
![]() ![]() ![]() |

Summoner, yes. At level 5, your eidolan can get the wings ability for 2 points, or for 4 you can get magical flying. You are good to go at that point as long as you are small. If you are medium, you'll need to purchase the larger eidolan. I believe there is also a mount ability for eidolans, fairly sure you need to buy that. Also, undead lord cleric can have a zombie version of any animal of HD < Cleric Level. So, dragons, griffons, or any other flying animal, you are good to go as soon as you hit the appropriate level.

![]() ![]() ![]() |

a Baby Roc (not a Rook - a crow) is often used with great effect.
this, very much so this, i ran a group through shades of ice part 3, there was a druid mounted on a baby roc using a lance, he had dipped two levels in fighter... the effects were... devastating, there was one creature he couldn't one shot with minimum damage on a charge, this was in the 4-5 subtier. I had him rolling damage to see if he outright killed things or just took them below zero without killing them.
if you were to compare this guy to the Hurt Me Plenty rules, he was on the I'm to young to die setting, while using cheat codes to get all the weapons and ammo

![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
I know the character, he almost died when his mount was one-shotted at PaizoCon 2010.
As a GM you need to know the fly rules. If you take damage fly checks need to be made etc.. If you are a PC you need to have a ring of featherfall, otherwise things go bad very quickly.
It's a nice build though and he plays it well...

![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |

As a GM you need to know the fly rules. If you take damage fly checks need to be made etc... It's a nice build though and he plays it well...
Your average GM isn't going to be familiar with most of the fly rules (myself included), but the player knows the rules intimately, and makes all the necessary rolls before you even realise they're needed:
Grolshmir: (rolls dice)
Me: What are you doing?
Grolschmir: Handle Animal check ... pass (rolls more dice)
Me: And now?
Grolschmir: Ride check ... pass (rolls yet more dice)
Me: (looks enquiringly)
Grolschmir: Fly check ... pass
It's a killer build, but as a player, he makes the GMs job easy, because he knows his rules, and doesn't hold up the game. He does indeed play it well.
Re flying mounts, as a GM, you're never too sure whether your better tactic is to aim for the mount or aim for the rider?
I wonder if The player with the baby Roc knows he's become popular enough to be talked about in the forums.
Oh, I think he knows ... ;-)

![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Re flying mounts, as a GM, you're never too sure whether your better tactic is to aim for the mount or aim for the rider?
Please target Ari (my Roc)!
But seriously, assuming that the NPC has sufficient sense or knowledge, it's best to target the rider. The rider can generally use Mounted Combat to negate hits to the mount, and the mount typically has natural armour, in addition to armour and dex, so on the raw numbers, the mount's harder to hit.
Plus, it's the rider who's doing most of the damage, not the mount.
Of course, to those less intelligent NPCs out there, poultry must taste better than bony gnome.... even if the bony gnome's dropping swords on you in the Andoran tradition.

![]() ![]() |

Please target Ari (my Roc)!
.... even if the bony gnome's dropping swords on you in the Andoran tradition.
I really like this character concept! I hope we game together.
Got to ask, you mention twice now about "dropping swords". You don't really do that, do you? Swords aren't ranged weapons, so your to hit would be improvised weapons, right?
If your weapon doesn't have reach, when you do a Ride-By (Fly-By) Attack you don't provoke AoO, and to be in a straight line if you start at 10 feet height, attack at 10 feet, you just continue at 10 feet. There wouldn't be any swooping down then soaring up. But that is very cool anyway.
Most Cavaliers with Ride-By-Attack are lucky if they can use it once in a mod. But by being above everyone else you avoid the interferance of other people!
In Ultimate Combat there is a feat, Escape Route (teamwork) you might be interested in.

![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
I have a player...
Gnome Druid Named Littlefoot
Pteradon mount.
Uses flying to great effect.
Laments the lack of flyby for his mount (and by laments i mean Curses)
uses an ancestral lance to great effect.
even cast masterwork item on said lance and has now enchanted it.
GM's, fear the Little foot who makes big tracks!
Just an added note. make sure they are aware of weight limits. it is really easy to make most Medium flying mounts unable to get airborne from too much weight.

