-
The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Help on paladin's mount survival, please
- Thread starter Artoomis
- Start date
Artoomis
First Post
apsuman said:
Under normal english rules, sometimes parts of sentances are implied.
With the implied language inserted, this statement reads:
Share Saving Throws: The mount uses its own base saves or the paladin's base saves, whichever is higher.
The additonal language I aded is not needed by normal rules of english.
But I appreciate the attempt!! I sure would like to read it otherwise.
Artoomis said:
I am not trying to belabor the point, or pick at you Artoomis.
For example, the sentence "The mount wears his red jacket or the the paladin's ." does indeed imply that the mount would wear the paladin's jacket, does it howerver, imply that he must wear the paladin's red jacket?
And, to delve into this deeper, if the mount had some ungodly dex like a 30 (+10) would he get to use HIS reflex save but the paladin's FORT and WILL saves. The SRD example says "base save" singular not plural as your example.
Alas, this is probably all moot as I am sure the sage has alread ruled on this. (Well, has he?)
g!
Artoomis
First Post
apsuman said:
No ruling form the Sage on this point, as far as I know.
I admit I "pluralized" base save for clarity - but either way it's the same thing.
I'd love it if I could get the paladin's modified saves out of this, but there is no way that will happen. The sentance is pretty clear - even if you think the language is slightly unclear, I think the intent is clear. Which makes me unhappy
. This is one case where I would love to be wrong.So I am looking for other things to help.
And, yes - you look at each base save individually and pick the best one, mount or paladin.
SpikeyFreak
First Post
Leadership feat + Awakened Riding Dog = Cool Halfling Paladin
--Arithmatic Spikey
--Arithmatic Spikey
Artoomis
First Post
SpikeyFreak said:
Yes, that would be cool. But you cannot awaken a paladin's mount because it is a Magical Beast. Well, sort of - that's it's creature type, but it seems to get no other bennies of being a Magical Beast (per my DM and the Sage).
But I'm working a feat chain of Leadership - Invest Mount that would essentially make the mount my cohort as well as my mount.
The feat is posted in House Rules here:
Invest Mount
at the bottom of the page. I'm going to try and and talk my DM into this one (after some more tweaking). Mayeb he'll let me do it since it costs two feats.
SpikeyFreak
First Post
Artoomis said:
As a DM, I would be more likely to allow a little bending of the rules (awaken on a paladins mount) than to let a feat from the net into my game.
After all, the mount is a magical beast that doesn't progress as one. How much sense does that make? And the concept is just about the coolest thing I have seen in a long time.
But I'm not your DM.
Good luck on getting the feat approved. It looks like a cool one.
--Well-Wisher Spikey
Infinite Monkey
First Post
You don't have to take Craft Magic feats. Just find a friendly cleric or paladin or whatever that has them and pay them to do it for you. Saddle blanket of resistance +5 here we come! As a DM I would certainly allow this and probably make it cheaper than the equivalent cloak as it would be mount specific and the mount isn't as important as a PC.
Wyckedemus
Explorer
Wyckedemus
Reapersaurus, I was unaware that I was being such a prick for doing my part in Artoomis' home campaign. I should have considered your feelings before I performed my duties as DM. Back off, I'm tired of your ignorant and pathetic slander. Your insults have made your opinions worthless to me. Oh, and by the way Reaper, that is my first flame of the new boards. Love ya. >~
To fill in the blanks as to why none of the message board readers are getting my side of the story is simple.
a) I don't have much time to surf the boards anymore, and
b) I've been out of town for a week judging at Winter Fantasy, and have not had the opportunity to say yay/nay to ANY of Artoomis' new ideas.
Now for the Good Stuff! Artoomis has been patient enough in awaiting my return, and he deserves my attention like he always has. Anyone interested in my opinions?
A) Share Divine Grace. Decent feat idea. As for balance, I can't think of a possible mount that blows his master's Cha out of the water. Power? A 12th level paladin with a 22 Cha gives his mount a +6 to all saving throws while within 5' of him? Sure! Why not? If you max the Cha stat, you get really big bennies! You might not be as good at the more combat related aspects if you min-max the Cha, however, so it doesn't sound too bad.
