| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
1) My horse is slower in combat than most PCs (2 x 40 is less than 3x30)In my experience by about level 8 or so most characters (Even the ones in plate mail) are going substantially faster than 25 feet a round. The biggest exceptions likely spell casters who just don't really need the speed as much
I'm thinking that makes the problem worse. The disconnect is that IRL people use horses as mounts because doing so makes them travel faster.
So having a mounted character with less available movement speed than nearly any character on foot - usually including themselves - is a bit strange.
Even more strange is when your Animal Companion dog is fighting against an NPC enemy dog and you find that your companion dog can't move or act as fast. The enemy dog gets three actions and your companion dog gets two.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
1) My horse is slower in combat than most PCs (2 x 40 is less than 3x30)The math seems to hold here. Based on a quick check through the Player Core, most ancestries have Speeds of 25 feet (only exceptions were the dwarves with 20 feet and elves with 30 feet).
3x25=75 is slower than the horse mount's 2x40=80. Dwarves get even left further behind (3 x 20 = 60) but Elves can outrun them (3 x 30 = 90).
At first level, sure.
But fleet is a pretty common choice, grabbing a wand of tailwind is pretty common, quite a few classes have speed increases either baked in or readily available, boots of speed are available, etc.
In my experience by about level 8 or so most characters (Even the ones in plate mail) are going substantially faster than 25 feet a round. The biggest exceptions likely spell casters who just don't really need the speed as much
Okay but now we're dealing with a superhuman being enhanced by magic, which kind of changes the context a lot.
Lol, That is a perfect example of odd/strange rules. Seeing perfectly through mist when in the mist it stops you...Must be magic!
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm thinking that makes the problem worse. The disconnect is that IRL people use horses as mounts because doing so makes them travel faster.
So having a mounted character with less available movement speed than nearly any character on foot - usually including themselves - is a bit strange.
Even more strange is when your Animal Companion dog is fighting against an NPC enemy dog and you find that your companion dog can't move or act as fast. The enemy dog gets three actions and your companion dog gets two.
Over long distances, a trained human runner can outpace a horse. It's just that people don't want to put in that kind of effort when you can have the horse put in the effort for you... which, honestly, perfectly encapsulates the actual use case for companion mounts, even if the particulars are kind of off.
I'm not saying that the minion rules don't break simulationism in general. They *do*. It's just that in this particular case....
Over long distances, a trained human runner can outpace a horse. It's just that people don't want to put in that kind of effort when you can have the horse put in the effort for you... which, honestly, perfectly encapsulates the actual use case for companion mounts, even if the particulars are kind of off.
I'm not saying that the minion rules don't break simulationism in general. They *do*. It's just that in this particular case....
To be clear, you are referencing the human abilities for extreme distance travel and body temperature regulation. Basically that because humans sweat we can run for longer than most other animals.
And by "Over long distances," we are talking hundreds of miles (or kilometers the difference between the two isn't all that relevant at this scale).
So in the battlefield scenario, the human being able to put on bursts of speed and outpace a horse is still very inaccurate.
And from what you are pointing out: in the overland terrain movement scenario during exploration mode where we are only looking at base movement speed, having the horse be able to go 32 miles per day while the human is only making it 28... is also inaccurate.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Seriously, though, if we want to talk about minion wackiness, we don't need to go chiseling small gains out of mounts. We can talk about Young Animal Companions. Let's recall that these are young animals. They have a bond of some sort, but it's not like they've been extensively trained.
So, first of all, the fact that all of these various kinds of young animals are roughly as capable in combat as one another is downright silly, but we're going to skip right past that and co into what happens if they're in a fight.
At least as I understand it, if your young wolf companion gets attacked while you're asleep, they can defend themselves with a reasonable degree of skill... as long as you leave them alone. If you wake up, see what's going on, and give them a single command...? They will perform that command (taking one or two actions to do so) and then immediately stop doing anything useful to defend themselves until you give them more orders. They could have rival dogs on both sides, actively biting them. They will stand, doing nothing, and wait for word from you.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Speaking of mounts … anyone mention losing reach when on a medium mount yet?
Speaking of mounts … anyone mention losing reach when on a medium mount yet?
I don't remember seeing that one in the list yet. You want to do the honors and list it out?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My horse is slower in combat than most PCs (2 x 40 is less than 3x30)
Not really, no.
If it came to an outright sprint, you'd be correct that a standard horse is faster than an animal companion horse, of course. As you say, 2 x 40 = 80 is less than 3 x 30 = 90.
However, animal companions are trained for combat skirmishes, not for sprinting, so that tracks.
A normal horse requires you to spend an action to move 30 feet. In almost every circumstance outside of the aforementioned sprint, you will likely use your remaining two actions attacking, defending, casting spells, or activating abilities.
