We are about to start a new game but is only with the core material (so no archetypes, no cavalier or anithing rare)
I want to make a mounted combat character (just want charge with a lance like no tomorrow. The thing here is that it will be a low level campaign and the only clases are the basic.
So who is the best class to do this? A druid mounting his compagnion? a barbarian? a fighter?
The problem i see is that only way i can get a moun is via build it, so they dont scale and are kinda weak.
Any advice?
The elephant is available in the core rulebook. That makes a fine mount for a low-level campaign. Heck, a heavy warhourse should be more than fine for the first few levels depending on what "low level" means.
The Handle Animal skill is pretty critical.
Hmm but i can se my gm making all the combats inside buildings so my elephant needs to stay out waiting for me... Still is a good idea
Well, in that case, ick. Maybe a pony-riding halfling?
|
Sadly your EXTREMELY limited.
If your using COre RUlebook my advice is dont do mounted combat because your limited to 2-3 classes at best.
Fighter or Barbarian- Your mount will ALWAYS suck and be low level...come high level a single fireball will kill your mount and just be a cause for grief for you.
Paladin- This is your Best choice. Play a Halfling Paladin and take the mount as your Divine Bond. You will want the Pony. But if your DM allows more exotic mounts a Riding Dog or Boar is very nice. If he is very lenient with the wording " although more exotic mounts, such as a boar, camel, or dog are also suitable. ask if you can have a Giant Gecko. (Even under Core rules Bestiary is necessary for any companion and such.)
Ranger- You can at least turn your Animal Companion into a mount. So your mount wont be nearly as weak as the Fighter/Barb choice. You can try to pick up feats via ranger style but the core only choices straight suck. You do get spells, skills, and good defenses so this is not a complete wash but it certainly could be better if you were not limited to Core only.
My biggest advice is to be a Halfling so you can stay mounted even inside buildings and dungeons. The key is to be using those feats the most you can. But sadly there are a lot of cool mounted feats from source books outside core so you will be greatly limited.
Perhaps waiting to do mounted when you get into a different campaign with more available sources.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hmm but i can se my gm making all the combats inside buildings so my elephant needs to stay out waiting for me... Still is a good idea
Make sure you talk to your GM about this and find out if the campaign will accommodate this kind of play. Even a Halfling would be unlikely to ride an animal into a building, or fight mounted while indoors.
That said, a fighter on a heavy warhorse could be pretty devastating in a core-only low level campaign.
|
|
Hmm but i can se my gm making all the combats inside buildings so my elephant needs to stay out waiting for me... Still is a good ideaMake sure you talk to your GM about this and find out if the campaign will accommodate this kind of play. Even a Halfling would be unlikely to ride an animal into a building, or fight mounted while indoors.
Not true. An Animal companion is much like a service animal and is more welcome even inside buildings. A halfling on a dog takes up roughly the same amount of space as a human just standing around. Its not like your trying to fit a Large warhorse into a house.
When I did Mounted in PFS I was only required to dismount 1 time in 24 sessions to enter a spa. I was asked a few times to not bring in my animal but after a intimidate or bluff that I would not help them unless my companion be treated with respect. If they don't want the job done that is fine...hope that guy doesn't come back and kill you. Or I could bluff and say I am lame and this is my service animal that is basically my working legs. He is very well trained and I promise he will be in complete control.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Not true. An Animal companion is much like a service animal and is more welcome even inside buildings. A halfling on a dog takes up roughly the same amount of space as a human just standing around. Its not like your trying to fit a Large warhorse into a house.
I'm not going to tell you you're doing it wrong, and certainly for PFS that approach is entirely appropriate to the milieu. Speaking as a GM, however: "core only, low-level campaign" often translates to "something with a greater sense of realism and reduced fantasy elements". In that kind of game, a halfling riding his mount into somebody's home, stronghold, or place of business might be seen as rude and weird, and hence immersion-breaking.
Or maybe not. That's why I recommend speaking to your GM about it.
Also, if you would prefer to play the big armored knight on a heavy warhorse, your GM might be able to offer a response like "Oh, that's great! There will be lots of wilderness and outdoor action where that character will shine!" or even "You'll be spending a lot of time in caves and dungeons, maybe your should use a small character on a medium mount."
I'm just trying to balance the innate prejudice this board seems to have where "Mounted PC" automatically implies "Small PC on a medium Mount."
