I am playing a witch with the Ride feat and the phantom steed spell. Whilst mounted, how do I coordinate actions? In short how do I control the beast?
I've read all the rules, they just seem all over the place, and somewhat ambiguous too.
"Ask your DM..."
The issue is that the spell tell you NOTHING of value: you "conjure a Large, magical, equine creature" but without knowing if it's a minion or if it's intelligent you don't even know if you NEED to Command an Animal (it's doesn't SAY it's an animal), use Diplomacy [unicorn/pegasus] or "uses the same number of actions to ask the creature to do what they want".
As such, there is NO way to #1 know if it's intellegent, #2 an animal or #3 even NEEDS commanding vs just controlling it like a normal spell. As such, I don't even know if you'd need the feat.
Myself, I'd say it's 100% dumb [ie, not even a minion]: Treat it like other conjurations like a Unseen Servant where every action you use moves it. Since it's long lasting vs sustain, the specific sustain action isn't used. SO if you want the mount to 40', you spend an action. Want it to move another 40', spend another action. So basically, the spell is just allowing you to use it's movement with your actions IMO.
You use the Command an Animal action to get your mount to do things you want it to.
The Ride feat makes your check for that action automatically successful if the action you want the mount to take is a move action - this is technically ambiguous because the mounted combat section says something more broadly applicable than that, but specific overrides general and the Ride feat's actual text is the more specific source than random mentions of the feat.
And the "The animal does as you command on its next turn." bit of the Command an Animal action is augmented by the mounted combat rules making your mount share your initiative so it's next turn is basically right after you command it.
It NEVER says it's an animal, just a creature. For instance, unicorn and pegasus aren't animals and aren't controlled with Command an Animal but are equine. As such, it's unknown.
The issue is that the spell tell you NOTHING of value.Weirdly, when I read phantom steed I don't have any questions as to how it works because it's a horse except for the explicit differences the spell mentions because that's what "equine creature" and "The horse" says to me.
Not all equine are horses [or animals] as you can see by looking at Pegasus: "They mature at the same rate as horses and can even breed with other equines" Or if we use the general definition "of, relating to, or resembling a horse or the horse family" so anything that looks like a horse is equine. A statue of a unicorn or a centaur is equine.
Secondly, "the horse" analogy kind of goes out the door when you start walking on water, air walking and flying. The mounted rules section, "Different Types of Mounts", points out various rules interactions if the creature is intelligent or not and it's not hard to imagine that a magical construct, and NOT a minion, would follow your commands: would you think an unseen servant requires a control animal check?
Now if it simply said "conjure a Large, horse", that'd be easier to deal with as we know that that is a non-intelligent animal but that's not what's written.
For ease of reference:
Command An Animal action
Mounted Combat GM advice
Mounted Combat rules
Phantom Steed spell
Ride feat
Erm, so is it a minion or not? Does it still get three actions, or is it now a minion with only two actions in exchange for the better 1-for-2 trade-off? Can I still spend actions on a 1-for-1 basis if I so choose, such as when I want my mount to have three, or even four actions? Insofar as I can tell, the Ride feat doesn't necessarily take that away, though it's less than clear.
In the case of a phantom steed, it automatically fails all saves. What about save DCs though? Command An Animal still requires a check against the phantom steed's Will DC whenever I have it take non-move actions. Do I auto-succeed such checks just as it would fail all saves?
Is the phantom steed considered a horse, except where noted? Can it make use of the Gallop activity? Can it make agile hoof attacks?
|
** spoiler omitted **
Erm, so is it a minion or not? Does it still get three actions, or is it now a minion with only two actions in exchange for the better 1-for-2 trade-off? Can I still spend actions on a 1-for-1 basis if I so choose, such as when I want my mount to have three, or even four actions? Insofar as I can tell, the Ride feat doesn't necessarily take that away, though it's less than clear.
Whether it's an animal or not, I don't know. But as it is right now, it's not a minion. With the Ride feat, the mount acts in your turn like a minion, but it's still not a minion (I read it as a comparison to better explain the rules, whether it helps or not, it's up to debate), so you still have to spend actions with a 1:1 ratio, using the Command Animal (or other equivalent action if not an actual animal). If you have Ride, then you don't have to roll; if you don't, I wouldn't know: the simplest answer would be to use the spell DC (the stronger the steed, the more difficult it is to ride), but since the creature would count as helpful (I guess), then you would be stuck only on a critical fail, and your proficiency in the Command Animal skill is supposed to scale with levels anyway (if you're planning on using a mount in combat, that is).
Can a phantom steed use the Gallop activity?
Phantom Steed cannot use the Gallop activity because nowhere it says it inherits all properties of an actual horse.
Erm, so is it a minion or not?
Well, it's never given the animal or minion traits so... It's also not stated as having any independent actions.
For instance, for Command an Animal you "Attempt a Nature check against the animal’s Will DC", but there is no evidence that it's an animal/beast vs say a magic construct which would be Arcana or a equine spirit for Occult even if we make the leap that you have to use Command an Animal.
