| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Having started Pathfinder 2E recently, I thought it would be fun to convert some of my character concepts to 2E starting with the first character I made for 1E. He was a Cavalier based around the charge action and was pretty fun. However, the issue I'm running into is that as I'm reading through the rules for Animal Companions, mounts and mounted combat, I'm not sure I'm understanding everything.
It seems like there are a lot of somewhat overlapping "if;then" scenarios so I was hoping to clarify exactly how this worked and make sure I didn't miss anything.
1. Assuming I'm commanding a creature that is friendly toward me, I could use "Command an Animal" to try and get it to do something like stride. I would use an action on my turn to command it, then, if successful, it would use an action on it's turn to follow what I said. If I commanded it to do something that took more than 1 action (Gallop for example), I would have to spend the same number of actions
2. If I have an animal that isn't combat trained (mount or otherwise) and bring it into an encounter, it becomes Frightened 4 and tries to flee unless I successfully command it in which case, it remains frightened but doesn't flee. It it's attacked, it will try to flee again.
3. If I'm riding an animal and/or the creature I'm commanding is my Animal Companion, it acts on my initiative
4. If I'm riding an animal that is not my animal companion, we essentially share the 3 actions for the turn (so I command it to move as my first action and it moves for the first action, I attack for the second action and it does nothing for the second action etc.).
5. If the animal I'm commanding (mount or otherwise) is my animal companion, when I command it it gains 2 of it's own actions for the turn rather than sharing my action pool as per the minion special ability that it gains. This would mean, for example, if I used the horse's advanced maneuver, Gallop, I would use 2 actions to command it, then it would use 2 actions performing leaving me with a 3rd...
1. Yes.
2. Yes.3. Yes.
4. Yes.
5. No. You only have to spend 1 action to give your Animal Companion 2 actions, so you only have to spend 1 action to allow the Horse to use it's 2 actions to Gallop. You would still have 2 actions left.
6. No. You share MAP with a standard mount, but Animal Companions are Minions. They have their own actions and their own MAP. You do not share with them.
7. Yes.
8. Yes.
9. Kind of. They gain HPs and Level based Proficiency, but their Proficiency Ranks only increase when an ability says they do. For example, they do not become Expert in their attacks until becoming Specialized.
1. An animal companion is a Minion, not an Animal. Those rules don't apply. For other Animals, AFAIK, the animals stated to be combat trained are those you listed, or those your GM says are combat trained.
2. Your actions are separate. You use a single action to command it, and that gives it 2 actions to use during your turn. At what point during your turn it uses those actions is up to you. It could Stride once, then you Strike, then it Strides again.
3. I don't believe the rules cover that. I'd say you would both have to make the check.
4. That's up to your GM.
Yes, your Companion uses one of its 2 actions to use its Support Benefit.
|
6. No. You share MAP with a standard mount, but Animal Companions are Minions. They have their own actions and their own MAP. You do not share with them.
Do you have a citation for minion mounts not sharing MAP? That’s not how I’ve been running it, and the Paladin in my group has been fighting side by side with his horse rather than sharing MAP.
You use a single action to command it, and that gives it 2 actions to use during your turn. At what point during your turn it uses those actions is up to you. It could Stride once, then you Strike, then it Strides again.
Is this set forth somewhere? Again that’s not how I’ve been running it. I’ve been putting both of the animal companions actions together immediately after the action spent to command it.
No. You share MAP with a standard mount, but Animal Companions are Minions. They have their own actions and their own MAP. You do not share with them.
The shared MAP applies to any mount. That includes an animal companion, if and only if you are riding them.
6. No. You share MAP with a standard mount, but Animal Companions are Minions. They have their own actions and their own MAP. You do not share with them.Do you have a citation for minion mounts not sharing MAP? That’s not how I’ve been running it, and the Paladin in my group has been fighting side by side with his horse rather than sharing MAP.
Riding an Animal Companion has its own specific rules. The General Mount rules are not relevant. You don't share actions like you would with a mount. It can't fly like a mount. It can't swim like a mount. It's not a mount. It's a Ridden Animal Companion. It's essentially just a Minion that happens to be carrying you. At least that's how I read it.
Riding Animal Companions
You or an ally can ride your animal companion as long as
it is at least one size larger than the rider. If it is carrying a
rider, the animal companion can use only its land Speed, and
it can’t move and Support you on the same turn. However, if
your companion has the mount special ability, it’s especially
suited for riding and ignores both of these restrictions.
