Has anyone ever run into this? Its important, right? I mean you don't run across it often but there are a variety of things it matters for. I think the biggest question is do you occupy every square that you mount does?
Here is an example:
If you are a medium sized character and you are attacking with a non-reach weapon from the back of a large sized mount ...what squares do you threaten? The squares around YOU or the squares around your mount? If it is the former then do you have to declare what square of your mount your character is occupying? If it is the latter then are you counted as occupying those squares for other things like say AOE effects as well?
If you subscribe to the idea that you only occupy your normal 5x5 then do you have to move from one square of your mount to another? Does this cost movement or can you simply arbitrarily decide which square you are at on your mount at any given time? When can you shift positions? What kind of action does it take?
It presents a variety of different issues really. I think I'm just kinda touching the top of the iceberg here. And maybe this question seems a bit too involved to some but I hope I have illustrated some fairly common occurrences that makes the answer important.
Unless I'm mistaken I do not believe the rules cover this. If that is the case I guess I'm just wondering how your groups handle it.
Since you threaten all the squares around the horse, I'd say you effectively occupy the same squares as the horse. If you get the benefit, you also get the drawback.
Yeah, this is the extent of the rules that I found on it:
For simplicity, assume that you share your mount's space during combat.
So it makes sense that you share the same space with the mount then, right?
What if your mount is larger than Large? What if your on a huge mount? Do you threaten all of the squares around it? What if your a Halfling?
As an example: What if you are a Halfling Paladin/Sorcerer with the Sylvan Bloodline and have a Roc Animal Companion. Say you are sufficient level (and likely have the Boon Companion feat) and your Roc has reached Large size and you frequently use it as a mount. You could have been using it as a mount from the point it was Medium sized, but I'm trying to make a point here. Say your Roc is Large size and then you use Share Spells to share an Enlarge Person spell to it and it becomes Huge size. And you have a dagger. And your mounted on it. What squares can you hit with your dagger? Do you actually threaten 16 squares as a small sized Halfling?
Sorry to nitpick, but how'd you get an AC and be able to cast enlarge person on it (and you)?
Share Spells (Ex): The druid may cast a spell with a target of “You” on her animal companion (as a spell with a range of touch) instead of on herself.
Enlarge person does not have a target of "You" so it doesn't qualify in the first place.
As for the general question, I've always imagined that you threaten all the squares around your mount since you kinda lean forward/sidewards/backwards in your saddle and are able to reach the respective square.
As for the halfling; although being small, she does have the same reach as a medium character.
Ruyan.
Dangit. I dunno, a potion of Enlarge Person? Naw, it only works on humanoids. Fine, lets say you used a scroll of Animal Growth.
Anyway, I think I know the RAW answer but this is one of those situations where I find the visual picture of a little Halfling reaching 10' across a Huge sized mount to reach to an enemy on one side and then 10' in the opposite direction to reach an enemy on the other side (hey, he has itterives too, right?) to be kinda... odd. Know what I mean? Suspension of disbelief and all....
I think it's one of those things where, RAW may not make a lot of sense, or have a hard to imagine image (like your Roc example), but you just have one rule for all cases to keep from having a bunch of exceptions to the rule and growing the already large rulebook. I've run across several of these, and generally just shake my head and move on, heh. So, the halfling is one with the bird and can affect and be affected in any square said bird occupies by RAW it seems.
So if a fireball happens to just clip the edge of the Huge Roc's wing then it hits the Halfing?
So basically you all play it that he counts as occupying all squares for all positive and negative effects then, right?
I guess so?... Makes you think about what that means if you use a reach weapon, eh?
So if a fireball happens to just clip the edge of the Huge Roc's wing then it hits the Halfing?
So basically you all play it that he counts as occupying all squares for all positive and negative effects then, right?
Definitely. If he gets the bonus of threatening multiple targets, he gets the penalty for being easier to access =p.
Sorry to nitpick, but how'd you get an AC and be able to cast enlarge person on it (and you)?
