I'm working on a halfling cavalier whom i would like to have a Gecko mount cause it seems both fun and useful.
Now obviously gecko's aren't on the base list for cavalier mounts, but they are on both the rideable and animal companion lists which makes them valid for replacement options correct?
1) Is there anything stopping me from replacing my level 1 pony companion/mount with a giant gecko mount from a market?
2) Giant Geckos are medium sized creatures normally, however the animal companion version is small. If i buy a normal giant gecko and declare it to be my companion/mount is it going to shrink? I would expect it to keep the initial animal companion stats, but it seems like it shouldn't lose a size category just because it changed owners (yes this is a blatant attempt to get around the pre level 4 size)
You can use a Giant Gecko from the market but it wont be a Cavalier's Mount unless it is on the list for Cavaliers or your GM houserules it or you acquire some other ability (such as an archetype) that changes which mounts you can use.
No bonus stats, no progression, and Handle Animal becomes a pain.
As for small sized mounts, there is a feat called Undersized Mount, but you still need GM permission for it since the Cavalier class specifically calls out which animals are available at which levels.
Example: My Halfling Cavalier can ride a Small Boar with the feat Undersized Mount but the boar will not qualify as a Cavaliers Mount until level 4 because the Cavalier class states that level 4 is the earliest I can use a Boar (without GM approval).
By the rules the cavalier's mount list is limited and there is no way to expand it beyond the Monstrous Mount feat. Even then, Gecko is not among the options.
By the rules, you cannot have a gecko mount. If you buy a gecko and ride it around, it does not get your mount's progression or any other benefits.
Well that's pretty lame, what is the point of having the line that says "The creature must be one that he is capable of riding and is suitable as a mount." if you are just going to completely cancel it out by restricting the list? I suppose I'll have to ask my GM to save me from restrictive writing.
Well that's pretty lame, what is the point of having the line that says "The creature must be one that he is capable of riding and is suitable as a mount." if you are just going to completely cancel it out by restricting the list? I suppose I'll have to ask my GM to save me from restrictive writing.
Because the cavalier list includes wolves and riding dogs (and other creatures which aren't large sized) and aren't suitable mounts for medium creatures.
The creature must be one that he is capable of riding and is suitable as a mountMeans that a mount can't be small sizes for a large rider.
It can't be a wild mount or some other unsuitable mount.That does not mean "I get to do anything I like cause I can dream it up."
And that's what made me think i could use a gecko as a replacement, since it is on the animal companion list and appropriately sized (for a small pc).
But even if they didn't have those initial lines the fact that the next one says exactly which creatures you can use makes the first lines irrelevant.
MerlinRedbead, Beast Rider doesn't solve the Gecko issue either. It isn't on the Beast Rider's list of animals.
i guess drow cavaliers are just SoL then, no matter what the descriptions say. that sucks
All of this helps, but ultimately little of it really matters. Talk to your GM.
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
the fact that the next one says exactly which creatures you can use makes the first lines irrelevant.
You misunderstood my explaining to you why that isn't true to be a statement agreeing with you.
That line
"The creature must be one that he is capable of riding and is suitable as a mount"
could be rewritten as:
Look up mount rules to make sure you can legally ride that mount.
The creature must be trained to be a mount.
And I'm saying that the lines
A Medium cavalier can select a camel or a horse. A Small cavalier can select a pony or wolf, but can also select a boar or a dog if he is at least 4th level.
make the lines describing anything else irrelevant. Why do you need to know that you can only choose suitable mounts if in point of fact the only mounts you are actually allowed to choose are suitable? If the first few lines apart from the animal companion equivalency were removed the ability would work the same way it does now.
|
And I'm saying that the lines
A Medium cavalier can select a camel or a horse. A Small cavalier can select a pony or wolf, but can also select a boar or a dog if he is at least 4th level.make the lines describing anything else irrelevant. Why do you need to know that you can only choose suitable mounts if in point of fact the only mounts you are actually allowed to choose are suitable?
Because you're ignoring the line which says;
"The GM might approve other animals as suitable mounts."
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Ridiculon, one of the things that is hard for many people to understand is that the rules were NOT written in such a way where it is expected to be parsed by rules lawyers.
There are regularly lines which state the obvious, are repetitive, or even sometimes irrelevant.
Once a person absorbs this fact then understanding the rules becomes easier. Yes, we can parse the rules using all the rules lawyer skills available to us but ultimately we are limited by the fact that the rules were not written with that in mind.
Being mounted isn't really all that great (or difficult) by default, that's why i was taking a class specifically designed for it. If I just wanted someone to be mounted on a gecko i'd just buy a gecko like you said. What i was trying to do (and may still do GM permitting) is a climbing charge build (and yes i understand that is an entirely different bag of worms), but it doesn't look like the default cavalier rules can handle mounts that you would typically find on golarion so i'll just have to ask my gm to save me from them.
If your GM is cool then a gecko can be legal, though you'd need to wait till they were big enough to ride to pick them. So a horse while they are too small, and then swap to the gecko when it would grow big enough.