![]() |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |

Right Then... A Few Notes on Flying Mounts from a player perspective.
1. Don't recommend it until level 5 or 6 (7 if you have to wait for a mount to fit you.) until that point most flying creatures worth of mount status are sitting at fair or clumsy flying and with the average 180 being a DC 20 fly check plus any other environmental factors, the odds of falling to your death are high...very high.
2. Military Saddles. Hate to say it, but get tied in, its less damage to fall on the dead corpse of your best pal and thank him for it at his funeral than it is to thank him for it in the afterlife. That being said, this can conflict with a Ring of Feather Falling as it is a *I belive* at least a full round action to cut yourself out of it.
3. Feather Falling: This by no means releases the need for feather falling, as I have fallen out of a military saddle on more than one occasion. It took a few trips to the land of unconscious to get me on board that one.
4. Skill Focus Flying for your mount. Do This...Do it Now...and Don't stop putting ranks in it until its level 10 (garnering your mount a +6 bonus).
5. Wind: Think of your mount like a beautiful kite you have strapped your mortal coil into for kicks and giggles. Would you take it up in a Hurricane?...Thought Not. Although... a note for druids. The Cloak of Winds Spell can keep you airborne for combat in crappy conditions. Highly recommend keeping a few scrolls of that one handy.
6. Weight. Anything over a light load will keep your mount grounded. make sure you know what that is and adjust accordingly.
7. Charging: Charging is tricky until you get Ride by then it evens out nicely. Also.. The Wheeling Charge Feat from Cities of Golorian is an absolute must for 3D combat.
7. Try to get ahead of your GM in the rules and roles dept. I mean page numbers, requirements etc. It will make them more comfortable, and let you focus on the real reason you have a flying mount...Looking Freaking Awesome.

![]() |

clarence garrett wrote:Whoa, hold up. Everything I have read says that we can't do that little trick. Now I hear a VC has a player doing it? I'm so confused...
uses an ancestral lance to great effect.
even cast masterwork item on said lance and has now enchanted it.
Since I am the player in question, I will attempt to diffuse this before it turns in to another plethora of rules interpretation. It was decided by me and my VC that the spell worked as written and described in the Guide and FAQ's. Now... adjusting for human error and alternate realities, My VC knows that I will (with only minimal grumbling) acquiesce to any adjustment he asks me to make in result to a rule change. That being said, I keep a printed copy of the rules, a detailed explanation of the reasoning and process we used and a short story that fits the character to present to any GM who has issue with it and (because it's ambiguous) leave it to their discretion on a game to game basis as to whether or not they wish to allow it to work at their table as we understand it. This has proven to be a more equitable solution than endless RAI vs RAW debates on the Boards. I encourage every player with these issues to talk with their favorite PFS GM or VC if possible to see what works best for you.
Flyer.

![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Oh, I'm not out to cause trouble, I actually like the way you handled it. I just wanted clarification, as what I've seen says that doing so would be an end run around the rules, and M & M don't want things to work that way. Now I don't know what to tell players who want to do this.
not an end run. the spell costs more than a masterwork weapon. unless you cast it yourself between scenarios. then it costs as much. it still applies to that weapon only. so you can not change materials or get a "new" or second weapon. and if you loose it you are not a happy player.
not an end around by any means. just playing within the rules. that being said I AM NOT PERFECT. if i missed a RAW that prevents this please point it out. :) I have not photographically memorized all the rules, FAQ's and erratta. so please help me and my players play correctly with specific links/quotes when questioning a ruling of mine. I will admit when i am wrong with a smile. and chastise my players for it ;)

![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |

I think the ruling that "no spell lasts past the end of the scenario, unless it is curing type" I do know that some rulings havnt made it into guide or faq yet.
Now if you want to cast it and than enchant lance every time, that is the only way could work. My comp skills arnt that great so will take time to research, but have a question knowing this is controversial.
Do you bring it up with all your GM's or wait till they ask?

