Paladin mount advancement… Skill-points, Feats?

[Spatzimaus]

Well, I don't see how it's "obvious" that the bonus hit die are not magical beast hit die.

I think he's referring to the fact that Magical Beasts use a d10, while a Paladin's mount explicitly gets d8s (like the Animal it's based on).

Even though the mount changes to Magical Beast, its previous HD aren't retroactively changed to MB d10s. So, I'm guessing it's just for bookkeeping convenience that they say to use d8s; instead of "4d8 + 2d10" or "6d10" for a warhorse mount, it's just 6d8. Nerf the class a bit, to make it far easier to generate the mount on the fly.

The problem I have with this whole thing is, if Mounts only get a token increase (HP, AB, Saves) and nothing else, then they really suck at high levels. Sure, you can buy some magic items to compensate, but it comes out of the Paladin's share of the treasure...
Then, look at the "exotic mount" rules in DotF. By waiting a few levels, you can get FAR more powerful creatures. Heck, wait one level and get a Celestial Warhorse. It's got SR, DR, elemental resists, far better hit dice (including lots more skill points)... for waiting one level. Is this balanced?

Maybe later today I'll post the alt.Mount rules we developed for my campaign.

 

[Artoomis]

I think he's referring to the fact that Magical Beasts use a d10, while a Paladin's mount explicitly gets d8s (like the Animal it's based on).

Quite right - that's adds to the confusion. It's a magical beast with d8 hit die.

The mount should have been written up like the MM templates, for sure. That way everything would be spelled out properly, instead of haphazardly like the mount is written

 

[Caliban]

Quite right - that's adds to the confusion. It's a magical beast with d8 hit die.

The mount should have been written up like the MM templates, for sure. That way everything would be spelled out properly, instead of haphazardly like the mount is written

A human is a "Humanoid" monster type, which used D8 HD.

A human with 8 rogue levels doesn't advance in HD, he gains rogue HD.

Similarly, a paladin's mount doesn't advance in HD, it gains bonus HD.

It's exactly like a normal character gaining a prestige class: you only get the benefits listed for the class, not the benefits advancing as your monster type.

 

[Artoomis]

A human is a "Humanoid" monster type, which used D8 HD.

A human with 8 rogue levels doesn't advance in HD, he gains rogue HD.

Similarly, a paladin's mount doesn't advance in HD, it gains bonus HD.

It's exactly like a normal character gaining a prestige class: you only get the benefits listed for the class, not the benefits advancing as your monster type.

You're making quite an assumption about how this is like a template. The following quote is from the rules on paladin's mounts:

These are extra eight-sided (d8) Hit Dice, each of which gains a Constitution modifier, as normal. Remember that extra Hit Dice improve the mount's base attack and base save bonuses.

That second line especially is only a reminder, not a statement of benefits. As such, it would imply all benefits of extra hit die would apply - such as skills and feats.

Perhaps they will change the language in 3.5e, but, until then, you could view this either way and be quite justified in ghranting skill points and feats for the magical beast hit die.

Given the way skills and feats are changing for all monsters (animals included) for 3.5e, this may be a mute point anyway.

 

[Artoomis]

whoops....

 

[Hypersmurf]

... this may be a mute point anyway.

Moot. A moot point.

A "mute point" is what a mime does to tell you there's something behind you...

-Hyp.

 

[Caliban]

You're making quite an assumption about how this is like a template. The following quote is from the rules on paladin's mounts:



That second line especially is only a reminder, not a statement of benefits. As such, it would imply all benefits of extra hit die would apply - such as skills and feats.
]

*shrug* I disagree. I don't believe it implies any such thing.

Perhaps they will change the language in 3.5e, but, until then, you could view this either way and be quite justified in granting skill points and feats for the magical beast hit die.

I really don't think so.

Given the way skills and feats are changing for all monsters (animals included) for 3.5e, this may be a mute point anyway.

*shrug*

I'm not commenting on whether or not paladin's mount should get feats and skill points.

I'm simply saying that based on the current text in the PHB, and the way creatures changing type are treated elsewhere in the rules (monks at 20th level for example), and statements by the Sage, it doesn't work that way.

It doesn't really matter to me anyway, none of my characters are paladins, and no players in my home game are paladins.


Hopefully it will be better defined in 3e.

 

[Spatzimaus]

The problem is, if the bonus HD were intended to be PrC-like, then you should be able to treat them as such, which means stacking saving throws and BAB differently. But, for that to work, you'd need some sort of explicit rules for which saves are the good ones, what the "class skills" are, and so on. I mean, we can't just assume Magical Beast, since as you've pointed out, the Hit Die is wrong for that.

AFAIK, there are only two splatbook-printed examples of Paladin mounts: one in S&F and one in DotF; the two conflict on many fundamental issues. The one in S&F adds the 4 to Natural Armor, the one in DotF sets the NA to 4. The one in S&F doesn't increase BAB correctly, either. And so on.

Personally, I think this could easily go either way, and that really annoys me, because it means that one of the important features of your class is subject to the rules interpretation of the DM (well, all classes are subject to DM, but not in this way). If I can ever get the thing formatted correctly (stupid Word), I'll post my alt.Mount rules to the House Rules forum for comments.