I think the safest bet is to expect to have to use actions on a 1 to 1 basis and that Ride does nothing for you as this is pretty much the definition of table variance IMO. IMO, you wouldn't have to roll a check, like you don't have to roll a check for an unseen servant, but it's hard to say if someone will want you to roll and what they will want to to roll based on what type of creature they think it is.
Can a phantom steed use the Gallop activity?
IMO, no as not all equine creatures possess the action: for instance a unicorn is clearly an equine creature but it lacks Gallop. IMO, it's kind of like a base familiar: it's an unformed horse-shaped blob unless you give it abilities and the only abilities the spell gives it is movement and base AC, HP and a total lack of saves.
Edited my above post to include additional questions, as well as a bit of clarity in my meaning.
Edited my above post to include additional questions, as well as a bit of clarity in my meaning.
Can it make agile hoof attacks?
AH... You can make all the attacks that are listed under the spell... Yep, that'd be none. Your steed has NO dex, str, proficiency, damage die, weapon traits, ect for you to be able to attack with it: it's like trying to figure out how much damage your ferret familiar does with a bite: undefined.
I think it's best to NOT think of it as a horse or to base anything off it being one as it's not defined as such. It's a horse sized blob of magic.
What about save DCs though? Command An Animal still requires a check against the phantom steed's Will DC whenever I have it take non-move actions. Do I auto-succeed such checks just as it would fail all saves?
As I'd said above, IMO you don't have to Command An Animal but just spend an action to make it do an action: if someone made you use Command An Animal you still have to roll it's not a save it's failing but a roll you're making but then you run into the problem that saves aren't defined so you once again run into DM fiat so it'd be a randomly picked number out of the air you'd have you roll against.
After reading the comments here, and re-reading the rules for the nth time, I'm of the mind that it's still a 1-for-1 action on a horse-like spell effect (i.e., not a horse) and that--with or without the Ride feat--it doesn't require a check to succeed, just the action expenditure. Benefits include higher speeds and terrain traversal, and perhaps other generic benefits of mounted combat (such as having extended reach and being able to use feats like Defend Mount or Quick Mount with it).
Keeps the spell simple and straightforward, and limits potential for abuse.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If it's supposed to be a horse, is it a riding horse or a war horse?
The lack of a clear answer to that question leads me to believe that graystone is likely correct.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
After reading the comments here, and re-reading the rules for the nth time, I'm of the mind that it's still a 1-for-1 action on a horse-like spell effect (i.e., not a horse) and that--with or without the Ride feat--it doesn't require a check to succeed, just the action expenditure. Benefits include higher speeds and terrain traversal, and perhaps other generic benefits of mounted combat (such as having extended reach and being able to use feats like Defend Mount or Quick Mount with it).
This is how I understand it. 1-for-1 actions via Command an Animal, which the phantom steed automatically fails at the check (significant). Easy peasy. :)
Keeps the spell simple and straightforward, and limits potential for abuse.
Keeping it straightforward, I think is likely the most beneficial approach.
Because "conjure a Large horse" is, functionally, what "conjure a Large equine creature" combined with "The horse" is saying.
Then WHY say "equine" when they COULD super easily say 'horse'? If it's meant to have the stats of a specific horse and use the same rules as a specific horse for control, why not come out and SAY it? There is a monster family, HORSE!!!! They could just use it! Granted it still wouldn't narrow it down to a specific horse...
A strike against using equine so broadly is the game using the term for OTHER creatures like a pegasus and the kelpie which are very different than the 'normal' horse.
It's a case of casual language by which the meaning was clear to me vs. technical language by which the spell is - as a result of not being written in technical language in the first place - less than clear.
It isn't technical, IMO, to understand equine means anything related to the horse family and that horse is a specific item that is an equine. After all, everyone understands a zebra or a donkey is equine and are NOT horses. As such, what is clear doesn't match what you say is clear as most people I know know that a zebra and a horse aren't the same animal but are both equine.
It is a minion
CRB p637
summoned (trait) A creature called by a conjuration spell or effect gains the summoned trait. A summoned creature can’t summon other creatures, createthings of value, or cast spells that require a cost. It has the minion trait...
Note it has the Minion trait
Well that explains part of it. "you issue a verbal command, a single action with the auditory and concentrate traits" and it gets "2 actions per turn and can’t use reactions" when you do. I guess it shows I don't summon very often. LOL Actually, it looks like a lot of use don't use them. ;)
It is a minion
CRB p637
summoned (trait) A creature called by a conjuration spell or effect gains the summoned trait. A summoned creature can’t summon other creatures, createthings of value, or cast spells that require a cost. It has the minion trait...
Note it has the Minion trait
How would you suggest using that in conjunction with the mounted combat rules? They seem somewhat incompatible to me.
How would you suggest using that in conjunction with the mounted combat rules? They seem somewhat incompatible to me.It is a minion
CRB p637
summoned (trait) A creature called by a conjuration spell or effect gains the summoned trait. A summoned creature can’t summon other creatures, createthings of value, or cast spells that require a cost. It has the minion trait...