An AC horse gets 80 feet of movement for that same single action. That's MUCH faster than a standard horse! A standard horse just can't compete with that short burst of anime speed without eating all your actions.
So any round that really matters (that is to say, any round you and your mount are participating in combat), the AC horse will always come out on top as the faster creature, at least over the short distances combat typically takes place in. It gets you farther with fewer actions AND still let's you have a meaningful impact in the combat.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
An AC horse gets 80 feet of movement for that same single action. That's MUCH faster than a standard horse!
One, that is mildly inaccurate. The Horse still spends two actions to move 80 feet. A wild horse can also spend two actions to move 80 feet and can spend a third to move another 40 feet afterwards.
two, that is missing the point. The point is that the 80 feet of movement that the horse animal companion can do is all that they can get for the round. The Gnome Bard next to them can usually move 90 feet in a round if they have put any investment into their movement speed at all.
Speaking of mounts … anyone mention losing reach when on a medium mount yet?I don't remember seeing that one in the list yet. You want to do the honors and list it out?
Sure. Why should a halfling with a lance on a riding dog have ten feet of reach while an orc on a warhorse with a lance gets five? I can imagine a mounted goblin with a horsechopper holding the butt of the weapon against a horse’s head while the horse rider swings their lance in futility. ‘Ha ha, now Sir Gobbo have upper hand! See how it feels now, longshanks!’
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Rules that I consider strange? That's easy.
The fact that there are constructs and undead in the world (ancestries and versatile heritages) that can bleed, drown, get poisoned, die of starvation, and almost anything else that living creatures have to deal with. It goes against absolutely everything that makes a construct a construct and an undead an undead. *rolls eyes then spits on the ground*
Yes I understand the rational due the balance but still very strange and completely breaks the immersion to have an automaton or a skeleton becoming poisoned.
My hopes is that in some future PF3 (or even now for SF2) the designers put in the ancestries balance that some ancestries will get non-living immunities and balance all living ancestries to compensate this in their chassis.
Yes they may a choice to give us the option of these types of characters but with weakened abilities. It does sort of break immersion a bit. It is a big change in the style from older D20 games. I guess it is a plus. I certainly enjoyed playing a couple of Poppets.
AFAICT the options for full constuct / undead style immunities are with Construct Companions, Undead Companions, summoning spells, and Ferrous Form. Not even the full undead archetypes can get you there at high level - which is dissapointing.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
TBH I think Paizo unfortunately kind of wrote themselves into a corner. Everyone is so weak at a baseline in PF2 that it's really hard to add cool and interesting features without breaking the balance, because there's so little wiggle room.
I get where they were coming from with new ancestry system, but in practice it ends up getting in the way of a lot of concept spaces just because the power budget ends up being so limited.
Design Manager
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Sure. Why should a halfling with a lance on a riding dog have ten feet of reach while an orc on a warhorse with a lance gets five?
The main answer to that lies in the rules for being mounted. A gnome on a riding dog occupies a 5x5x5 space while a human on a horse occupies a 10x10x10 space. The nature of a grid-based map means the Small rider still gets a bit more oomph here, since "odd" sizes like Small and Huge get the advantage of a central square, but the Medium rider is getting some of that reach back in the form of being able to occupy and measure their reach from 8 squares compared to the Small rider's 1.
|
An AC horse gets 80 feet of movement for that same single action. That's MUCH faster than a standard horse!One, that is mildly inaccurate. The Horse still spends two actions to move 80 feet. A wild horse can also spend two actions to move 80 feet and can spend a third to move another 40 feet afterwards.
two, that is missing the point. The point is that the 80 feet of movement that the horse animal companion can do is all that they can get for the round. The Gnome Bard next to them can usually move 90 feet in a round if they have put any investment into their movement speed at all.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe if you are RIDING your horse, then it can move 3 times @ 40 feet (or rather, *you* are moving 3 times, but using its speed)...which is also weird.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe if you are RIDING your horse, then it can move 3 times @ 40 feet (or rather, *you* are moving 3 times, but using its speed)...which is also weird.
As long as it is a Horse that is just a Horse, then you would be using Command an Animal and you could have it use three actions on Stride.
But as soon as you turn it into a Horse and it gains the Minion trait, then you use the Minion rules and can only command it once per round. So you can only have it use two actions on Stride.
I tried making the case that you could additionally use Command an Animal to give a third action to the Minion, but I was corrected on that one.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The main answer to that lies in the rules for being mounted. A gnome on a riding dog occupies a 5x5x5 space while a human on a horse occupies a 10x10x10 space. The nature of a grid-based map means the Small rider still gets a bit more oomph here, since "odd" sizes like Small and Huge get the advantage of a central square, but the Medium rider is getting some of that reach back in the form of being able to occupy and measure their reach from 8 squares compared to the Small rider's 1.