![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |

Was just reading threads on subject. Seems Mark ruled it not legal,but has not been added to FAQ or guide. I dont really see the need to. It dosnt really effect game play that much as I see it. I do like the idea of being able to upgrade your starting weapon using this spell. Even a normal one, that has history for you.
That said, by RAW looks like you can, but knowing they may add it to FAQ, that you wont be able too.

![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Well Mark Moreland commented on the upgrade of heirloom weapons in two threads the first was here
Mike Schneider wrote:When you repair a broken weapon, what you're doing is removing the broken condition from that weapon in the same way you remove a disease or end the effects of a curse. Afflictions and conditions that have been removed do not magically reappear at the start of the next session. The difference between removing a condition and creation something new is where the line is drawn. When you change something from mundane to masterwork you aren't removing conditions. In these cases, under the current rules, such changes do not carry over from session to session.Dennis Baker wrote:I think at this point you pretty clearly cannot.It is as clear as mud because the only arguments I've seen (when any were made) are those which would logically extrapolate to saying that broken-item-repair should also "unwind" at the end of the mod.Quote:At some point don't you have to ask "Do I really want the PFS staff spending their time writing a guide to satisfy the most pedantic readers?"Put yourself in the shoes of a DM who honestly doesn't know whether or not he should be initialing a cert in which a player has a broken dogslicer which he has both (a) repaired, and (b) upgraded to a masterwork weapon -- and he's confused because the Ch6/Ch8 text appears to imply that ongoing buffs (i.e., the Ch6 mentioned Bless) are the sorts of spells being referred to. He has his PDF on netbook, pours over it, and finally shrugs and signs off.
The second is here
We recognize that the rule is unclear, and working that into something that doesn't cause threads like this is high on the agenda for our new campaign coordinator. Until such time as we clarify or change the rules as written, folks need to take off their rules lawyer hats and play the game as best you can interpreting the rules in the spirit of the game and not in an effort to be right and to find every loophole.
Needless to say, this thread has run its course. We get it. The rule needs to be reevaluated. It's been flagged for an FAQ. Thread locked. The end.
The issue with new post-errata heirloom weapons may have been lost in the shuffle, but maybe Mike and Mark can come up with a definitive ruling on the matter soon.

![]() ![]() ![]() |

You aren't a bar approved lawyer? I thought *ALL* VC's had to be lawyers, authors, artists, event organizers, savers of orphans, cookers of meals, and capable of detecting cheaters with a single glance! My faith is shattered!
I jest, I know you are all mortal, with lives outside pathfinder. I am quite thankful for all the work put in by all the staff, and wouldn't dream of asking for more.

![]() |

You aren't a bar approved lawyer? I thought *ALL* VC's had to be lawyers, authors, artists, event organizers, savers of orphans, cookers of meals, and capable of detecting cheaters with a single glance! My faith is shattered!
Isn't that what Moms do? No, wait ... It's dads, right? Ooh, no!!! It's grandads!!! Lol. :)

![]() |

6. Weight. Anything over a light load will keep your mount grounded. make sure you know what that is and adjust accordingly.
This is almost the only efficient use of Muleback Cords IMO, but I am not sure if you can put Muleback Cords on a Mount in PFS. Otherwise, there is always Ant Haul. And if you can get both, they do indeed stack.

![]() |
6. Weight. Anything over a light load will keep your mount grounded. make sure you know what that is and adjust accordingly.
I remember that rule from 3.X. However I had an argument with my housemate who says it was not brought over into Pathfinder. To date, I have not found any text that proves him wrong. So technically, mounts might even fly under heavy loads... with reduced speed.

