Does the animal companion granted by Monstrous Mount advance as an animal (d8 HD, 3/4th BAB) or as a magical beast (d10 HD, full BAB)? It would seem that advancement is unchanged as per the druid's animal companion, but that seems odd to me--why would a griffon become less hardy or combat effective when chosen as a mount?
Because Martials can't have nice things.
Seriously, it's a terrible feat that sets a terrible rules precedent. If you aren't playing in FPS just House Rule it into oblivion.
Does the animal companion granted by Monstrous Mount advance as an animal (d8 HD, 3/4th BAB) or as a magical beast (d10 HD, full BAB)?
It uses animal progression. Getting full BAB and D10 would make this feat pretty amazing though.
Because Martials can't have nice things.
Seriously, it's a terrible feat that sets a terrible rules precedent. If you aren't playing in FPS just House Rule it into oblivion.
There are plenty of reasons you can say this feat sucks, but I don't think changing your animal to full BAB and increasing its HD is one of them. The Pre-reqs and that second feat in the line on the other hand...
Any feat that makes a pegasus or griffin an "animal" is a bad feat.
We just pretend this feat never happened.
|
yeah, a feat to ride griffons and others into combat... that sounds so aweful (I've read the book, can't wait to make a spellscar drifter on a griffon!)
Same here, but mine will be a gnome
|
I don't understand why people hate this feat so much.
Before its release your only option was to buy a Griffon as a statblock from the Bestiary. It was not customizable, and it did not advance. If you wanted to order it to attack, you had to use your move action to do so.
Now it's an Animal Companion, complete with the ability to be upgraded, and using Handle Animal is a free action.
What gives?
There is another feat that makes the AC into a magical beast, but it still uses the normal progression, so this one likely does the same thing.
A druid with this feat, assuming they can qualify for it, would be even more difficult to deal with, and then many players can extrapolate how the AC table works so that would have to be rebuilt.
So that is at least 3 reasons why the feat still follows the standard progression, and a spending a feat to get a mount that flies and advances is not a bad investment, especially as a fighter, who normally has to deal with normal animals that can die with one hit.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
yeah, a feat to ride griffons and others into combat... that sounds so aweful
A feat that lets me use great swords? That's got the be the most amazing feat ever! A feat that lets me ready to attack a guy who hits me? Best feat ever!
Yarr, I don't think anyone's saying the idea of riding a griffon or hippogryph is awful. Execution is another thing altogether.
The problem with this feat is that it sets a rules precedent that without this feat, no character can ride a griffon. It is easily arguable that in order to have a griffon riding character, one must now sink a bunch of feats into it.
At the OP noted, there is no reason at all to take this feat and get a substandard griffon.
|
|
The problem with this feat is that it sets a rules precedent that without this feat, no character can ride a griffon. It is easily arguable that in order to have a griffon riding character, one must now sink a bunch of feats into it.
I don't see how anyone could interpret it that way. There are clear rules for riding exotic mounts, mounted combat, and purchasing/raising a griffon as a mount. This feat changes none of that.
As the OP noted, there is no reason at all to take this feat and get a substandard griffon.
It's not substandard. Without this feat your griffon is stuck with the feats Iron Will, Skill Focus (Perception), and Weapon Focus (bite).
That might seem powerful at level 1, but by level 5 (when most Paladins will be grabbing this feat) you instead get to choose 3 feats. If you want to give your AC Griffon those same 3 feats, you still can. If you don't, you don't have to.
And it advances. An AC Griffon will quickly take over the regular statblock and become a superior creature.
And, again, action economy is what wins fights. Purchasing a Griffon and riding it into combat robs you of that.
As the OP noted, there is no reason at all to take this feat and get a substandard griffon.It's not substandard. Without this feat your griffon is stuck with the feats Iron Will, Skill Focus (Perception), and Weapon Focus (bite).