Not true. An Animal companion is much like a service animal and is more welcome even inside buildings. A halfling on a dog takes up roughly the same amount of space as a human just standing around. Its not like your trying to fit a Large warhorse into a house.I'm not going to tell you you're doing it wrong, and certainly for PFS that approach is entirely appropriate to the milieu. Speaking as a GM, however: "core only, low-level campaign" often translates to "something with a greater sense of realism and reduced fantasy elements". In that kind of game, a halfling riding his mount into somebody's home, stronghold, or place of business might be seen as rude and weird, and hence immersion-breaking.
Or maybe not. That's why I recommend speaking to your GM about it.
Also, if you would prefer to play the big armored knight on a heavy warhorse, your GM might be able to offer a response like "Oh, that's great! There will be lots of wilderness and outdoor action where that character will shine!" or even "You'll be spending a lot of time in caves and dungeons, maybe your should use a small character on a medium mount."
I'm just trying to balance the innate prejudice this board seems to have where "Mounted PC" automatically implies "Small PC on a medium Mount."
I think this is less "innate prejudice" and more "Hmm but i can se my gm making all the combats inside buildings so my elephant needs to stay out waiting for me..."
|
|
Not true. An Animal companion is much like a service animal and is more welcome even inside buildings. A halfling on a dog takes up roughly the same amount of space as a human just standing around. Its not like your trying to fit a Large warhorse into a house.I'm not going to tell you you're doing it wrong, and certainly for PFS that approach is entirely appropriate to the milieu. Speaking as a GM, however: "core only, low-level campaign" often translates to "something with a greater sense of realism and reduced fantasy elements". In that kind of game, a halfling riding his mount into somebody's home, stronghold, or place of business might be seen as rude and weird, and hence immersion-breaking.
Or maybe not. That's why I recommend speaking to your GM about it.
Also, if you would prefer to play the big armored knight on a heavy warhorse, your GM might be able to offer a response like "Oh, that's great! There will be lots of wilderness and outdoor action where that character will shine!" or even "You'll be spending a lot of time in caves and dungeons, maybe your should use a small character on a medium mount."
I'm just trying to balance the innate prejudice this board seems to have where "Mounted PC" automatically implies "Small PC on a medium Mount."
Sadly in Core only there is no Undersized mount or Narrow Frame feats to help a medium sized creature ride a medium mount or easier for large mounts to squeeze into dungeons.
You also use the Word Prejudice wrong because I am VERY EXPERIENCED and use plenty of reasoning for my mounted suggestions.
As far as the Animal companion coming into businesses, Barracks and such. Police dogs are welcome everywhere they want to go. Same with any service dogs/animals. What is rude is to beg for help from someone and then dictate how that individual solves your problems. The NPC can make a request. This opens up opportunity for skill checks. Like Bluff, Diplomacy, or Intimidate to bend the NPCs will more towards your way of thinking. On my mounted ranger my favored enemy was Human. I got major bonuses while talking to humans. Also as a PC you can easily say "F&@* you NPC solve your own problems." The Dm could just end the Campaign there or try to figure out a way to get the PC to do the task. But the PC is not obligated to help if a weak ass begging NPC who wants to enforce rules upon their saviors/heroes. Sometimes you just have to put an NPC in its place since the DM has plenty of times where he will try his best to throw sticks in your bike's spokes.
|
|
Sure, from a mechanical perspective, small mounted characters are less restricted. On the other hand, there are certain character concepts that aren't exactly served best by a halfling or gnome.
Cause Halflings can't be warriors? They have to be Rogues or Bards?
Kinda wrong (a bit racist) to think that tough knights have to be big too. I have a halfling with enough Str to pick up a full sized human and beat another human to death with the one he is holding onto. 42lbs of halfling fury that makes humans think twice about going into combat with him.
I do believe he said "some concepts" for a reason.
Perhaps he wants to emulate Thranduil, with his majestic swordplay on top of an elk. He's not a halfling or a gnome.
Or, again from the same movie, a dwarf on a boar. Beautiful image, with a lot of head-cracking. Again, not a gnome or a halfling.
It's fine that some concepts can't be covered by small races, and isn't really even connected to racism at all.
|
|
As far as the Animal companion coming into businesses, Barracks and such. Police dogs are welcome everywhere they want to go. Same with any service dogs/animals. What is rude is to beg for help from someone and then dictate how that individual solves your problems. The NPC can make a request. This opens up opportunity for skill checks. Like Bluff, Diplomacy, or Intimidate to...