Share Spells (Ex): The druid may cast a spell with a target of “You” on her animal companion (as a spell with a range of touch) instead of on herself.Enlarge person does not have a target of "You" so it doesn't qualify in the first place.
Read the rest of the ability. "A druid may cast spells on her animal companion even if the spells normally do not affect creatures of the companion's type (animal)."
If Enlarge Person is cast from the class that grants the animal companion, he can cast it on the AC.
Paladin or normal Druid probably couldn't do it without some odd tricks, but summoners and sylvan sorcerers have no problems.
Sorry to nitpick, but how'd you get an AC and be able to cast enlarge person on it (and you)?
Share Spells (Ex): The druid may cast a spell with a target of “You” on her animal companion (as a spell with a range of touch) instead of on herself.Enlarge person does not have a target of "You" so it doesn't qualify in the first place.Read the rest of the ability. "A druid may cast spells on her animal companion even if the spells normally do not affect creatures of the companion's type (animal)."
If Enlarge Person is cast from the class that grants the animal companion, he can cast it on the AC.
Paladin or normal Druid probably couldn't do it without some odd tricks, but summoners and sylvan sorcerers have no problems.
The point isn't that a roc is not a humanoid, and thus not a valid target for enlarge person. The point is that enlarge person's target line is "one humanoid creature", which makes it not eligible for Share Spells, which only works on spells with a target of "You".
As I understand it, the rider occupies the same squares as the mount.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The point isn't that a roc is not a humanoid, and thus not a valid target for enlarge person.
That's the exact point.
Normally, a wizard can't cast Enlarge Person on a Roc. Why? Because it's not a humanoid, it's an animal.
A sylvan sorcerer can cast Enlarge Person on a Roc, because Share Spells allows him to cast a spell on his animal companion even if the spell would not normally affect it because of it's type.
The point is that enlarge person's target line is "one humanoid creature", which makes it not eligible for Share Spells, which only works on spells with a target of "You".
Share Spells (Ex): "The druid may cast a spell with a target of “You” on her animal companion (as a spell with a range of touch) instead of on herself. A druid may cast spells on her animal companion even if the spells normally do not affect creatures of the companion's type (animal). Spells cast in this way must come from a class that grants an animal companion. This ability does not allow the animal to share abilities that are not spells, even if they function like spells."
Sentence 1: You can cast spells targeting "You" on the animal, like a touch spell. A druid can cast Longstrider on her animal companion.
Sentence 2: You may cast spells on the animal even if they would not normally work, due to the AC's type.
Sentence 3: This only works with spells from the class that grants the AC, not multiclass or UMD or whatever.
Sentence 4: This doesn't work for Sp, Su, etc.
Using the ability from sentence 2 is not contingent on also using the ability from sentence 1.
SKR thought the same thing as you until someone explained it then he asked Jason who verified it.
yes, a regular summoner is able to cast humanoid-only spells on his eidolon (duh)
it seems to me that a Sylvan Sorceror gets an animal companion from her bloodline, not her class, so Share Spells doesn’t allow her to cast Enlarge Person on her animal companion.
Animal Companion (Ex) is the bloodline power and bloodline arcana for the Sylvan bloodline gained from the Wildblooded sorcerer archetype.
Bloodline is a sorcerer class feature.
By taking the level of sorcerer, you gain a class feature which grants you an animal companion.
If Enlarge Person is cast from the class that grants the animal companion, he can cast it on the AC... summoners and sylvan sorcerers have no problems.Forgive me for not reading through the whole 901-post thread you linked if this issue was raised there...but it seems to me that a Sylvan Sorceror gets an animal companion from her bloodline, not her class, so Share Spells doesn’t allow her to cast Enlarge Person on her animal companion.
are you arguing that Bloodline abilities are not class features of a sorcerer?
they're variable class features, sure, but they're still class features.
The problem is not the type the spell effects but the target entry!
You vs. one humanoid creature or creature touched.
See tree shape vs. enlarge person for example. The first has a you as target and is legit, the second spell fails this query.
