Paladin Warhorse
- Thread starter brehobit
- Start date
John Crichton
First Post
I've actually had the exact opposite experience as Henry. Every Paladin I have ever run for or played has had a mount and that mount was very special to the character.Lord Pendragon said:I'm playing a paladin, and am totally into him having a mount. As others have said, I like the idea of the paladin's mount as a companion creature, as a friend and comrade, rather than a spell effect. This in spite of the added usability of the spell effect approach.
> snip <
This type of ability would give the paladin the added flexibility of leaving his mount in a safe location when traveling in the dungeon, but calling it at need. It'd also allow him to call his mount in the event that he is teleported far away without it. But it still maintains the living, breathing companion feel that I think is so important in my paladin mounts.
The only Paladin I ever played was lucky enough to get a unicorn mount which was quite cool. That aside, I have one PC who loves to play Paladins. His first Paladin character actually was given back his childhood horse that was recently killed in combat and it had enhanced stats. And the most recent character was going for a wardog as his character was a halfling. That would have worked for me.
I mention this as support for both Lord P and Henry's points. As a DM it was not easy to run for those characters (and I'm assuming for mine as well) because I really didn't want to separate them from their mounts if I could help it as it reduced their effectiveness. Plus, the characters had affinity for their mounts. So, this new way of being able to have the mount be a summoned creature works on a few levels, making an assumption or 2:
- The mount cannot be killed permanently.
- It is still a god-given creature and is supernatural as it has always been.
Lord P: I could see your idea being added easily to the Paladin spell list. I may even incorporate it into my campaign world. Having it be a spell rather than an ability still limits it but gives the player the option of having it be available.
(Psi)SeveredHead
Adventurer
I would like to be able to board a boat to the Forbidden Continent without having to leave my mount behind for all of the adventures there.
It's also annoying keeping the mount around when paying a soecial visit
Finally, I hate having to heal the mount. Let it heal itself in Elysium or wherever it came from.
It's also annoying keeping the mount around when paying a soecial visit
Finally, I hate having to heal the mount. Let it heal itself in Elysium or wherever it came from.
Henry
Autoexreginated
John Crichton said:
Which is the main reason why a bonded mount has almost never been used in our groups' campaigns. It was difficult to incorporate them in Dungeons or in city adventures, and really only came into play in the wilderness. Whereas a paladin can crawl narrow shafts, hunt a surly villain in a bar, and fight high atop a tower, the trusted friend and warhorse would have to stay back at the city stables, or in the country inn's stables, or tethered to the tree outside the dungeon. The paladins of the group would have felt cut out of this special ability if they had to leave their "trusted friend" behind almost everywhere they went.
Therefore, I am intrigued by the change myself, and look forward to seeing how it plays out in a campaign. I know it's the first thing I'd look forward to, since a mounted hero has been one of my favorite things to do with my halfling and gnomish characters, mounter on their wardogs.
jester47
First Post
Only a miracle can save us now!
Thats right! Miracle the white horse from History of the World Part 1.
Most of the arguments against it are very one dimensional. It makes certain assumptions about the game that are not necessarily true.
What if the dungeon was like moria? That is it has two sides. The paladin before entering this dungeon (not moria but one similar in construction) sends his horse away a la Bill the Pony. When he reaches the other side He whistles and lo, like shadowfax, the mount appears ready for a 10 hour ride. The halfling feeds it an apple, and the elf pets it having been saved by this mount several times. The paladin saddles up and becomes the groups outrider while they trek across the landscape.
The assumption that I did not use is that the Paladin has to take casting actions. The ability works like a summoning mechanically, but is not the same as a dummon monster spell. Go read what was said about this issue more carefully, and I hope you will see that a distinction was mentioned.
Also the other assumption that is being made is that the Mount is not already magical. The mount has always been somthing like Drizzt Panther Friend. p22 1E PHB: "At 4th level - or any time thereafter - the paladin may call for his warhorse - ...; It will magically appear, but only one such animal is available every ten years." So from this evidence, warhorses have been going "poof" since the beginning.
The next assumption is that planar travel must be achieved instantaneously. Perhaps these mounts travel between the planes like the lords of amber travel through shadow, gradually, so they have to run off. Or maybe being divine creatures they are masters of subtlety. Example:
A mischevious party member sees a non-party paladin leave his mount at the hitching post. He decides he is going to take the horse out for a spin. The Horse being of Mr. Ed intelligence, sees this coming and slowly wanders around the corner of a building. The party member walks around the corner to see empty air. No tracks, no horse. The party member turns back the way he came. Just then, the paladin comes out of the building, calls the horses name and lo the horse comes trotting around the same corner that we were discussing. The Paladin gently scolds the horse for wandering off (more out of jest then really being unknowing) and starts to keep an eye on the guy that might have tried to use his horse.
No the revision is a good option and like most things is only as stupid as its users.
Aaron.
Thats right! Miracle the white horse from History of the World Part 1.
Most of the arguments against it are very one dimensional. It makes certain assumptions about the game that are not necessarily true.
What if the dungeon was like moria? That is it has two sides. The paladin before entering this dungeon (not moria but one similar in construction) sends his horse away a la Bill the Pony. When he reaches the other side He whistles and lo, like shadowfax, the mount appears ready for a 10 hour ride. The halfling feeds it an apple, and the elf pets it having been saved by this mount several times. The paladin saddles up and becomes the groups outrider while they trek across the landscape.
