|
| 2 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Druids get access to all animals
Sylvan Sorcerers and Animal Clerics get access to all animals,
Paladins and Cavaliers get mount specific access,
rangers get access to a small set of animals
all subject to GM choice.
the discussion here link , has come down to : multiclass characters with two classes that grant AC's stack, but only when the LIST of animals is also overlapping. i.e. druid/cavalier only gets to stack AC when the AC is a horse/rideable mount for the creature, sorcerer/ranger would only stack when the animal is on the ranger AC list ( which is also already part of the sorcerer AC list ), and that to get access to other animals beyond that list, you need to get specific inclusion to expand the list.
Rules as written, does that make more sense to people?
or does it make more sense that AC's stack, like the rules say they should, regardless of which subset of animals you choose your pet from?
|
I think that the precedent of "specific trumps general" supports the AC stacking only when it is an AC on both lists.
At the same time, I think most class features have you using the more permissive list when multi-classing for shared features (things like weapon proficieny and armor proficiency). I can't think of features outside of proficiencies that this applies to though...
I think that the exceptions of classes like the cavalier "The creature must be one that he is capable of riding and is suitable as a mount. A Medium cavalier can select a camel or a horse." make it make sense that it should have to be on a specific. But the proviso "The GM might approve other animals as suitable mounts" makes me feel like it should be opened up a little, like in the case of a cavalier/druid. I think Cavalier and druid levels should stack as long as the requirements of "The creature must be one that he is capable of riding and is suitable as a mount". So if the creature is not currently suitable as a mount, no stacking. If the creature is a suitable mount, I think the GM proviso opens up the feature enough to allow you to choose a creature from the more permissive list.
It is saver to have them stack, because (as I said elsewhere on this messageboard) if it doesn't stack you can end up with a level 20 mount and a level 20 non mount AC because the cavalier 4/druid 16 with both the horsemaster feat and the boon companion feat for the druid's AC would raise both to max level.
|
|
It is saver to have them stack, because (as I said elsewhere on this messageboard) if it doesn't stack you can end up with a level 20 mount and a level 20 non mount AC because the cavalier 4/druid 16 with both the horsemaster feat and the boon companion feat for the druid's AC would raise both to max level.
This is a big one. All of the feats and items in place to help rangers and multi-classed druids or cavaliers keep thei mounts and animal companions viable means that there's a couple ways and a few class combos that can give you two at-or-near par for level animal companions if you track the AC abilities separately instead of stacking.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
cases for them stacking:
1. it says so in the druid description.
2. it says so in the animal companion section.
3. there are prestige classes specifically for having more than one animal companion as a single classed character.
someone pointed out to me the "ambiguity" today,
If a character receives an animal companion from more than one source, her effective druid levels stack for the purposes of determining the statistics and abilities of the companion.
the ambiguity being "an animal companion". whether this is referring to the Animal Companion as a class feature ( aka, any class which grants an Animal Companion ), or an animal companion as a specific animal ( aka, classes that both grant access to a specific animal as a companion, like wolf from druid and wolf from ranger ).
I read the ambiguity in the permissive way. but i'd like someday to get it clarified what the developers intent was. When the CRB was written Druid and Ranger were the only ones with different AC list sets, and archetypes didn't exist. At the time Druid / Ranger seemed like it should expand your list of options and there wasn't a question about whether you could take a Dinosaur as a druid, and then take levels of Ranger and stack it. There's also the subclause about GM perogative for expanding the lists.
Now there's archetypes so a single classed Ranger could be a Beastmaster and get a Dinosaur companion without levels in Druid, and Beast Rider so Cavaliers can ride other animals besides the main restriction from their class.
The question still falls: Multiclass characters with animal companions say they stack, but makes no differentiation between selection lists, besides the ambiguous wording "an animal companion".