Well, those aren't bad feats on their own, and one of the big things is that you don't have to meet any requirements(5 ride/handle animal is what you'll probably get) or burn a feat of your own and that the animal companion griffon has a slightly slower than yours animal HD progression while the griffon you buy has a set 5 HD of magical beast, which is a difference between BAB and health. The Griffon you buy also starts out with pounce and rake, which are pretty amazing on a natural attacker, while the one you get through the feat has to wait until level 7 to get them.
But yeah, its substandard at level 4 when you can first get the feat and level 5 when you can get the griffon, but maybe not 7 when it advances and has had some catching up. Its also a lot more expendable as an AC than something you buy, depending on the campaign.
Another weird thing is that because of the requirements, around level 5 you get to try and explain how you get the griffon and if your starting before that you have to live with some other companion. You also might need boon companion to catch that animal friend of yours up, so you might have to wait even longer than that. Now if that was gone, you could snag it at 1 and have a great between you and your cuddly hippogryph friend right from the start.
I like the idea of the feat, but I don't like the execution: a magical beast progressing as an animal just seems... clunky. I agree that a d10/full BAB companion would be powerful, but we've already got the summoner, so why not?
As of now, it appears you can acquire a "real" griffon companion via Leadership, but not a feat specifically designed to grant said companion.
Just a little underwhelming. Oh well.
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
If you use this feat to gain a Griffon as your AC, I know it gains abilities as an AC not as a magical beast, but does its type become Animal, or is its type still Magical Beast?
Yea, thankfully the GM like me thinks the Monstrous Mount Mastery feat is not needed, and will allow me to use the Griffon as a Flying mount at its full fly speed, so long as its at its light load, which is going to be easy, as a sylph sky druid female she is light, and does not carry much.
|
The problem with this feat is that it sets a rules precedent that without this feat, no character can ride a griffon. It is easily arguable that in order to have a griffon riding character, one must now sink a bunch of feats into it.
At the OP noted, there is no reason at all to take this feat and get a substandard griffon.
So at the end of the day: Why do I want a Griffon through this feat rather than through Leadership? Is there some kind of fringe benefit? Is there a reason for me to Griffon Paladin with this feat, rather than taking a weapon as my divine bond or trading it away via an archetype, and then picking up a "Special Paladin Mount" via leadership at level 7 instead of 5? Same question, but posed for the Cavalier. Or go huntmaster, and trade the mount for a combat pet, and use the Griffon as your mount.
I guess I'm just not seeing the real benefit of the feat.
Also, would such a Griffon still be a magical beast? The rules don't seem to specify, but it's clearly following the progression of a regular animal.
The feat makes it super explicit that these creatures follow the animal companion progression table, not a hypothetical table with d10s and full BAB. How is this even a question?
As for creature type...well, as Animal Companions, they're always going to count as Animals for the purpose of which spells can affect them. Normally, I'd say they have to be magical beasts, because they have more than 2 Int.
The interesting question is, is your GM still going to have you roll Handle Animal for your Int 5, common-speaking, not a g## d%#n animal companion?
I suppose if you gained a Griffon through Leadership it would remain a magical beast, and continue to gain magical beast hit dice & BAB. It would however lose all of the things it could gain via being an animal companion, Improved Evasion, + to str & dex, natural armor etc. as well as the connection shared between you and your AC by Link & Devotion (I like to role play those things up, at least a little bit).
As a Paladin you get the Griffon (Or any "Steed" AC) with a celestial template attached at 11th Lvl. and SR of 11 + HD at 15th Lvl. Plus if you can somehow get augment summoning without having to burn a feat for spell focus, the +4 to str and con is nice.
If I make a hunter at some point, I will take the Griffon if I have a DM again that see's Monstrous Mount Mastery as unneeded, and go Primal to have a Huge Griffon that I can cast Animal Growth on to make it Gargantuan...Large cat works fine here as well, just give it the evolution to fly, though griffon's can fly at all times.
