for a certain class to use its class features then the player after discussing it with the DM and not being able to work out an equitable comermise should go to the cordinator or venture capatin and tak to him about the problem.
IF a GM abuses his discretion by making u rules to hamper or take away a players class ability then the GM after be warned about doing this
by the Venture Captain or the Cordinator should be dissallowed from game mastering for that PFS group, because the GM is vioalting the rules himself by changing the senario which is not allowed in PFS.
Until the Devs make a ruling about a mount going up or down stairs and errata it they should be allowed to with out penalty. Mounts and animal companions are all ready nerfed to much IMO. Note I have not played a class in PFS for this reason.
Director of Brand Strategy
|
Whether a Medium mount can go up or down stairs with(out) Ride or Handle Animal checks is not something we'll be making a ruling about for PFS. This is the sort of rule that works in PFS the way it works in the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game rules. If there is confusion about this, it should be taken to the general PRPG forums to ask someone on the design team for clarification of an addendum to the FAQ.
And while I'm here, just a reminder to keep things civil and consider that not everyone has the same play style as everyone else. If someone asks a rules question or interprets the rules differently, it doesn't mean they're trying to find loopholes and "cheese" the system. So let's try to leave those kinds of accusations and insinuations off the PFS boards, please. It doesn't make a welcoming environment for what is, for a large number of people, their first experience on the paizo.com message boards.
Thanks!
|
Venture-Captain, Ireland—Belfast
|
I was wondering if you were urging medium sized riders to come to terms with the (dare I say it "obvious") restrictions of their large mounts or encouraging small ones to accept similar restrictions on their medium ones?What he said.
Just because you're a small character with a medium mount doesn't mean you should expect a free pass. Think about the tough times medium cavaliers have, then go ahead and vent your frustration.
Being mounted is extremely powerful in 3.5/PFRPG. To expect to be able to be mounted all the time, or even the majority of the time, is asking a bit much.
Feral. It does not fall to me as. GM or organiser to try and address your very fair points by choosing to rebalance the PFRPG/PFS rules at the table.
Yes taking a medium cavalier or any medium sized mounted character puts you at adisadvantage in most PFS situations. That is because you are most powerful when mounted but have to ride a large mount, often one with hooves in a world where horse access is lamentably poor! (terrain size and shape only really accessible to medium or smaller ppl or critters). In fact when we sit around spitballing the great PFS scenario we will one day co-author we often mention writing in a bit to let mounted PCs shine
If you can ride a big cat or dog then you are in one fell swoop solving those problems. The Druid in my group keeps his wolf reduced in size when indoors because of the problems of any large creature inside. The summoner is beginning to wish he had the same option on his eidelon! OFC neither of them have to make the squeezing worse by trying to ride!
Just like little guys got the Tunnel Rat duty in wartime and midget subs could go places where normal sized ones could not, sometimes being small is a real tactical benefit. At others when you are wondering if you will ever actually damage a creature with DR then being small ain't so much fun!
I am not 100% agin some mechanical review that makes medium mounted specialist more flexible or better defines restrictions on medium mounts but in the limited world of dungeoneering being on a riding dog or cat is simply better than being on a horse, just as in wilderness settings the horse is better again.
W
|
|
You are 100% correct. A PFS judge does not have the power to invent rules to correct imbalances he/she finds within the game.
He does, however, have the power to make judgement calls where there are no rules in place. As there are no rules explaining how mounts handle climbing stairs, ladders, and/or playground jungle gyms you are at the mercy of the DM to rule as he sees fit. In this case, I would not fault the DM for ruling that your mount has a good deal of difficulty climbing said stairs.
|
|
Setting aside questions of cheese. as well as all of the previous suggestions of how to deal with a GM who doesn't see things eye to eye with you..
Another thing you can do is make sure your mount's acrobatics & climb skill ranks aren't neglected. A GM who's set on punishing you for riding when/where he feels you 'shouldn't' would be wise to skip the Ride checks entirely and see how long your mount makes its own skill checks.
I'd also recommend getting UMD (lots of ways to get it as a class skill) and having various forms of magic on tap to deal with GM rulings. Spider climb would be invaluable, not to mention being able to heal your own mount as a way to defeat a possible GM strategy of making the party healer be the one to tell you 'Leave the dang thing behind..'