Not that I'm saying your point is wrong, but your example isn't the best simile. A K9 unit's dog may be allowed in a lot of places, but you won't see a mounted officer's horse in most of those same places.
I do believe he said "some concepts" for a reason.
Perhaps he wants to emulate Thranduil, with his majestic swordplay on top of an elk. He's not a halfling or a gnome.
Or, again from the same movie, a dwarf on a boar. Beautiful image, with a lot of head-cracking. Again, not a gnome or a halfling.
If you're going with those in core-only, you can really only do the dwarf-on-boar druid. No option for elks and no real option for anyone else riding a boar.
|
|
I do believe he said "some concepts" for a reason.
Perhaps he wants to emulate Thranduil, with his majestic swordplay on top of an elk. He's not a halfling or a gnome.
Or, again from the same movie, a dwarf on a boar. Beautiful image, with a lot of head-cracking. Again, not a gnome or a halfling.It's fine that some concepts can't be covered by small races, and isn't really even connected to racism at all.
The Dwarf would need Undersized mount for the Boar concept...not available in Core only.
Sword play from horseback is hard to accomplish without beyond core material. Mounted skirmisher is not available to CORE only options. Ontop of no core only class (except druid) can get a moose for a mount unless the DM allows it under the guise of "More exotic Mounts"
All my suggestions are CORE ONLY related. And when it comes to CORE mounted combat your 2 choices are Medium sized with a Large mount that is space/place limited verses a Mounted Halfling riding a medium mount (preferably a dog or better options if allowed).
Not that I'm saying your point is wrong, but your example isn't the best simile. A K9 unit's dog may be allowed in a lot of places, but you won't see a mounted officer's horse in most of those same places.
A halfling on a dog should be accepted just as much. The pony might be harder to justify but what is the biggest hang up? Size? The humans take up just as much room. Is it uncommon? Well wheelchairs dont exist but bluff skill does. and many of you are writting it off like it is not an option to Diplo, Bluff, or intimidate your way past protesting NPCs who wanna try to be a hard ass while begging you to solve their problems.
Also when going into homes ad such where combat is expected...are you really caring about the concerns or feelings of your enemies protest to an animal in their building? No your here to kill them.
The NPCs who do protest 9 times out of 10 will not have combat in that domicile but point you where they want you to go. So you could dismount without worry cause your heading into a semi-safe place.
I was specifically replying to the idea that Fruian thought that it was somehow wrong to not want to play a halfling or gnome warrior.
I realize those options aren't available in Core, but my point about certain concepts not working with Small races still stands.
|
|
At low levels, the Bestiary warhorse is tougher than the animal companion version. At higher levels, Ivory Goats are a fantastic Core option. Portable and come with powerful weapons.
From an RP point of view, you have no right to demand that an NPC allow a wolf, boar, or pony in their home, and insisting on it could well cost you opportunities. I'd never push the issue in any game I was in. Always be willing to stable your animal.
Oh I'm sorry I didn't know RP meant doing everything as expected. Guess the Idea of Playing a Ranger who can care less about the norms of society but is being paid to take care of problems too big for the town to handle.
There are people who give/take and people who receive. But you have just as much rights as NPCs do. IF they can ask you to inconvenience yourself, put your life at risk, and do them favors....they should expect to help/support you the best they can.
Hey your a strong notable warrior. Can you kill these goblins that took over my glass-works factory? Oh and Mr. X don't you dare take that Animal companion in my glass works. Seems like b#%@+#+&...whats my mount gonna do? wreck up the place worst than the goblins? He gonna poop on your floor? Get real I'm gonna handle this how I am equipped to handle things.
I haven't seen any NPCs ask for specifics like that on the adventuring site. The most you usually get is "don't break my stuff".
What I believe they're referring to is being asked not to take your Large warhorse inside of their house, the genera store, the courthouse, etc.
It's fairly reasonable to assume most people wouldn't insist on forcing a warhorse inside someone's house if asked not to.
However, play your character like you want.
No one said you don't have to be nice to everyone, but recognize that this kind of stuff is in fact rude.
|
|
I haven't seen any NPCs ask for specifics like that on the adventuring site. The most you usually get is "don't break my stuff".
What I believe they're referring to is being asked not to take your Large warhorse inside of their house, the genera store, the courthouse, etc.