Really for me though, I like cat's, and it would seem they are great AC's for Pathfinder, I decided on Sylph Sky Druid, meaning if I want a AC it has to have the ability to fly, Griffon gets the cat goodies (with the one exception, instead of claw/claw it gets talon/talon which means a single feat wont affect four of its attack's, as Rake is considered claws), has the body of a big cat, and meets the sky druids requirements of being able to fly. I would have just taken a Tiger as my AC if I could do so, while still being a sky druid, would have saved me a feat, and could have made Weapon Focus/Improved Critical/Improved Natural Attack (Claw) affect more attacks.
About how they power up was not something I am asking, yes that is very clear. D8's, 3/4 BAB, all very clear.
For spells and affects I cast on it (Animal Growth) it is considered my AC. What if an Enemy Spell Caster uses something that only affects Animals? Or something that Animals are immune to? its to smart for Calm Animals, but what about Charm Animal? If its a magical beast you will need a higher level spell, charm monster maybe.
It cant speak common, but it understands common so I will not need handle animal checks to communicate with it.
An animal companion's abilities are determined by the druid's level and its animal racial traits. Table: Animal Companion Base Statistics determines many of the base statistics of the animal companion. They remain creatures of the animal type for purposes of determining which spells can affect them.
In PFS, even creatures that are not animals, have Fighter-level Intelligence and speak Common STILL have to be managed with Handle Animal, because stupid f+**ing b~&+@@!% reasons.
|
|
It was clear it uses the Animal Companion table. My question was for the purposes of their "Type" for anything keyed off of type (such as favored enemy, for instance) would they be Magical Beasts (as Griffons) or animals. The Animal Companion rules are obviously normally for animals, but a Griffon that is an Animal rather than a Magical Beast is clearly a different kind of creature altogether, like saying "Well, it looks like a human, it mostly behaves like a human, we call it a human, but instead of being a kind of ape, it's a kind of bear."
As for why you would roll handle animal when you can just talk to it is beyond me. Maybe for pre-planned tricks you won't have time to explain? IIRC the Griffon can understand you but cannot speak back, for whatever that matters.
But yeah. My main thought is "Why would you take this instead of just taking them via leadership, and then progressing them using leadership rules"? I guess you can take it at a lower level, if that's your concern, but one you qualify for Leadership, this is strictly worse.
The only reason I can see to take this is if you intend to take both; using this for a special mount and leadership for something else.
Ahh Pupsocket, I didn't know that, I only ever play with buddies at their homes or mine, never played in a PFS game (Pathfinder Society right)? We play only with Official Pathfinder material, not using 3PP rules, but house rule things we think are hinky (Monstrous Mount Mastery). When I brought up that feat, and the idea of Griffon AC the first words out of his (The GM) mouth were, "Ahh cool, so no need for Handle Animal checks".
I was looking under Share Spells, you are right about the spells for sure, so charm animal could work...maybe I should take Iron Will early.
Still would like to know to put the Animal or Magical Beast down for type on the document I wrote up for it. (Don't know if its him or her yet, will roll a 50/50 when we first see it) but I am thinking because of that bold text, Animal. When I asked the GM a bit ago, he said it will count as both...I could then see him having a thing with Favored Enemy Animal +4, Magical Beast +2.
I saw a post from a developer at some point I think, that makes me think "They remain creatures of the animal type for purposes of determining which spells can affect them", means that all things affect them as though they were creatures of the animal type, just wish they wrote it down that way if that is the case, otherwise you could take it to mean spells are as Animal, otherwise consider them as though they are the original type (Plant, Magical Beast, Vermin) since Favored Enemy is an (Ex).
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
No one seems to realize this, but druids with the class feature Nature Bond (animal companion) and hunters with the class feature animal companion do not qualify for this feat.
The feat requires: Divine Bond (Mount) [Paladins], Hunter's Bond (animal companion) [Rangers] or Mount [Cavaliers] as a class feature.
While I agree that it is a bit silly for PFS for something like a griffon that has 5 int (as much as my Pit Born Tiefling paladin) required to use Handle Animal with, the PFS rules do allow it to have 15+bonus tricks due to that in and the ability to select any feat or skill it is capable of using.