Back to topic, I'd argue that the effect of being on a large(r) mount is, you occupy all of its squares. This gives you the reach you're entitled to by your size category and/or weapon description and it's similar to being able to stand in a circular room with 40 ft. in diameter and still being able to dodge a fireball.
Ruyan.
The problem is not the type the spell effects but the target entry!
You vs. one humanoid creature or creature touched.See tree shape vs. enlarge person for example. The first has a you as target and is legit, the second spell fails this query.
Ruyan.
The point, Grick, is making (which I agree with) is:
Share Spells has two effects:
A) You get to cast spells with target: You, on your AC.
B) You get to cast spells on the AC even if they don't normally affect the animal type.
My initial thought was that B is just adjusting A, but that can't really be the case. If it is only relevant for personal spells, then B is absolutely redundant, as they never specify type in the target line (since it is "you").
As such they are most likely supposed to two seperate effects (I write "most likely", because an unneccesary line isn't an impossibility).
Hm. Good point. Thanks for the clarification.
Well, since the sentence specifying the entry "Target" comes first, I'd still assume from my professional life that it is the predominant explanation for the feature "Share Spells".
The sentence specifying what type (here: animal) might be affected would be used to illustrate or specify the first sentence with its content.
But I agree that in this case it doesn't make a lot of sence - although that wouldn't be the first case of poorly worded rules.
Ruyan.
Just looked at SRD v3.5. There you find:
Share Spells (Ex): At the druid’s option, she may have any spell (but not any spell-like ability) she casts upon herself also affect her animal companion. The animal companion must be within 5 feet of her at the time of casting to receive the benefit. If the spell or effect has a duration other than instantaneous, it stops affecting the animal companion if the companion moves farther than 5 feet away and will not affect the animal again, even if it returns to the druid before the duration expires. Additionally, the druid may cast a spell with a target of “You” on her animal companion (as a touch range spell) instead of on herself. A druid and her animal companion can share spells even if the spells normally do not affect creatures of the companion’s type (animal).
.
Could it be a left over from 3.5 where much more spells were applicable?
Ruyan.
Could it be a left over from 3.5 where much more spells were applicable?
Not likely, since the 3.5 version splits the spell to have it apply to both creatures. For instance, if the 3.5 druid casts Longstrider on herself, it also affects the companion.
In PFRPG, it's as we've explained. This was verified by SKR, the developer in charge of the FAQ, who specifically asked the rules guy, Jason Bulmahn. It's not possible to be any more official.
Back to topic, I'd argue that the effect of being on a large(r) mount is, you occupy all of its squares. This gives you the reach you're entitled to by your size category and/or weapon description
A medium creature with a longsword on a Large horse should not have 10' reach. You occupy the squares, but your actual size category doesn't change, nor does your reach distance. People say you can hit more squares, which is true, but only because you're occupying more squares. Basically, you can attack anything adjacent to the Horse.
Hm. Then my wording was wonky. That's what I meant. Your reach starts at the borders of the squares your mount occupies and in case of wielding a longsword, you can attack/threaten all the squares adjacent to your mount's squares.
In case of a huge mount (3 x 3 squares, "M") and a medium rider (1 x 1 square, "C") his reach with a longsword would be all squares marked "R" (see below):
RRRRR
RMMMR
RMCMR
RMMMR
RRRRR
Ruyan.
Hm. Then my wording was wonky. That's what I meant.
Ah, gotcha. When you said "your size category" I thought you meant the size category of the rider/mount combination. My mistake.
So, bigger mount, means you threaten more squares?
Yes. You have to remember that a mount actually takes up more squares on the map than the creatures actually needs in order to account for universal facing.
For example, a Heavy Horse technically only needs a 5'x10' section, but takes up a 10'x10' section as a large creature due to the fact that there is no facing.
That same line of thought explains why you would threaten (and be threatened) by the same area as your mount--at any given time the mount can be occupying any of those squares, which adjusts where you can strike and be struck from.