Okay Frustrated!


Rules Questions


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Can't find First Ed Pathfinder question forum. My question is was or is there an errata for Mammoth Rider Prestige Class. Since every version I've seen doesn't list wether they get any new weapons or armor profiencies

Paizo Employee Customer Service Representative

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Moved to the PF1 Rules Question forum.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

There is no errata I am aware of. As there is no section that details the Mammoth Rider receiving any new weapon or armor proficiencies, they do not receive any additional proficiencies.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

While most prestige classes do explicitly mention weapon/armor proficiencies, even to say no additional are granted Mammoth Rider does not. I can see how that might be slightly confusing, but given the lack of anything present I'm not sure why you would expect new proficiencies.

Based on available info, they don't get anything new.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Out of the 119 Prestige Classes made py Paizo, 31 don't have a "weapon and armor proficiency" class feature. That is way too many for them to all be mistakes.

In total 85 out of the 119 prestige classes don't grant additional proficiency, so that's actually the norm.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

The requirements of the class are going to limit who can take it. The fact that it does not increase spell casting is going to further limit those that are likely to take it. In reality the only classes that are likely to take this prestige class is a high-level ranger or cavalier. While it is possible for other classes to take it most of them would be giving up too much for what they get. If a druid or oracle takes this class not only does their spell progression not advance, but they are also behind in the BAB due to the lower BAB of the original class. That is something that is going to be very limiting.

Both the ranger and cavalier have proficiency in all martial weapons. The ranger is going to be limited to medium armor, but the cavalier will be able to use heavy armor.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

A spellcaster* may only want to take 1-3 levels for Gigantic Steed (Huge, plus Str and Con bonuses), Steed (improved selection of possible companion/mount), and possibly Rugged Steed.

Granted, a "typical" group will probably not want a Huge animal companion/mount because of the limitations where they can be brought. However, it could make sense for some character concepts.

*- either a class that gets an animal companion via a class feature (cleric with Animal domain, druid, hunter, wildblooded sorcerer with the Fey/Sylvan bloodline, etc.) or with the Nature Soul + Animal Ally feats


1 person marked this as a favorite.

you can check the rules yourself:
1) check AoN -> {PFS} Mammoth Rider Prestige class.
2) then check the product page for eratta...
3) then check FAQs for product
4) lastly OrgPlay updates (also helpful for home GMs).


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Bloodrider Bloodrager archetype probably is a "casting class" that would consider dipping in this.

A single dip would be a sizeable increase in terms of mount abilities (exchange a horse for what mammoth rider offers, and then make it larger), for the cost of delayed bloodline progression and spell casting.

Blooriders share resitances and immunities from the bloodlines with their mount (eh, not that relevant usually) but more importantly transfer any spells that are self to their mounts (this would include standouts like mirror image, shield, longarm or cheetah sprint, when you really want to charge someone currently in another country).

I dont think you can effectively share enlarge person with you mount though, it gets casted on it, but the mount is probably not humanoid, so no gargantuan size for a level 1 spell.

Dark Archive

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Mightypion wrote:

Bloodrider Bloodrager archetype probably is a "casting class" that would consider dipping in this.

A single dip would be a sizeable increase in terms of mount abilities (exchange a horse for what mammoth rider offers, and then make it larger), for the cost of delayed bloodline progression and spell casting.

Blooriders share resitances and immunities from the bloodlines with their mount (eh, not that relevant usually) but more importantly transfer any spells that are self to their mounts (this would include standouts like mirror image, shield, longarm or cheetah sprint, when you really want to charge someone currently in another country).

I dont think you can effectively share enlarge person with you mount though, it gets casted on it, but the mount is probably not humanoid, so no gargantuan size for a level 1 spell.

share spells wrote:


The druid may cast a spell with a target of “You” on her animal companion (as a touch range spell) instead of on herself. A druid may cast spells on her animal companion even if the spells normally do not affect creatures of the companion’s type (animal). Spells cast in this way must come from a class that grants an animal companion. This ability does not allow the animal to share abilities that are not spells, even if they function like spells.

Also Goliath Druid could do it

If the goliath druid selects an animal companion, she must select a dinosaur or megafauna. If she has a dinosaur or megafauna animal companion, she can target it with enlarge person even though the companion isn’t of the humanoid type.

This ability alters nature bond.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Goliath Druid certainly is a candidate to yeap.

Or have a Goliath Druid and a Bloodrider, actually, I am gonna use this as NPCs from a Merc company.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mightypion wrote:
I dont think you can effectively share enlarge person with you mount though, it gets casted on it, but the mount is probably not humanoid, so no gargantuan size for a level 1 spell.

