RAW, yes. But it's a free action to do anything but Push. Which is a move action.
Most groups ignore this.
Are you sure that RAW is actually yes? Because Handle Animal lets you teach tricks to non animals that have 1 or 2 intelligence BECAUSE they have 1 or 2 intelligence. Which leads one to believe that it's the 1 or 2 intelligence, and not the 'animal' subtype that prompts the use of Handle Animal.
There's a post on the paizo blog that says intelligent animals still need Handle Animal checks. I can't search it right now tho.
The Handle Animal skill functions similarly no matter how intelligent an animal becomes. A character must still make Handle Animal checks to train his animal and get him to perform the appropriate tasks.
Just ask your GM though. That's a lot of extra rolls.
Although, it might be funny if your wolf doesn't listen all the time.
Once your ride skill hits +4 (guide with knees) and your handle animal skill with your companion hits +9 (11 when wounded) there's really no point in rolling.
technically you're looking at
-Ride check to guide with knees (dc5)
-Handle animal check to get it to attack (dc10)
-Your attack roll
I don't think there's much point in rolling anyway. A trained combat animal (especially one with a six int) That sees you trying to kill someone is going to get the idea and join in with a hoof to the head.
The Handle Animal skill functions similarly no matter how intelligent an animal becomes. A character must still make Handle Animal checks to train his animal and get him to perform the appropriate tasks.
Emphasis mine. RAW, they require a handle animal roll unless the GM says otherwise.
I don't really see how it can get any clearer than that.
An intelligence of six means they get more skill points per level, and that they can take any feat they are physically capable of taking.
Further, the blog post also specifically says that Awaken is what's used to bring the creature up to sentience.
A high intelligent score doesn't do that.
I suppose there's some gray area w.r.t. magical beasts, but I think the non-magical beast version of the mount is clear.
So a paladin's mount can be dispelled? Now there's an amusing thought.
I understand what you're saying, and can see how that's a good argument. I'm not convinced by it, but I think it's worthy of asking.
I don't think the mount is created for the paladin. But I can see how that's debatble.
An intelligence of six means they get more skill points per level, and that they can take any feat they are physically capable of taking.
-Animals only get 2 skill points per hit die, So increasing an animals intelligence doesn't get you more skill points until you take it from 8 to 10.
Giving it a headband with a skill in it on the other hand...
It does get you more tricks though, so you can teach your mount some insanely specific things.
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.
-The mount functions as a druids animal companion, so whats in the blog goes for them as well.
-The animal is actually a flesh and blood critter, not a celestial called creature like they were in 3.5
Well technically... your mount is a spell like ability. So RAW is you CAN dispel it, ironically enough.
But this forces us to go back to game terms. If you mount dies, you have to summon another one. In which summon is a very specific game term. You're summoning an altered manifestation of an animal through the power of your god. It's only natural that that being would suit your needs.
EDIT: Actually, reading further, the description for paladin mount's uses both the word 'call' and 'summon'. Which are two entirely different things as far as game terms are concerned. (You call a mount to your side. But you summon when you bring him back to life. That doesn't make sense.)
EDIT 2: Though I suppose you can call an already summoned creature from one location to another.
That's why I don't think those are binding terms. I really do think those are meant to be colloquial terms for what's happening, and that goes back to the timestop / balor / gate question. Just like how not all attacks that are OHKOs (Master Hunter, Death Shot, etc) aren't labeled death effects, I think it would have to be specifically called out as a Conjuration (Summoning) [Or "as a summon monster spell" / "as Gate"] or Conjuration (Calling) to be one of those. Assuming that "Call" and "Summon" mean the specific game terms rather than just another way to say "it teleports to you."
For example, interstellar void of the Heaven's Oracle. They "call" something, but it's clearly not referring to the Conjuration (Calling) subschool.
Or another example:
An eidolon has the same alignment as the summoner that calls it and can speak all of his languages.
By saying "calling = Conjuration (Calling)", that's saying that the Eidolon is a Called (Conjuration (Calling)) creature. But everything else about the Eidolon says that it's not that.
The simplest reading seems to be that it's just an animal companion that you can teleport to you as a spell-like ability. It once existed on the Celestial Plane of Good Times, but now it is yours, gifted to you by the Gods themselves.