It's fairly reasonable to assume most people wouldn't insist on forcing a warhorse inside someone's house if asked not to.However, play your character like you want.
No one said you don't have to be nice to everyone, but recognize that this kind of stuff is in fact rude.
WHere the hell you get the Idea that I'm talking about a large warhorse?
I'm speaking directly from Halfling on a medium mount (Pony, Dog, Boar, Gecko, ect ect) Where they Animal companion+ rider are still smaller than a human. Hard to break things on a completely controlled, intelligent (Typically 3 Int by level 4), and Bridaled animal.
In no way am I talking about Large warhorses. Those typically are a no go cause of their size alone.
|
|
Oh I'm sorry I didn't know RP meant doing everything as expected. Guess the Idea of Playing a Ranger who can care less about the norms of society but is being paid to take care of problems too big for the town to handle.No, RP simply means that attitudes towards NPCs have consequences.
I have not played in games where throwing your weight around and making demands was normally a) good for your character or b) fun for the other players.
Perhaps your games are significantly different from mine.
Then you have never played with a Enchanter type character who just Dominates people to get what they want?
How about a Bluff special Bard who has such an outragous Bluff he can lie and even kings would believe him.
That is throwing your weight around.
So what do you use Diplomacy, Bluff, and intimidate for? What do you use charm/dominate Person for?
Speaking as a GM, however: "core only, low-level campaign" often translates to "something with a greater sense of realism and reduced fantasy elements". In that kind of game, a halfling riding his mount into somebody's home, stronghold, or place of business might be seen as rude and weird, and hence immersion-breaking.
I'll second the "talk with the GM" beforehand. I've played with a few GMs that feel like small character going everywhere mounted is gimmicky.
If you pull that character on a GM with that mindset, they will often look for ways to force a dismount, which will cause irritation on both sides of the screen.
|
|
Then you have never played with a Enchanter type character who just Dominates people to get what they want?How about a Bluff special Bard who has such an outragous Bluff he can lie and even kings would believe him.
That is throwing your weight around.
So what do you use Diplomacy, Bluff, and intimidate for? What do you use charm/dominate Person for?
The enchanter sounds like a villain to be opposed.
Never played with an implausible Diplomancer bard since everybody I've played with in home games has recognized it as exploiting a flaw in the system (and I guess I've just been lucky in PFS).
Charm and Intimidate used against known enemies. Diplomacy means, among other things, knowing that it is rude to bring your dog or whatever into the opera and not doing it. Bluff typically used to avoid violence.
Can't imagine trying to intimidate a non-hostile NPC unless it was an evil campaign.
All that is your opinion.
Charm Person, Dominate Person are not evil tagged and many wizard have the mindset of Results above all else.
You think it is exploiting the game to be an un-beatable diplomancer because a few people you play with think this. This right here is a flaw as there are many players who think anything functional is broken or exploiting...but dude its in the game as part of the rules for a reason. You are exploiting it as much as a fighter who does combat maneuvers.
Charm and Intimidate are not limited to only foes.
Just because you can not imagine it does not mean I am wrong. Its just something you can not bring yourself to do. That is fine and dandy but that does not mean everyone plays by your expectations and assumptions.
Diplomacy means, among other things, knowing that it is rude to bring your dog or whatever into the opera and not doing it.
No that is Respect of persons and manners
skill in handling affairs without arousing hostility
If a creature’s attitude toward you is at least indifferent, you can make requests of the creature. This is an additional Diplomacy check, using the creature’s current attitude to determine the base DC, with one of the following modifiers. Once a creature’s attitude has shifted to helpful, the creature gives in to most requests without a check,
Diplomacy are not always nice sounding either. Sometimes they can be strong handed too.
|
|
Speaking as a GM, however: "core only, low-level campaign" often translates to "something with a greater sense of realism and reduced fantasy elements". In that kind of game, a halfling riding his mount into somebody's home, stronghold, or place of business might be seen as rude and weird, and hence immersion-breaking.I'll second the "talk with the GM" beforehand. I've played with a few GMs that feel like small character going everywhere mounted is gimmicky.
If you pull that character on a GM with that mindset, they will often look for ways to force a dismount, which will cause irritation on both sides of the screen.
Yes but you can argue that any character is Gimmicky.
Hey that Sword and Board fighter ALWAYS fights with sword and board...should you hate them for it? No this gimmick is accepted....