The main issue is that size increases don't stack.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

The Goliath would probably get the size increase, and then add strong jaw as an effectivee size increase which would stack.

Hmm, can you ride things while you are in wild form?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Derklord wrote:
Mightypion wrote:
I dont think you can effectively share enlarge person with you mount though, it gets casted on it, but the mount is probably not humanoid, so no gargantuan size for a level 1 spell.
The main issue is that size increases don't stack.

Are you implying that an animal companion that has had it's 7th level size bump is not a valid target for animal growth?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Java Man wrote:
Derklord wrote:
Mightypion wrote:
I dont think you can effectively share enlarge person with you mount though, it gets casted on it, but the mount is probably not humanoid, so no gargantuan size for a level 1 spell.
The main issue is that size increases don't stack.
Are you implying that an animal companion that has had it's 7th level size bump is not a valid target for animal growth?

No, because it's not a size increase for the rules, but rather a set size depending on the level. It's not worded as a size increase, too. Also, you might argue that e.g. a lion is large sized, so the 1st to 6th level companion is the one affected by a size change (to make it smaller), and at 7th+ level it has it's unchanged size. I wouldn't want to have to look up the base creature just to see at which levels you can Animal Growth it, but if you chose to go down that rabbit hole...

Mammoth Rider's Gigantic Steed, however, literally says "The size of a mammoth rider’s steed (see below) increases". You cannot in honest argue that it's not a size increase.

The rules are clear that size increases don't stack, and that both Gigantic Steed and Enlarge Person (or Animal Growth) are size increases. You might argue that the level advancement is a size increase, but even than it doesn't change the fact that Gigantic Steed and Enlarge Person don't stack. It would only mean that level advancement needs one of those every-table-houserules that no one writes down because common sense dictates them.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Bloodragers are already proficient with all martial weapons and medium armor. Unlike Cavaliers they take the penalty to their ride check from heavy armor. This kind of puts them into the same category as rangers. Druids are also proficient with medium armor and cannot use metal armor without severe penalties. While there are a few heavy armors they can use those are fairly rare. A druid (or other spell caster) that is dipping for a single level is unlikely to be focusing on mounted combat which diminishes the need for extra weapon proficiencies. I don’t see any reason for this prestige class to grant additional weapon or armor proficiencies.

The rules for stacking effects are listed under magic in the core rule book. They specifically call out spells or magical effects in the first sentence. Gigantic Steed is an extraordinary ability so is not magic. That suggest it is not subject to the rules of stacking effects. I could be mistaken on that but unless someone can show a FAQ that extraordinary abilities are affected by the rules under magic, I have to conclude that you can use magic to further increase the size on an animal companion with gigantic steed.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mysterious Stranger wrote:
The rules for stacking effects are listed under magic in the core rule book. They specifically call out spells or magical effects in the first sentence. Gigantic Steed is an extraordinary ability so is not magic. That suggest it is not subject to the rules of stacking effects. I could be mistaken on that but unless someone can show a FAQ that extraordinary abilities are affected by the rules under magic, I have to conclude that you can use magic to further increase the size on an animal companion with gigantic steed.

That's not how the rules and especially FAQs are written, and you should know that.

I posted the FAQ that says "size changes do not stack". It doesn't mention "magical" at all.

Yes, it says "As per the rules on size changes", making it derivate from the 'rule' (which is actually just in the Enlarge Person description) that only mentions "magical effects"... but we have an FAQ that calls out shield spike's virtual size increase as non-stacking, which can only be true if the aforementioned FAQ applies to it.

Also, that you started your argument with "The rules for stacking effects are listed under magic in the core rule book." should have shown you how nonsensical it is. If rules in the magic section wouldn't effect non-magical things, we wouldn't even have stacking rules for those!
Plus, almost all of the magic rules only talk about "spells", meaning by literal interpretation they don't apply to e.g. supernatural abilities - which would break a ton of them. Including Wild Shape.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

The general rules for Druid Nature Bond in the CRB say: "Most animal companions increase in size when their druid reaches 4th or 7th level, depending on the companion." So it is stated as a size increase. Consistency sake says the ruling here and for gigantic steed should be the same, or we admit we are making a house rule exception (nothing wrong with that).


2 people marked this as a favorite.

If it matters at all, I treat the size increase from Mammoth Rider exactly the same as the one granted through the animal companion progression. To clarify, the creature is now X size, full stop. Enlarge will work on it normally (actual size increase) as will Strong Jaw (effective size increase). If you want to call it a house rule, that's fine.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Derklord wrote:
Mysterious Stranger wrote:
The rules for stacking effects are listed under magic in the core rule book. They specifically call out spells or magical effects in the first sentence. Gigantic Steed is an extraordinary ability so is not magic. That suggest it is not subject to the rules of stacking effects. I could be mistaken on that but unless someone can show a FAQ that extraordinary abilities are affected by the rules under magic, I have to conclude that you can use magic to further increase the size on an animal companion with gigantic steed.