B) A creature Feat that allows the Mount to advance as a magical beast? Not out of the question. I have yet to see a breakdown in the difference between his mount's current abilities, and what he would look like modified as a magical beast, so I can properly judge if the difference can be covered by a feat in balance terms. Heck, I'm not sure if a feat is needed... but I would never have OK'd this idea with all the previous abilities Artoomis was trying to pass along with it. Just like in legislation. If you are given the bill as a whole and part of it is acceptable, and part of it is not, you veto it until you find time to cooperate and work out what you both can live with.
C) Slots for a Dog. Hmm. Barding, Collar, Saddle, Saddle Blanket, Reins/Tack/Harness, maybe even a Helm/head protector/muzzle slot. I'm going to say No to shoes for dogs, because that's just plain silly. If there is a rare style of dog training that can utilize foot coverings to help in snow (i.e. sleddogs), that is an unusual quality that does not apply to most creatures of that species. Therefore, a magic item for that utility is going to be unusual, limited, and slotless (yet possible).
D) Artoomis' mount will never be awakened to full sentience and cohort-dom. Simple reasoning shall follow. There are already several permanent NPC personalities that I have to keep up with in a campaign that consists of 6 player characters, 1 cohort, 3 familiars, and 1 paladin's mount. I already nixed Artoomis' desires for him to acquire a cohort to add to the group. Not only would group XP get more muddled, but I have yet another more complex personaltiy I have to provide. If DM comfort is not a good enough reason, Then I rule that his mount is not an animal or tree that can be awakened. Thank you.
E) A 5 level prestige class that allows the paladin to get new abilities at every level as well as continued advance in EVERY paladin ability except spellcasting? Instead, just getting the spellcasting a little bit later? Allowing Weap Spec, sharing of the paladin's MODIFIED saves (including the pal's magic items), +1 to ride per level, magic beast advancement, haste several times per day, the mount gaining the celestial template and counting as one higher on the paladin/mount chart as well as an additional multiplier while charging?
I think that is a little over the top. I admit that his following idea was altered slightly, but that is a lot of abilities for a 5 level prestige class. The abilities might have been able to work in some way, but allowing him to advance as a paladin at the same time? I also am not fond of the idea of min-maxing a character, then asking for a small patch to your master design, and all of a sudden POOF! Your Min-Max no longer has a Min.
I was not as strong in a battle of wills against another player of mine, and that situation never came to a conclusion that completely satisfied both parties. I don't want to hit that wall with this particular friend and player, personally.
My version of a prestige class fit the idea that I had of the religion and benefits that such an order would provide. The reason that mine was denied was because it did not allow most of the paladin abilities to continue to advance alongside the prestige class' other abilities, and it did not completely turn his lancer into a super lancer that made his mount nearly invulnerable. Sorry, Artoomis, I'm calling it like I see it. No offense intended. Our ideas were different enough so that Artoomis is trying to round out his mount in less drastic ways, instead of doing what his companion did by butting heads with me for 2 years.
Thank you, Artoomis. You have couth, class, and a damn fine sixth sense when it comes to the frustration of others. If only others made my existance as easy. lol.
I've read this thread, and I've seen MANY posters offering help by pointing out the impressive powers of the paladin's mount. I also know that Artoomis started with a mount that is not as powerful as a typical heavy warhorse. Uphill battle, I know. But the game is designed for players to make choices, and in doing so, bypassing other choices. In plain words... you can't have everything.
Now for another question. Does wearing rhino hide armor raise your charge multiplier when you are performing a mounted charge? Or just when you yourself are charging?
Hey everyone...do you know how scary it is to see a paladin deal 40 to 60 points of damage, almost unerringly, almost every round? Now imagine that his mount can go everywhere with him now, and so he no longer suffers choices between mounted and unmounted combat like a medium paladin. He can always be mounted and charging (for the most part). Now I'm not complaining that he is broken or munchkin or anything like that. Other players can do scary stuff too. But what I'm trying to avoid is basically handing him a quick fix that both powers up his main strengths AND removes his few weaknesses, and therefore allowing him to munch.