That Evocation wizard is pretty gimmicky specializing in fireball and using it way too much...you should look for ways to shut him down too.
No but the halfling on a dog is the real problem cause its toooo gimmicky?
SO many flaws in that way of thinking.
|
|
All that is your opinion.Charm Person, Dominate Person are not evil tagged and many wizard have the mindset of Results above all else.
Yes, it is my opinion. And apparently it is yours that enslaving people to get what you want is not evil because it lacks the mechanical descriptor tag.
The groups I tend to play in have our own preferences about how to act towards non-hostile NPCs (and their homes), how to handle poorly designed rules elements, and what makes an action evil. I observed that your games may differ and they clearly do.
All you are offering is your opinion. All I am offering is mine.
Did I ever say Enslave? NO...you assumed and you know what they say about assuming.
You can charm a non hostile NPC to give you free room and board at an inn....that evil? No...
You can charm or Diplo/bluff a person into sleeping with you...is that evil.... no...is it common YES at many tables.
Can you charm a shopkeeper into giving you better deals on selling/buying? Yes is that enslavement? No is it evil...NO.
Glad to know you play with experts who design the game better than the creators of the game. I'm looking forward to your 3rd party material that helps us noobs correct our understanding of rules in pathfinder.
SO many flaws in that way of thinking.
Perhaps, but I've yet to find a GM that accepted the argument of "this guy on the Paizo forums said it's cool."
|
|
SO many flaws in that way of thinking.Perhaps, but I've yet to find a GM that accepted the argument of "this guy on the Paizo forums said it's cool."
You know that was me saying your hate for Gimmicky mounted halflings but without seeing that any character designed takes up a gimmick of some sort. But the DM specifically targets one gimmick over others cause he feels its too gimmicky.
Most of what I've stated I have backed up with in game ability to do something. But everyone who has responded is "Not at my typical table because we play by different rules or mindsets than the rules of the game dictate."
*Huge Sarcasm* So yeah to hell with Magic, Skill checks. TO hell with rules that the game as it is generally played.
Most of what I've stated I have backed up with in game ability to do something. But everyone who has responded is "Not at my typical table because we play by different rules or mindsets than the rules of the game dictate."
Yes, there is a ton of variation in the way each GM runs their campaign. What is acceptable at one table may not be at another.
That's why it is always a good idea to run your character concept by the GM. If the GM is not comfortable with certain character types, that is their perogative.
In my experience, expecting to go everywhere mounted is one of the concepts that has a higher likelihood of causing an issue than the average concept.
What is the harm in getting your GM's buy-in ahead of time? Helps avoid issues and will save you both time.
@Fruian: I did notice that you edited your earlier post from "uses charms to get what he wants" to "many wizards have the mindset of 'results above all else'". That points to how you seem to think that literally enslaving someone for a period of time (charm/dominate, whatever) is okay, as long as it gets the job done.
Spoiler alert: that's Lawful Evil.
Also, I don't think anyone is saying that the mounted halfling is too powerful, and needs too be shut down. You're kind of taking things out of context here.
What we're saying is that the whole concept of a mounted warrior, whether Small or not, has flaws. It isn't the all-powerful, end-all be-all, build you think it is.
One of the drawbacks of the mounted lance-charge-beast is the fact that you can't take your mount everywhere.
-"The King says no animals in his throne room."
Perhaps his daughter is afraid of animal. Polymorph is a thing; is that dog really an assassin in disguise? Are you going to tell the king of a nation that you want your dog in here, Asmodeus be damned, or you're not doing what he wants? "Okay, bye, there are plenty of other adventurers capable, and willing, of doing what I need."
-"The goblin tribe you need to make peace with absolutely hates dogs, and you can't let them see you with one. Leave it here." Pretty self-explanatory. Not every mission can be solved with a shove of a lance.
-"Okay, once you climb to the top of the vertical cliff face, you'll find monster Blah-Blah."
Yes, this could be solved with a Fly spell. If you're above 5th level with a wizard, you're good. But what if the wizard didn't prepare any, and this needs to be done now? What if your caster is a director, and doesn't know Fly (as rare as that is)? Your trusty steed can't climb straight up, and it'll probably be a hard challenge for even you!
The point is, there's situations where you can't be running around on your wardog of death, charging at everything you see.
No one is saying the mounted halfling is too powerful, or too wrong to play, or anything.
There's just consequences to relying on a mount, be prepared to face them.
|
There's just consequences to relying on a mount, be prepared to face them.