That's not how the rules and especially FAQs are written, and you should know that.

I posted the FAQ that says "size changes do not stack". It doesn't mention "magical" at all.

Yes, it says "As per the rules on size changes", making it derivate from the 'rule' (which is actually just in the Enlarge Person description) that only mentions "magical effects"... but we have an FAQ that calls out shield spike's virtual size increase as non-stacking, which can only be true if the aforementioned FAQ applies to it.

Also, that you started your argument with "The rules for stacking effects are listed under magic in the core rule book." should have shown you how nonsensical it is. If rules in the magic section wouldn't effect non-magical things, we wouldn't even have stacking rules for those!
Plus, almost all of the magic rules only talk about "spells", meaning by literal interpretation they don't apply to e.g. supernatural abilities - which would break a ton of them. Including Wild Shape.

The FAQ you posted was about size increases stacking with effective size increase, which the FAQ stated worked. The body of the FAQ said, “As per the rules on size changes, size changes do not stack”. This indicates the FAQ is not changing or clarifying anything on that subject so what is written in the book still applies. The only rules I have found under stacking are in the section on magic and it specifies Spells or magical effects.

The FAQ on the klar states that when used as a weapon it is considered a one-handed weapon that does slashing damage, not a shield. What the FAQ is stating is that putting the bashing enchantment on a klar does not increase the damage that the klar does as a weapon. A bashing klar can either do the bludgeoning damage of a shield 2 sizes larger or 1d6 of slashing damage. The damage of a light shield 2 sizes larger works out to be 1d6 so a bashing klar can do either 1d6 bludgeoning damage or 1d6 slashing damage. This has nothing to do with size increases stacking, this has to do with the fact the bashing enchantment does not work on the weapon portion of the klar.

As far as I know this is the only place in the rules that stacking is brought up. If there is some other FAQ or parts of the rules I missed, that is fine, but otherwise I stand by my post.

This is like saying that animal growth does not work on an animal with the giant template. That template is designed to allow a GM to create a larger version of an animal that does not have a specific write up. So, if a GM is creating a land of giants setting where all the creatures are larger than normal it would not work on the giant raccoon but would work on the dire rate because it has a write up in the bestiaries.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Java Man wrote:
The general rules for Druid Nature Bond in the CRB say: "Most animal companions increase in size when their druid reaches 4th or 7th level, depending on the companion." So it is stated as a size increase.

Ah, didn't check that, only individual entries. Thanks. Of course, that's only evidence for Animal Growth + level-based size increase not stacking, and not in any way counter-evidence to Gigantic Steed + Enlarge Person not stacking.

Mysterious Stranger wrote:
The FAQ you posted was about size increases stacking with effective size increase

Before making such statements, you might want to read the FAQ in question more closely. The question asked was for "various effects that change my actual size, my effective size, and my damage dice". That does cover multiple non-virtual size changes, and thus so does the answer.

Mysterious Stranger wrote:
The body of the FAQ said, “As per the rules on size changes, size changes do not stack”. This indicates the FAQ is not changing or clarifying anything on that subject so what is written in the book still applies.

We don't actually have rules on size changes in any of the general rules sections of the book, only rules-in-examples, which are quite often incomplete. What the FAQ references is an unwritten general rule that is now being explicitly spelled out. This is something FAQs do quite a lot, a good example being this FAQ making a general rule where there were only individual examples, without indicating that there is any actual change (because it was always intended like that, and the rules were written with that unwritten rule in mind).

Mysterious Stranger wrote:
The FAQ on the klar states that when used as a weapon it is considered a one-handed weapon that does slashing damage, not a shield. What the FAQ is stating is that putting the bashing enchantment on a klar does not increase the damage that the klar does as a weapon. A bashing klar can either do the bludgeoning damage of a shield 2 sizes larger or 1d6 of slashing damage. The damage of a light shield 2 sizes larger works out to be 1d6 so a bashing klar can do either 1d6 bludgeoning damage or 1d6 slashing damage. This has nothing to do with size increases stacking, this has to do with the fact the bashing enchantment does not work on the weapon portion of the klar.

Nice essay. Utterly proven wrong by the use of the word "stack" in the FAQ, of course, but hey, keep telling yourself that "doesn’t stack" has nothing to do with stacking, if that makes you happy.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Okay Frustrated! All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.