| 2 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |
I have seen posts on both sides of the fence on this one, as both ROI and RAW arguments. Is there a way to get an official ruling on this for Pathfinder Society?
If not, are there any recommendations on ways to get something other than a camel or horse? I've seen Figurine Comapanion, Mammoth Rider, the orcish feat Beast Rider.. What else am I missing?
For society, I'd say no, but otherwise I'd say yes.
Prerequisites are, as a principle of the rules, generally, satisfied by abilities that match the substance even if the label isn't an exact fit. For example, life oracles and channeling feats.
Prerequisites are, as a principle of the rules, generally, satisfied by abilities that match the substance even if the label isn't an exact fit. For example, life oracles and channeling feats.
That's my inclination as well. Trying to be too picky about precise nomenclature doesn't work too well considering how loose Paizo is when it comes to wording.
a Paladin calls his mount a Bonded Mount, and fuctionally the Oracle Mystery and Divine Bond (Bonded Mount) are identical.
I would say RAI as well as RAW would be no. in the monstrous mount section of inner sea combat, it says "The Monstrous Mount Choices are ridden primarily by cavaliers, rangers and paladins."
that's a good point, and the druid AC is conspicuous in its absence. However, "primarily" is not "exclusively".
How is this question not answered by this FAQ? It is, quite literally, just another example of "Spear Training."
I'd say the RAI here is basically "whatever". When writing the monstrous mount feat they didn't want to list every kind of stray mount option but also didn't want this to be a Druid thing. So some of the outlying mount options got left out in the cold. If you are in PFS then you are out of luck. If you are anyone else, I think a reasonable GM should allow it.
How is this question not answered by this FAQ? It is, quite literally, just another example of "Spear Training."
because that only explicitly (but not "explicitly only", the distinction is important) applies to archetypes within the class. But the discussion around that FAQ illuminates that substantially fulfilling a prerequisite is sufficient.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
How is this question not answered by this FAQ? It is, quite literally, just another example of "Spear Training."because that only explicitly (but not "explicitly only", the distinction is important) applies to archetypes within the class. But the discussion around that FAQ illuminates that substantially fulfilling a prerequisite is sufficient.
Here, have a dev post on the topic (from when SKR was a dev).
Relevant quote:
So when the cleric class has a header section called "Class Features" and under that is an entry that says "Channel Energy," and the oracle class has a section called "Class Features" and under that is an entry that says "Channel: You can channel positive energy like a cleric," and the paladin class has a section called "Class Features" and under that is an entry that says "Channel Positive Energy (Su): ... she gains the supernatural ability to channel positive energy like a cleric," those all are intended to work the same way, even though they're not given identical names. For one, because the paladin and oracle "versions" of that ability tell you it works like the cleric "version" of the ability. For two, because having them all work the same way is simpler and easier to remember than each of them working a different way. Now, given, the oracle gets 1+Chamod per day instead of the cleric's 3+Chamod, and the paladin spends uses of lay on hands instead of a separate X/day allotment, but if you line up a good cleric 5, a life oracle 5, and a paladin 5, and tell each of them to channel a burst of positive energy, all three of them are healing 3d6 to living or dealing 3d6 to undead, DC 10 + 1/2 level + Chamod, 30 ft. radius, no AOO, and so on. Exactly the same. Because it's easier to remember that way. Because it makes the game easier to run that way.
And that means things like Improved Channel and Alignment Channel and Extra Channel should apply equally to the cleric, life oracle, and paladin (you'll note for Extra Channel the paladin ability's counting method of uses per day for the feat is slightly diff because the paladin ability is based on using lay on hands, but the net result is the paladin gets +2 uses of channel per day, just like the cleric and oracle). Because to do otherwise means we need different versions of these feats for oracles and paladins because under the strictest interpretation, neither of them has a class ability that's specifically and explicitly named "channel energy;" and three sets of redundant identical feats for clerics, oracles, and paladins is lame and a waste of space.
What's interesting is that Monstrous Mount is specifically written in a way to attempt to exclude Druids. In this case, though, you can say that the Bonded Mount is analogous to Divine Bond. If you read the Paladin class feature, you'll note the following:
The second type of bond allows a paladin to gain the service of an unusually intelligent, strong, and loyal steed to serve her in her crusade against evil. This mount is usually a heavy horse (for a Medium paladin) or a pony (for a Small paladin), although more exotic mounts, such as a boar, camel, or dog are also suitable. This mount functions as a druid's animal companion, using the paladin's level as her effective druid level. Bonded mounts have an Intelligence of at least 6.
Turns out that Divine Bond is the name of the class feature, but it allows you to select either a bonded weapon or a bonded mount. Thus, the Oracle would qualify.
You know, I had always thought that Druids qualified for that feat. But I guess you are right that the wording is such that they do not. So I suppose that means that a Lunar Oracle with the Primal Companion Revelation wouldn't qualify either even if it is a Companion that is being used as a mount?
Welp, there goes another character concept of mine.