You could just as easily replace mount with bow, or sword, or holy symbol, or spellbook in that sentence and have similar results, but that's not how it usually plays out. And a lot of the times where it becomes an issue are actually fairly arbitrary. The king doesn't want you bringing your mount into court because it could be dangerous, or could be an assassin in disguise, but your companions, who could have also been replaced with disguised assassins, are allowed to walk in with weapons and armor unchecked.
And having to climb walls? In order to lift a character or object up with rope you only need to be able to lift their weight off the ground, for most small sized mounted melee character this should be a non issue. Your average mounted halfling can lift 350 lbs. I don't imagine many riding dogs would weigh more than this, even with saddle and barding. Or you can get the 18th strength fighter to do it, since he can lift up to 600 lbs. But I've been told on numerous occasions "there's a 30' climb, you're going to leave your mount behind." Meanwhile the wizard and cleric both need help climbing up because they can't reliably make a DC 15 climb check.Now, I'm not saying that there won't be times where you will have to leave your mount behind, but the reasons put forth are pretty arbitrary. Adventurers are odd people, and I don't see why if the fighter wants to show up to dinner in full plate with his greatsword, he should be allowed to do so, but the halfling can't have his dog sit at his feet.
|
|
There's just consequences to relying on a mount, be prepared to face them.You could just as easily replace mount with bow, or sword, or holy symbol, or spellbook in that sentence and have similar results, but that's not how it usually plays out. And a lot of the times where it becomes an issue are actually fairly arbitrary. The king doesn't want you bringing your mount into court because it could be dangerous, or could be an assassin in disguise, but your companions, who could have also been replaced with disguised assassins, are allowed to walk in with weapons and armor unchecked.
And having to climb walls? In order to lift a character or object up with rope you only need to be able to lift their weight off the ground, for most small sized mounted melee character this should be a non issue. Your average mounted halfling can lift 350 lbs. I don't imagine many riding dogs would weigh more than this, even with saddle and barding. Or you can get the 18th strength fighter to do it, since he can lift up to 600 lbs. But I've been told on numerous occasions "there's a 30' climb, you're going to leave your mount behind." Meanwhile the wizard and cleric both need help climbing up because they can't reliably make a DC 15 climb check.Now, I'm not saying that there won't be times where you will have to leave your mount behind, but the reasons put forth are pretty arbitrary. Adventurers are odd people, and I don't see why if the fighter wants to show up to dinner in full plate with his greatsword, he should be allowed to do so, but the halfling can't have his dog sit at his feet.
This guy gets what I am trying to say. Thank you for putting it together better than I could.
There are other answers (Outside Core) for many of the situations you mention.
I for one Ride a Gecko or a Flying mount...so I really don't have cliff issues as I can make charge lanes from walls and Ceilings as well as run up walls and drop a grappling hook once I'm at the top.
If you are a Paladin you can summon your mount up.
You could even wait outside why your party face goes and talks with the king.
Like Deighton says there is MANY solutions to your purposed "Problems".
No a Lancer is not end all be all...but a small lancer does get the benifit of using his mount slightly more than a medium character. The point of a Martial character is to use your feats as much as possible and when you go 3-4 feats deep into mounted combat you want to be mounted as much as you possibly can. If that involves some problem solving or some Skill check or Magic to make it happen so be it. those are always options. At least as long as your table follows the typical rules for Social skills and spells. They also can imagine this is a strange and magical world where our normal actions (in real life) do not exist (in the game).
You could just as easily replace mount with bow, or sword, or holy symbol, or spellbook in that sentence and have similar results,
Sounds like a false equivalency argument. Have you actually seen a sword or a holy symbol or a spellbook cause a problem in this same way as needing a mount, or are you just saying that it could happen?
but that's not how it usually plays out.
Right, so in other words, you're arguing against the idea that a mount can be a problem, not the fact that it actually has been in actual game experience.
For the record, I think a small character mounted on a medium mount is a cool concept. And if we're only offering advice on what we like or what we think is cool, rather than based on actual game experience, then I wouldn't advise checking with your GM beforehand.
|
|
You could just as easily replace mount with bow, or sword, or holy symbol, or spellbook in that sentence and have similar results,Sounds like a false equivalency argument. Have you actually seen a sword or a holy symbol or a spellbook cause a problem in this same way as needing a mount, or are you just saying that it could happen?