Nothing there says that you share MAP. I mean look at it this way. If my ally rides my Animal Companion, and I command it to Attack, does my Ally now share MAP with it?
You use a single action to command it, and that gives it 2 actions to use during your turn. At what point during your turn it uses those actions is up to you. It could Stride once, then you Strike, then it Strides again.Is this set forth somewhere? Again that’s not how I’ve been running it. I’ve been putting both of the animal companions actions together immediately after the action spent to command it.
Your animal companion has the minion trait, and it
gains 2 actions during your turn if you use the Command
an Animal action to command it; this is in place of the
usual effects of Command an Animal.
I don't see anything that dictates the timing of those actions. When use Command an Animal, it gains 2 Actions during your turn. To me, that says it can use those Actions at any time during your turn.
Your animal companion, as a minion, has specific rules that override the normal action economy of mounts. There is nothing to support the idea that other mount rules don't apply, or that a ridden animal companion is not a mount.
I disagree.
The easiest resolution would be for you to spend your last (third) action on Command an Animal, and have the minion act right after you've completed your turn.
Hopefully that's enough for the overwhelming majority of cases.
That would be completely useless 99% of the time. The vast majority of Companion actions go Move -> Support. Doing Support at the end of your turn accomplishes nothing.
Animal Companion to hit values scale worse than Spellcasters, so having them attack is a waste of time for most of the game.
Literally the only Companion where the order of its actions matters most of the time is the Horse, because the entire purpose of a Horse is to hit and run. Needlessly penalizing an already weak Companion choice by not allow it to do so is just silly.
Riding an Animal Companion has its own specific rules. The General Mount rules are not relevant.I'm sorry, but it appears you're saying you're better off with an animal companion that doesn't have the mount special ability?
If what you're saying is true, you can switch from riding a mount to riding a non-mount AC and get two "best" attacks (no MAP) instead of just one.
Unless I'm misunderstanding you?
No. I'm not saying that. The Mount special ability and the Mounted Combat Rules are not the same thing. The Mount special ability allows your AC to use both its special speeds, and its Support Ability while being ridden.
You have this penchant for responding in inflammatory ways, without actually addressing any of the points that were made, which I truly do not understand.
If you had said "I disagree. Page 301 states that your Minion acts once on your turn, when you give it a command. This says to me that both actions have to be used immediately.", that would be a valid response. We could have a discussion about that. Ad hominem attacks like "Hmm - this might be an example of the age old fallacy.", as well as using multiple posts, instead of taking the time to compose a single, well written post, just makes me wish there was a way that I could block you.
MG,
I would suggest checking out the GREAT videos by Basics for Gamers, he has a number of videos pertinent to this discussion.
1. An animal companion is a Minion, not an Animal. Those rules don't apply. For other Animals, AFAIK, the animals stated to be combat trained are those you listed, or those your GM says are combat trained.
Nitpick, but an animal companion has the minion trait - which says nothing about removing or replacing any other traits it would already have. Nothing prevents an Animal Companion from having both the animal and minion traits simultaneously, since PF2 turned all creature types into traits and doesn't appear to have any rules making them mutually exclusive (which is a good thing imo).
That said, the rules about combat trained animals only appear in the section about renting or purchasing a specific listed set of animals, and I would argue this means that it is specifically meant for that section rather than being a general rule. Essentially, it seems to be intended to say that domesticated animals bought for other purposes (travel, transport, etc) are generally going to try to flee from combat. If this was meant to be applied to everything with the animal trait I would 1) expect it to appear as part of that trait, which it doesn't, and 2) would expect combat training to appear on a number of animals in the bestiary, where the phrase is never used. Overall, I would say that combat training (& the penalty for not having it) is only a thing necessary for purchased animals - and not something that you need to have specified on an animal companion, familiar, or any other type of animal.
Riding an Animal Companion has its own specific rules. The General Mount rules are not relevant. You don't share actions like you would with a mount. It can't fly like a mount. It can't swim like a mount. It's not a mount. It's a Ridden Animal Companion. It's essentially just a Minion that happens to be carrying you. At least that's how I read it.
Disagree due to what the CRB gives as general guidelines for situations like this.
Specific Overrides General
A core principle of Pathfinder is that specific rules override general ones. If two rules conflict, the more specific one takes precedence. If there’s still ambiguity, the GM determines which rule to use. For example, the rules state that when attacking a concealed creature, you must attempt a DC 5 flat check to determine if you hit. Flat checks don’t benefit from modifiers, bonuses, or penalties, but an ability that’s specifically designed to overcome concealment might override and alter this. If a rule doesn’t specify otherwise, default to the general rules presented in this chapter. While some special rules may also state the normal rules to provide context, you should always default to the normal rules even if effects don’t specifically say to.