Note it has the Minion trait
The same way someone with a horse animal companion does it? They have minion too [and have the mount ability too].
Easiest way is to just use mounted combat rules as is but limit the mount to 2 actions per round: seems a good compromise: However, yeah it seems incompatible as is. I took a look and someone asked the same question about a horse companion and it was never resolved.
Whether you're using an animal companion, phantom steed, or some other minion, I'm thinking maybe you use 1-for-2 paradigm when unmounted, and the 1-for-1 rule when mounted.
Seems like a nice clear line that way.
So the Mounted Combat rules say "If you have the Ride general feat, you succeed automatically when you Command an Animal that’s your mount."
However, the Ride feat says "When you Command an Animal you’re mounted on to take a move action (such as Stride), you automatically succeed instead of needing to attempt a check."
So, which is it? Do I get automatic success on checks to use move actions only? Or on all actions the mount is capable of taking?
So the Mounted Combat rules say "If you have the Ride general feat, you succeed automatically when you Command an Animal that’s your mount."
However, the Ride feat says "When you Command an Animal you’re mounted on to take a move action (such as Stride), you automatically succeed instead of needing to attempt a check."
So, which is it? Do I get automatic success on checks to use move actions only? Or on all actions the mount is capable of taking?
Summoned creatures don't require a roll. Minion: "Your minion acts on your turn in combat, once per turn, when you spend an action to issue it commands. For an animal companion, you Command an Animal; for a minion that’s a spell or magic item effect, like a summoned minion, you Sustain a Spell or Sustain an Activation; if not otherwise specified, you issue a verbal command, a single action with the auditory and concentrate traits." Since the spell has no sustain action, you're out of luck ruleswise as the action IS specified but you can't use it.
Even if you could command it, it's not a roll. Summoned: "If you can communicate with it, you can attempt to command it, but the GM determines the degree to which it follows your commands." As the spell isn't listed as an animal and has no listed languages, you have no way to communicate with it.
Thanks graystone, but that was more of a general question, not necessarily referencing phantom steed specifically.
Does a phantom steed even come with a bit, bridle, and saddle?
How is it that this just gets more confusing?
Thanks graystone, but that was more of a general question, not necessarily referencing phantom steed specifically.
Does a phantom steed even come with a bit, bridle, and saddle?
How is it that this just gets more confusing?
So in general? I'd say no roll: the feat doesn't contradict the mounted combat section, so both can stand. Most likely one wasn't updated when they finalized the rules so until it's errata'd, I'd go with the most permissive: you've spent a feat so why not let the player not roll? It just speeds things along and, IMO, that's a good thing.
Then WHY say "equine" when they COULD super easily say 'horse'?Because vocabulary is fun.
It isn't technical, IMO, to understand equine means anything related to the horse family and that horse is a specific item that is an equine.When I say "technical language" and "casual language" I'm talking about writing style. A technical language writing style does exactly what you are expecting with regards to what words are chosen and how abilities are phrased with every possible detail spelled out explicitly - where a casual language writing style is a lot more loose, allows for more varied vocabulary, and is (for the majority of people) a lot easier to read despite their being "blanks" to fill in based on what is said.
We'll have to agree to disagree: I see no reason to obfuscate your meaning to make it look cool... Reading equine as horse STILL does nothing for you as it doesn't narrow down what KIND of horse it is. Is it a riding horse, a war horse or maybe a pack animal? And why would you NOT use the term as the game does in other places? Why is it not a kelpie, which is called out as an equine? "its true appearance takes the form of a hideous equine" How about a nightmare? "Nightmares are flaming equine harbingers of death." Or a pegasus and hippogriff? "equine cousins" "can even breed with other equines"...
So why do you expect the readers to fill in the "blanks" and read equine differently than the authors of the bestiary did? They made a HORSE Monster Family but chose to not use it...
IMO, equine is the height of uselessness when trying to narrow down what the mount is in real life, let alone pathfinder where there are far more creatures that fall under the equine umbrella. Heck a Zelekhut or a Skeletal Horse falls under that collection of creatures.
EDIT: also look at this: "The kelpie can take on the appearance of any Medium or Large animal of an equine nature (such as a horse, hippocampus, or pony)"
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
However you read it, I think it's pretty clear that, as currently written, it can't be referring specifically to the horse statblocks in the Bestiary.
Your whole disagreement is with the writing style that the Paizo team chose, not with me.
Only if I agree with your point. From my perspective, it's a horse shaped creature without ANY stats not given by the spell so the choice of equine is 100% correct the way I read it and a bad choice if you read it like you do. Your point of view is a white room analysis IMO, as you totally ignore how the game uses the word in other places. EVERY place I found equine used, it included non-horse creatures: look at HORSE animal companion "Your companion is a horse, pony, or similar equine." If it's obvious that equine means horse, it reads to you 'Your companion is a horse, pony, or similar horse.'?
it can't be referring specifically to the horse statblocks in the Bestiary.
LOL you can't even point to a specific horse stat block, let alone a stat block from the horse monster family... Even reading equine as horse makes the description inadequate. ;)