Try prapareing your spells after your spell book is destroyed or taken from you.
Try to cast a Arcane spell after you have your spell components stolen and no eschew materials.
Try to channel energy without your Holy symbol.
Try to use your feats weapon focus, specialization, and Improved critical after having your weapons sundered, stolen, disarmed, ect ect.
They hurt just as much as a mounted character without his mount. Except as long as I have a weapon and power attack I'm not hurting as bad as the wizard who had his spell pouch and book destroyed/stolen.
Basically tables differ but each table will have a more hated gimmick. While 1 DM will hate on a mounted guy by doing everything possible to dismou t him. Another table might hate the gimmic of a slumber witch by making everything immune to sleep. But both are gimmicks and every build will have weaknesses. It's up to the player to try his best to make his gimmick work as much as possible. This is why optimizers choose small mounted builds because it stays on its mount more often than medium...that is basically it.
Try prapareing your spells after your spell book is destroyed or taken from you.
Try to cast a Arcane spell after you have your spell components stolen and no eschew materials.
Try to channel energy without your Holy symbol.
Try to use your feats weapon focus, specialization, and Improved critical after having your weapons sundered, stolen, disarmed, ect ect.
Once again, false equivalency. Might as well argue that you can't swing a sword without an arm. Sure, technically correct, but does it happen as often, in your experience, as the small-character-going-everywhere-on-his-mount concept?
If so, feel free to provide that information.
Basically tables differ but each table will have a more hated gimmick.
Sure, which is why we rely on our own experience. IME, goes-everywhere-mounted character is more likely to be viewed as a gimmick than anything else mentioned yet.
As such, the advice to check with the GM beforehand.
You seem to be arguing against the merits of viewing goes-everywhere-mounted as a gimmick and assume I'm arguing for them. I'm not. I'm basing my advice on actual game experience.
You think I do not base my advice on actual gameplay?
Okay, so then it is safe to assume that in actual gameplay you have seen an equal amount of issues occur from:
Takes-mount-everywhere-character
Wizard loses spellbook
Cleric loses holy symbol Sundered/stolen/disarmed weapons?
Wow, this got off the rails quickly. Back to the original poster's question. My opinion - If she wants to play a paladin or a druid it sounds like those are her best options with core-only based on her presented criteria but mounted-focused characters can have issues (which can be mitigated by characters like paladins or druids who have a lot of secondary tricks for when their primary gimmick doesn't work).
Since when has the advice forums turned into a "I have a bigger dick so I win the cock fighting contest!" argument playground? The OP is not asking if its okay to bring their service animal into the drinking pub or thrown room during a dinner party, he was asking the best way to build a core only mounted combat character. Personally I would have requested minimal base class options from advanced to help certain concepts, but every core only build needs some gimik or work around to work.
Going back to wizards, you can make a really unfun no combat and no need for skill rolls wizard with core only. If yoyr DM dislikes the idea of a small character riding a service dog everywhere but ok is okay with a Fighter showing up and sitting at the dinner table clad in full plate with sheathed greatsword, or knowing a wizard is amoung the group not asked to remove his spellbook or magical items without a check is playong bism at this point and all around makes no sense to me.
Additionally combat in those areas would be just as unlikely but simply state this argument when your confrunted with "All animals of any size are prohibited in entering" senarios.
Off topic, while I agree charm is an evil act in many situations if used inappropriately, it is not inheridentaly evil. Using it instead of diplo or bluff would be evil in the majority of viewers. Free room and board for a single night, while scumbagish is not evil and is neutral at best. Charming someone for information or the mcguffin would be again neutral at worst. Throwing an idea into the fire because it isn't combat oriented is extremely narrow minded in rpg. If I wanted to kill things good, I wouls turn on Skyrim.
Ranting aside after reading these off topic debats, all of the ideas have already been given. Druid, Paladin, and Ranger are the only ones who have access to a scaling mount. The others, while nice, would not keep up... Unless... How does your DM feel about mounted companions with leadership? Just asking, I dont know if it is core, but you can ask if you can get a monsterous cohoert with leadership to gain a scaling mount for any class. Mind you this is minimum level 7.
I apologize for sounding off in my post, but reading this really erked me bow much this turned into a fight about whats right and wrong instead of helping the OP with his help to make a Core only mounted fighter.
(EDIT)
Please excuse my soddy writing. On my phone at the moment and is had to type on a.small screen while on the bus.