For my cavalier with Monstrous Mount, I have skippped Mastery and don't intend on taking it (I spend most of my time unmounted anyway and send the griffon to flank, or fast dismount and send it after a flying enemy)
One point in favor of gaining a griffon through Monstrous Mount rather than Leadership is the fact that (as far as I can tell) a significant portion of the GM population either bans or heavily restricts the Leadership feat.
One point in favor of gaining a griffon through Monstrous Mount rather than Leadership is the fact that (as far as I can tell) a significant portion of the GM population either bans or heavily restricts the Leadership feat.
If the GM is going to ban the Leadership feat, he's going to ban this feat too, since they can accomplish (somewhat) similar goals.
or Dragon
Kigvan, you are correct I overlooked that, I will point it out to the GM and see if he will still allow me to take it. I am guessing he will say as a Druid I should be able to take anything that anyone can take as an AC...but we will see.
|
No one seems to realize this, but druids with the class feature Nature Bond (animal companion) and hunters with the class feature animal companion do not qualify for this feat.
The feat requires: Divine Bond (Mount) [Paladins], Hunter's Bond (animal companion) [Rangers] or Mount [Cavaliers] as a class feature.
While I agree that it is a bit silly for PFS for something like a griffon that has 5 int (as much as my Pit Born Tiefling paladin) required to use Handle Animal with, the PFS rules do allow it to have 15+bonus tricks due to that in and the ability to select any feat or skill it is capable of using.
For my cavalier with Monstrous Mount, I have skippped Mastery and don't intend on taking it (I spend most of my time unmounted anyway and send the griffon to flank, or fast dismount and send it after a flying enemy)
I noticed this a while back when I was looking at having my paladin take the weapon bond and gain a mount through the Nature's Ally feats. These feats (in addition to being ludicrously over-priced as a chain) are also painfully specific in who can access them, specifically excluding Hunters and Druids.
|
|
I don't know any GMs who ban leadership.
It's definitely better than other feats - it goes on basically every character I build (and is typically my biggest reason not to dump CHA) but I as a GM just accept that the party size is going to double at level 7, and plan around that, and increase the number of enemies once all the player have leadership.
The question is never "are you taking leadership", it's "what are you going to pick up with leadership?" - "Well, the party could use a bard." or "Well, I could definitely benefit from a bodyguard of some kind" or "Well, I have this cool houndmaster theme going, I will pick up a Worg, then advance it to large, and then start piling on levels of fighter, and ride around on a horse-sized intelligent wolf".
I guess I don't see a reason to ban it because it benefits everyone, and everyone takes it. Of course, that means that if you don't ban it, everyone should be taking it.
|
|
I agree it was a poor decision to make it be a feat.
It would have been better had it just been baked into character progression. Some additional characters make the plot more entertaining (just make sure they have actual personalities, and aren't just some numbers).
But whatever, the way I see it, it basically IS baked into character progression, at level 7, instead of a feat; but if there's a feat you really need at that point you can always push it back to level 9.
I can see how it could slow down combat too much if you have a group of 8 players, and in that case I might consider banning it, but I just don't see what the problem is with allowing the players to come up with a sort of supporting cast to round out the group at level 7. It's not as though a group with 4 level 7s and 4 level 5s is just going to plow through my adventure any more than a group of 8 level 6 PCs would, I can add more monsters to the fight. "Now there are 8 orcs instead of 5."
Yeah, a fight against a singular boss opponent is easier, but you can always give him some lackeys, or whatever.
Does the Nature Oracle's Mount Revelation count for meeting the prerequisites?
I would say yes,
Prerequisite(s): Handle Animal 4 ranks; Ride 4 ranks; divine bond (mount), hunter's bond (animal companion), or mount class feature with an effective druid level of 4.
Mount Class feature. The Nature Oracle can gain Bonded Mount (Su)