Sure. Why should a halfling with a lance on a riding dog have ten feet of reach while an orc on a warhorse with a lance gets five?
Yeah, several of these rules oddities are due to balance reasons.
It is still somewhat amusing and a bit cathartic to overthink them.
The main answer to that lies in the rules for being mounted. A gnome on a riding dog occupies a 5x5x5 space while a human on a horse occupies a 10x10x10 space. The nature of a grid-based map means the Small rider still gets a bit more oomph here, since "odd" sizes like Small and Huge get the advantage of a central square, but the Medium rider is getting some of that reach back in the form of being able to occupy and measure their reach from 8 squares compared to the Small rider's 1.
Sure. Why should a halfling with a lance on a riding dog have ten feet of reach while an orc on a warhorse with a lance gets five?
Yeah, several of these rules oddities are due to balance reasons.
It is still somewhat amusing and a bit cathartic to overthink them.
Apologies in advance to you and Michael Sayre, but over thinking is what I do.
I don't understand.
since "odd" sizes like Small and Huge get the advantage of a central square
It is clear that reach, attack range and other effects and also being attacked counts from and to all the squares of your mount. So I'm not seeing the advantage of a central square. Every rider seems to be in every square of their mount for all purposes. The only place where it might have a difference is maybe how the GM adjudicates cover (though I don't consider it when I GM).
Looking at the 10 ft reach scenario. A Medium Rider on a Large Mount has 4 squares to measure their reach from, potentially targeting 12 squares. Compared to a Small Rider on a Medium mount having 1 square, and potentially targetting 24 squares. I am not counting the space(s) occupied by the mount.
|
|
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe if you are RIDING your horse, then it can move 3 times @ 40 feet (or rather, *you* are moving 3 times, but using its speed)...which is also weird.As long as it is a Horse that is just a Horse, then you would be using Command an Animal and you could have it use three actions on Stride.
But as soon as you turn it into a Horse and it gains the Minion trait, then you use the Minion rules and can only command it once per round. So you can only have it use two actions on Stride.
I tried making the case that you could additionally use Command an Animal to give a third action to the Minion, but I was corrected on that one.
I thought that if you were riding something with the Mount trait that you could move for three actions without needing to command it -- but then those were the only actions you got. But it sounds like that was a house rule the GM had.
|
TBH I think Paizo unfortunately kind of wrote themselves into a corner. Everyone is so weak at a baseline in PF2 that it's really hard to add cool and interesting features without breaking the balance, because there's so little wiggle room.
I get where they were coming from with new ancestry system, but in practice it ends up getting in the way of a lot of concept spaces just because the power budget ends up being so limited.
Maybe Mythic rules for PF2 will help there.
The main answer to that lies in the rules for being mounted. A gnome on a riding dog occupies a 5x5x5 space while a human on a horse occupies a 10x10x10 space. The nature of a grid-based map means the Small rider still gets a bit more oomph here, since "odd" sizes like Small and Huge get the advantage of a central square, but the Medium rider is getting some of that reach back in the form of being able to occupy and measure their reach from 8 squares compared to the Small rider's 1.
Sure. Why should a halfling with a lance on a riding dog have ten feet of reach while an orc on a warhorse with a lance gets five?
Yeah, several of these rules oddities are due to balance reasons.
It is still somewhat amusing and a bit cathartic to overthink them.
Apologies in advance to you and Michael Sayre, but over thinking is what I do.
I don't understand.
since "odd" sizes like Small and Huge get the advantage of a central square
It is clear that reach, attack range and other effects and also being attacked counts from and to all the squares of your mount. So I'm not seeing the advantage of a central square. Every rider seems to be in every square of their mount for all purposes. The only place where it might have a difference is maybe how the GM adjudicates cover (though I don't consider it when I GM).Looking at the 10 ft reach scenario. A Medium Rider on a Large Mount has 4 squares to measure their reach from, potentially targeting 12 squares. Compared to a Small Rider on a Medium mount having 1 square, and potentially targetting 24 squares. I am not counting the space(s) occupied by the mount.
I thought so too. Until I realized that there is an important detail that forced the balance of the mounts to be like this. The level!
Basically what happens is the following. When you are a small creature and use a weapon with the reach trait, your reach is no different from any other dismounted PC with the reach trait.
If a medium-sized PC riding a large creature, whether or not using a weapon with the reach trait, had 10 feet or even more as expected for a large creature with a weapon with the reach trait, you would essentially be emulating the effect of the Enlarge spell or of the Giant's Stature feat which are respectively level 3 (rank 2 magic, and therefore costs spell slots) and level 6, but you already ride a large creature from level 1 onwards, so if you received the normal benefit of the size you would essentially be gaining access to unlimited Enlarge at level 1.
This doesn't mean that I agree with such solution because it's odd and don't scale well yet makes sense as a way to restrict access to all benefits of a large creature too early in the game.