The reason I don't want to use those other classes for a mounted combat build is that the cavalier is quite a bit better at it between the full bab, full animal companion, and unrestricted smite (which i plan to enhance with the Order of the Flame). If the ranger had the full animal companion it would definitely be a good substitute, but its version is even more restricted than the cavalier's (level 4 start).
It's the difference between a u-haul and a moped, they can both carry stuff but you don't look for a moped on moving day.
If your GM is cool then a gecko can be legal, though you'd need to wait till they were big enough to ride to pick them. So a horse while they are too small, and then swap to the gecko when it would grow big enough.
That's pretty much what i've decided yeah, the original question assumed that they were legal by default which ended up derailing the thread a bit.
Alternately...a BOAR! with a magic item or potion of spider climb. :)
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
And I'm saying that the lines
A Medium cavalier can select a camel or a horse. A Small cavalier can select a pony or wolf, but can also select a boar or a dog if he is at least 4th level.make the lines describing anything else irrelevant.
Which you keep evading or ignoring my reply that the line isn't irrelevant.
It covers the case of a horse for a large cavalier (who is not capabale of riding a large horse without Undersized Mount or some other size fix).
It also covers an untrained horse, which can't effectively serve as a mount.
And I'm saying that the lines
A Medium cavalier can select a camel or a horse. A Small cavalier can select a pony or wolf, but can also select a boar or a dog if he is at least 4th level.make the lines describing anything else irrelevant.Which you keep evading or ignoring my reply that the line isn't irrelevant.
It covers the case of a horse for a large cavalier (who is not capabale of riding a large horse without Undersized Mount or some other size fix).
It also covers an untrained horse, which can't effectively serve as a mount.
I wasn't ignoring or evading, i just hadn't thought about the large cavalier pc's (and you didn't bring it up yourself till this comment, you could try saying what you mean in the first place next time). The ability seems to do nothing for them at all as written, there aren't any options listed in the mount ability and none of the animals listed on the animal companion page are big enough for them to ride. So, sure, i guess those lines prevent large pc's from ever using the ability without the undersized mount feat (or gm intervention).
Ridiculon, the Devs have stated that the rules are written from the pov of small/medium PCs. Since there are no 'standard' PC races of other sizes a GM would already be in 'GM permission' territory and so one more 'GM permission' (atypical mount) is expected.
Can't you ignore the mount progression problem by dipping into a class that grants any mount you want at level 1? Example: Druid, Mad Dog Barbarian, Wild Child Brawler.
Reason found here:
The character's druid level. The druid's class levels stack with levels of any other classes that are entitled to an animal companion for the purpose of determining the companion's statistics.
Every class that grants an animal companion counts as a "druid leveL" or "druid level -3," yes? So if I have 1 level of Mad Dog / 10 levels of Cavalier, I count as a level 11 Druid who can choose any mount they want for purposes of my singular animal companion, yes?
You take the most restrictive animal companion between all your animal companion/mount classes.
Ouch. If that is true, that is stanky.
If something seems too good to be true, it probably is.
All you can really do is ask for you GM to change the restrictions on the list.
I have made that request before as a player, but it was for more thematic purposes and the ways in which I use my animal companions have never been a problem.
I usually use them as part of an archer build, in which they provide mobility to my character. There are animals better than a horse, but the horse could always do what I really need it for (have a fast movement speed to keep my from getting pinned down or attacked). Everything else is gravy. So the last character I played with an animal companion (Inquisitor with the Chivalry Inquisition -grants mount class feature- who worshipped Erastil was allowed to ride a Megaloceros because it was more fitting for a worshipper of Erastil than a horse. My elk made attacks in exactly one combat only, and the rest of the time was just my defensive ally/mobility device.
But it wasn't a flying mount, it wasn't a walk on walls mount. Those sorts of abilities can be drastically game altering if combo'd with an archer. And as a GM, those are the sorts of things I would probably say no to. For a melee PC with a gecko...I would consider it. But I'd have to look a lot more closely. And consider if there are any horseshoes that add spider climb to mounts.
It'd be stanky if not. Too cheesy.Though on the flip side this means Sacred Huntsmen Inquisitors can get two full progression animal companions by picking up the Chivalry inquisition. Not super relevant for the OP, but interesting.
So, where a Sacred Huntsman with the Animal Domain would NOT get two mounts, the Chivalry one would?
Iiiiinteresting.
Wait. What if you're a Saurian Druid and you choose a Dinosaur for your first animal companion, then take the Animal Domain to get a non-dinosaur animal companion (such as a snake)? Does that work? Do you get two animal companions?
Elsewise, you could do Saurian Druid + Chivalry Inquisition, since Inquisitions aren't limited, right?
EDIT: Wait, nevermind again. Drat. Inquisitor and Cleric are the only ways to make this work, I see.
If something seems too good to be true, it probably is.
All you can really do is ask for you GM to change the restrictions on the list.
[...]
And consider if there are any horseshoes that add spider climb to mounts.
Claxon the thought of a wolf or boar with spider climb is making me drool, from this i have to assume that its not allowed.