![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |

To date, I have not found any text that proves him wrong. So technically, mounts might even fly under heavy loads... with reduced speed.
You use the word 'might' in your own post. RAW I'm not sure as last time I looked I didn't find it either. But I wouldn't work on a build that depends on a rules interpretation which 'might' work.
Flyer777 - thanks for sharing. I once saw a low level character discussed here and it seemed it only worked if the character was female, naked and would ride without saddle and harness for weight issues. I never felt comfortable with such a build but it seems you sorted it out at higher level.

![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |

Flyer777 wrote:6. Weight. Anything over a light load will keep your mount grounded. make sure you know what that is and adjust accordingly.This is almost the only efficient use of Muleback Cords IMO, but I am not sure if you can put Muleback Cords on a Mount in PFS. Otherwise, there is always Ant Haul. And if you can get both, they do indeed stack.
This has been discussed on the boards before, and recently. I dont have the link, but I know the answer was that a mount couldnt use them, especially a flying mount.

![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |

Flyer777 wrote:I remember that rule from 3.X. However I had an argument with my housemate who says it was not brought over into Pathfinder. To date, I have not found any text that proves him wrong. So technically, mounts might even fly under heavy loads... with reduced speed.6. Weight. Anything over a light load will keep your mount grounded. make sure you know what that is and adjust accordingly.
Its a bit convoluted to find the rule that supports the fact you cannot fly under medium or heavy loads, but here you go...
Flying mounts can't fly in medium or heavy barding.
A medium or heavy load counts as medium or heavy armor for the purpose of abilities or skills that are restricted by armor.
The above is what I'd use to justify not letting a mounted creature fly should its encumbrance reach medium load.

![]() |

Thod - Kudos...Hope its Helpful
Heirloom Lance - Have been chastised and relinquish the magic back into the void until the Gods see fit to return it to me.
Muleback Cords - Animals have a back slot so...yes.
Weight - Convoluted Yes, Annoying...only before the 7th Level stat explosion most flying mounts get. And Finally if +8 Dex and +10 Natural Armor arent enough for your average Druid's Flying Serpentus...then consider mitheral breastplate barding. Or A high enough ride check to screw that guy hat just nailed your mount at DC 28

![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |

Muleback Cords - Animals have a back slot so...yes.
Not sure if it is officially FAQ'd for PFS or for Pathfinder RPG, but there is a thread out there where Mark Moreland basically says that animals can only use the Amulet slot (might be one more, but that's what I can recall).
Didn't find it in the FAQ, so I guess expect table variation on this.
I personally wouldn't allow it.

![]() |

Flyer777 wrote:
Muleback Cords - Animals have a back slot so...yes.
Not sure if it is officially FAQ'd for PFS or for Pathfinder RPG, but there is a thread out there where Mark Moreland basically says that animals can only use the Amulet slot (might be one more, but that's what I can recall).
Didn't find it in the FAQ, so I guess expect table variation on this.
I personally wouldn't allow it.
See Previous Post about my eternal and undying acquiescence to the demands of GM's concerning ambiguous rules.

![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |

Not sure if it is officially FAQ'd for PFS or for Pathfinder RPG, but there is a thread out there where Mark Moreland basically says that animals can only use the Amulet slot (might be one more, but that's what I can recall).
And some dogs have a sweater slot. >.>

![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Here is the post from Mark. The notation in the corner says it is in the FAQ, but I wasn’t able to find it there.
Companion Item Slot post from Mark
The intent is that animal companions or familiars can not activate magic items that require activation. Something like an amulet of natural armor does not require activation; it's always on (unless it's in an antimagic field or someone dispels it or whatever). That said, a creature is limited by its anatomy. Something without shoulders can't wear a cloak, and something without fingers can't wear a ring. For the sake of PFS, animal companions can wear barding and neck-slot items. All other slots aren't really appropriate for animals (or even magical beasts). The only exception to this would be an imp or quasit familiar gained with the Improved Familiar feat. One could reasonably face either of these wielding a wand or wearing a circlet of persuasion in combat, and after investing a feat to gain their service, they are not limited by the same restrictions as normal bonded creatures like animals (whether treated like animals or magical beasts and regardless of Int scores).