I think I have been challenging Artoomis like a proper DM, and he finds that he doesn't like the threat of the tactics I sometimes have to use. One reason he is scared for his mount is because he went off on his own and encountered a Gulguthydra's stench. The mount had no saving throw due to having low hit dice. This left the dog nauseated and almost defenseless. The paladin once stopped his charge within reach of a Hill Giant, and (amazingly) failed to kill it in one blow. In return, there was almost a dog/paladin cleave combo. Artoomis took off recently as an "offensive scout." The Grey Slaad they encountered used power word blind, and the dynamic duo was affected by it with no save due to hit point totals at the time. The Grey Slaad also used Chaos Hammer. A lot. You know why? Because he tried it once and it worked. Artoomis' mount failed it's save a couple times, and was effectively staggered (and blind) for the entire combat.
These creatures are the appropriate EL for the 11th level party, and when the party eventually arrived, they survived without a single death. Every near death experience that this PC and his mount have had was due to the PC going off on his own in a dangerous place, and not having appropriate party backup. It's been challenging, sure...and I'm proud that I can instill fear in a player for his character's welfare, but it does not mean that the paladin's mount is a major liability as written.
This is why small fixes and customizations are the way to go as opposed to complete overhauls.
Well, that's my piece. Who thinks I'm out of my gourd?
Oh, and reaper? You are not required to answer my post. In fact, I invite you not to. Your opinions mean nothing to me.
P.S. Is Artoomis ready for Thursday? hee hee hee... See you soon, bud! Sorry for being cranky, but I haven't had my nap. >~
...wannabe sleeping after my long flight.... mmmmmm *sigh* zzzzz...
Reapersaurus, I was unaware that I was being such a prick for doing my part in Artoomis' home campaign. I should have considered your feelings before I performed my duties as DM. Back off, I'm tired of your ignorant and pathetic slander. Your insults have made your opinions worthless to me. Oh, and by the way Reaper, that is my first flame of the new boards. Love ya. >
~To fill in the blanks as to why none of the message board readers are getting my side of the story is simple.
a) I don't have much time to surf the boards anymore, and
b) I've been out of town for a week judging at Winter Fantasy, and have not had the opportunity to say yay/nay to ANY of Artoomis' new ideas.
Now for the Good Stuff! Artoomis has been patient enough in awaiting my return, and he deserves my attention like he always has. Anyone interested in my opinions?
A) Share Divine Grace. Decent feat idea. As for balance, I can't think of a possible mount that blows his master's Cha out of the water. Power? A 12th level paladin with a 22 Cha gives his mount a +6 to all saving throws while within 5' of him? Sure! Why not? If you max the Cha stat, you get really big bennies! You might not be as good at the more combat related aspects if you min-max the Cha, however, so it doesn't sound too bad.
B) A creature Feat that allows the Mount to advance as a magical beast? Not out of the question. I have yet to see a breakdown in the difference between his mount's current abilities, and what he would look like modified as a magical beast, so I can properly judge if the difference can be covered by a feat in balance terms. Heck, I'm not sure if a feat is needed... but I would never have OK'd this idea with all the previous abilities Artoomis was trying to pass along with it. Just like in legislation. If you are given the bill as a whole and part of it is acceptable, and part of it is not, you veto it until you find time to cooperate and work out what you both can live with.
C) Slots for a Dog. Hmm. Barding, Collar, Saddle, Saddle Blanket, Reins/Tack/Harness, maybe even a Helm/head protector/muzzle slot. I'm going to say No to shoes for dogs, because that's just plain silly. If there is a rare style of dog training that can utilize foot coverings to help in snow (i.e. sleddogs), that is an unusual quality that does not apply to most creatures of that species. Therefore, a magic item for that utility is going to be unusual, limited, and slotless (yet possible).
D) Artoomis' mount will never be awakened to full sentience and cohort-dom. Simple reasoning shall follow. There are already several permanent NPC personalities that I have to keep up with in a campaign that consists of 6 player characters, 1 cohort, 3 familiars, and 1 paladin's mount. I already nixed Artoomis' desires for him to acquire a cohort to add to the group. Not only would group XP get more muddled, but I have yet another more complex personaltiy I have to provide. If DM comfort is not a good enough reason, Then I rule that his mount is not an animal or tree that can be awakened. Thank you.
E) A 5 level prestige class that allows the paladin to get new abilities at every level as well as continued advance in EVERY paladin ability except spellcasting? Instead, just getting the spellcasting a little bit later? Allowing Weap Spec, sharing of the paladin's MODIFIED saves (including the pal's magic items), +1 to ride per level, magic beast advancement, haste several times per day, the mount gaining the celestial template and counting as one higher on the paladin/mount chart as well as an additional multiplier while charging?