The specific rules of the Riding an Animal Companion section do not claim to negate the general mounted rules nor do they conflict with them in terms of MAP. As such, since the Riding an Animal Companion section does not specifically claim to override the Mounted Combat rules, you would default to the general mounted combat rules for any sections which are not in conflict.
Also, if the General Mount rules were not relevant because the Riding an Animal Companion section replaced them - then mounted animal companions would not have any rules regarding the rider's reach when mounted, how targeting works against mount+rider, etc. Those are all in the general mounted combat rules and are not reproduced in the animal companion section.
1. An animal companion is a Minion, not an Animal. Those rules don't apply. For other Animals, AFAIK, the animals stated to be combat trained are those you listed, or those your GM says are combat trained.Nitpick, but an animal companion has the minion trait - which says nothing about removing or replacing any other traits it would already have. Nothing prevents an Animal Companion from having both the animal and minion traits simultaneously, since PF2 turned all creature types into traits and doesn't appear to have any rules making them mutually exclusive (which is a good thing imo).
That said, the rules about combat trained animals only appear in the section about renting or purchasing a specific listed set of animals, and I would argue this means that it is specifically meant for that section rather than being a general rule. Essentially, it seems to be intended to say that domesticated animals bought for other purposes (travel, transport, etc) are generally going to try to flee from combat. If this was meant to be applied to everything with the animal trait I would 1) expect it to appear as part of that trait, which it doesn't, and 2) would expect combat training to appear on a number of animals in the bestiary, where the phrase is never used. Overall, I would say that combat training (& the penalty for not having it) is only a thing necessary for purchased animals - and not something that you need to have specified on an animal companion, familiar, or any other type of animal.
I actually wasn't nitpicking. I did not mean to imply that I don't think that Companions have the Animal Trait, only that they are not Animals in the sense of the things in the equipment chapter. I believe we are in agreement on that.
Riding an Animal Companion has its own specific rules. The General Mount rules are not relevant. You don't share actions like you would with a mount. It can't fly like a mount. It can't swim like a mount. It's not a mount. It's a Ridden Animal Companion. It's essentially just a Minion that happens to be carrying you. At least that's how I read it.Disagree due to what the CRB gives as general guidelines for situations like this.
Specific...
Ok, so I'll ask again, because nobody has provided any discussion on this yet. Nothing about my Animal Companion being ridden states that it prevents me from Commanding it as normal. So, if my ally rides my Animal Companion, and I command my Companion to Attack, do my Companion and the rider share MAP? Do they share an Action Pool? The rules for a standard mount and the rules for Animal Companions do not seem particularly compatible.
It is my opinion that sharing MAP with your mount is a side-effect of sharing an Action pool with your mount, as it's essentially a mindless thing that is incapable of acting on it's own. You have to use your actions 1 to 1 for it to do anything.
Companions are not the same. They are minions. They are their own beings, who gain their own Action pool when you command them. You wouldn't make a Halfling riding on a Giant share MAP would you?
You are only "mounted" if you used the mount action to get on the animal. The only reason to do that is to move the animal's Initiative to your own. You could ride a Horse without mounting it if you wanted to, it would just be a lot more difficult, as you would order it on your turn, and it would move on its own turn.
Companions don't have this problem. There is no reason for me to ever mount the companion. I literally just have to ride on top of it.
Can we also agree that this is mostly an academic point? It's basically never going to be a good idea to command the animal that you are riding to attack, Companion or not. Non Companion animals are just bags of very small HP that die as soon as anything touches them, and Companion Attacks don't scale well enough to make their Attacks more valuable than the PC's.
I'm fairly certain Aratorin is completely correct here.
A 'Horse' Animal Companion is not a 'Horse' Creature - it appears similar, but its functionally completely different. It doesn't have the same types, the same keywords, or even a vaguely similar statblock. There's absolutely no reason to imagine they share even vaguely similar restrictions.
The 'Horse' animal companion should function exactly like every other Animal Companion, except for the exceptions laid out in Riding Animal Companions. Referring to other, unreferenced sections of the book makes no sense from a rules perspective- it just kindof seems like it does from a narrative one because you may confusing one Thing called a Horse for another.