I think that is a little over the top. I admit that his following idea was altered slightly, but that is a lot of abilities for a 5 level prestige class. The abilities might have been able to work in some way, but allowing him to advance as a paladin at the same time? I also am not fond of the idea of min-maxing a character, then asking for a small patch to your master design, and all of a sudden POOF! Your Min-Max no longer has a Min.
I was not as strong in a battle of wills against another player of mine, and that situation never came to a conclusion that completely satisfied both parties. I don't want to hit that wall with this particular friend and player, personally.
My version of a prestige class fit the idea that I had of the religion and benefits that such an order would provide. The reason that mine was denied was because it did not allow most of the paladin abilities to continue to advance alongside the prestige class' other abilities, and it did not completely turn his lancer into a super lancer that made his mount nearly invulnerable. Sorry, Artoomis, I'm calling it like I see it. No offense intended. Our ideas were different enough so that Artoomis is trying to round out his mount in less drastic ways, instead of doing what his companion did by butting heads with me for 2 years.
Thank you, Artoomis. You have couth, class, and a damn fine sixth sense when it comes to the frustration of others. If only others made my existance as easy. lol.
I've read this thread, and I've seen MANY posters offering help by pointing out the impressive powers of the paladin's mount. I also know that Artoomis started with a mount that is not as powerful as a typical heavy warhorse. Uphill battle, I know. But the game is designed for players to make choices, and in doing so, bypassing other choices. In plain words... you can't have everything.
Now for another question. Does wearing rhino hide armor raise your charge multiplier when you are performing a mounted charge? Or just when you yourself are charging?
Hey everyone...do you know how scary it is to see a paladin deal 40 to 60 points of damage, almost unerringly, almost every round? Now imagine that his mount can go everywhere with him now, and so he no longer suffers choices between mounted and unmounted combat like a medium paladin. He can always be mounted and charging (for the most part). Now I'm not complaining that he is broken or munchkin or anything like that. Other players can do scary stuff too. But what I'm trying to avoid is basically handing him a quick fix that both powers up his main strengths AND removes his few weaknesses, and therefore allowing him to munch.
I think I have been challenging Artoomis like a proper DM, and he finds that he doesn't like the threat of the tactics I sometimes have to use. One reason he is scared for his mount is because he went off on his own and encountered a Gulguthydra's stench. The mount had no saving throw due to having low hit dice. This left the dog nauseated and almost defenseless. The paladin once stopped his charge within reach of a Hill Giant, and (amazingly) failed to kill it in one blow. In return, there was almost a dog/paladin cleave combo. Artoomis took off recently as an "offensive scout." The Grey Slaad they encountered used power word blind, and the dynamic duo was affected by it with no save due to hit point totals at the time. The Grey Slaad also used Chaos Hammer. A lot. You know why? Because he tried it once and it worked. Artoomis' mount failed it's save a couple times, and was effectively staggered (and blind) for the entire combat.
These creatures are the appropriate EL for the 11th level party, and when the party eventually arrived, they survived without a single death. Every near death experience that this PC and his mount have had was due to the PC going off on his own in a dangerous place, and not having appropriate party backup. It's been challenging, sure...and I'm proud that I can instill fear in a player for his character's welfare, but it does not mean that the paladin's mount is a major liability as written.
This is why small fixes and customizations are the way to go as opposed to complete overhauls.
Well, that's my piece. Who thinks I'm out of my gourd?
Oh, and reaper? You are not required to answer my post. In fact, I invite you not to. Your opinions mean nothing to me.
P.S. Is Artoomis ready for Thursday? hee hee hee... See you soon, bud! Sorry for being cranky, but I haven't had my nap. >
~...wannabe sleeping after my long flight.... mmmmmm *sigh* zzzzz...
reapersaurus
Explorer
Nice to see a new member on the boards, able to bring their point of view to bear!
I'm curious, you didn't mention:
Are you hesitant to mess with the rules because you want to play 3E as written first?
I'm curious, you didn't mention:
Are you hesitant to mess with the rules because you want to play 3E as written first?
Similar Threads