The assumption that I did not use is that the Paladin has to take casting actions. The ability works like a summoning mechanically, but is not the same as a dummon monster spell. Go read what was said about this issue more carefully, and I hope you will see that a distinction was mentioned.
Also the other assumption that is being made is that the Mount is not already magical. The mount has always been somthing like Drizzt Panther Friend. p22 1E PHB: "At 4th level - or any time thereafter - the paladin may call for his warhorse - ...; It will magically appear, but only one such animal is available every ten years." So from this evidence, warhorses have been going "poof" since the beginning.
The next assumption is that planar travel must be achieved instantaneously. Perhaps these mounts travel between the planes like the lords of amber travel through shadow, gradually, so they have to run off. Or maybe being divine creatures they are masters of subtlety. Example:
A mischevious party member sees a non-party paladin leave his mount at the hitching post. He decides he is going to take the horse out for a spin. The Horse being of Mr. Ed intelligence, sees this coming and slowly wanders around the corner of a building. The party member walks around the corner to see empty air. No tracks, no horse. The party member turns back the way he came. Just then, the paladin comes out of the building, calls the horses name and lo the horse comes trotting around the same corner that we were discussing. The Paladin gently scolds the horse for wandering off (more out of jest then really being unknowing) and starts to keep an eye on the guy that might have tried to use his horse.
No the revision is a good option and like most things is only as stupid as its users.
Aaron.
At first read I thought this was a terrible idea. I DM and am currently playing a Paladin in another game as well (one who is about to get his horse).
I think there are few bad assumptions being made. First, the idea that the warhorse is essentially Summon Monster with a longer duration. The fact is its not a generic horse that appears, its a specific horse, with a specific personality, etc. So it still has all the special qualities it should have.
I think the mistake is the 2hr/level duration. I think the rule should read the horse can be summoned / unsummoned once per day each but that there is no limit on how long it can be around.
Also, I think it should be up to the DM as to where the Paladin can summon the horse. For example, in the middle of the dungeon isn't logical, but anywhere where a horse might be able to function normally would be.
Imagine: After a long, hard fight through a dark dungeon, the PCs chase after the villian through a magical portal. Hot sun beats down. Rocky, desert ground. Where the heck are we? Looks like there's a castle way off on that rocky cliff. It's gonna be a long walk. Paladin: 'Having Lightning here sure would be handy'. Whistles. Looks around. Silence. Wait, whats that on the horizon. A cloud of dust, and there his white stallion galloping across the sun-baked ground.
I think the summoning can be handled pretty well. Just substitute 'call for' for 'summon' and 'dismiss' for 'unsummon'. So what if the Paladin doesn't know where the horse goes when he's not using it, thats not really important. In fact it gives in a magical, mysterious quality.
Finally, I think it is easily house-ruled back to the old version for anyone who wants to keep it that way.
One last question, why does everyone talk about stabling the horse, etc? This is a pretty intelligent creature that should be able to manage on its own most of the time. Just unsaddle it and let it ride out into the woods, showing up again when the Paladin needs it.
I think there are few bad assumptions being made. First, the idea that the warhorse is essentially Summon Monster with a longer duration. The fact is its not a generic horse that appears, its a specific horse, with a specific personality, etc. So it still has all the special qualities it should have.
I think the mistake is the 2hr/level duration. I think the rule should read the horse can be summoned / unsummoned once per day each but that there is no limit on how long it can be around.
Also, I think it should be up to the DM as to where the Paladin can summon the horse. For example, in the middle of the dungeon isn't logical, but anywhere where a horse might be able to function normally would be.
Imagine: After a long, hard fight through a dark dungeon, the PCs chase after the villian through a magical portal. Hot sun beats down. Rocky, desert ground. Where the heck are we? Looks like there's a castle way off on that rocky cliff. It's gonna be a long walk. Paladin: 'Having Lightning here sure would be handy'. Whistles. Looks around. Silence. Wait, whats that on the horizon. A cloud of dust, and there his white stallion galloping across the sun-baked ground.
I think the summoning can be handled pretty well. Just substitute 'call for' for 'summon' and 'dismiss' for 'unsummon'. So what if the Paladin doesn't know where the horse goes when he's not using it, thats not really important. In fact it gives in a magical, mysterious quality.
Finally, I think it is easily house-ruled back to the old version for anyone who wants to keep it that way.
One last question, why does everyone talk about stabling the horse, etc? This is a pretty intelligent creature that should be able to manage on its own most of the time. Just unsaddle it and let it ride out into the woods, showing up again when the Paladin needs it.
Trickstergod
First Post
Poof
How many literary knights and paladins had their mounts pop off after ten hours, with no recourse to get them back for the rest of the day?
I'm all well and good with a paladin being able to "whistle up" his horse. What I'm not fine with is the fact that, no matter what anyone says, after eight, or ten, or however many hours, the horse "poofs" off - or however one wants to describe it. There is absolutely no getting around the fact that the horse will not always be by the paladins side when he needs or wants it. It's great and all that after the teleportation spell is popped off, the paladin can trust in the fact that when he goes from Bumpkissville to Podunk Town, Beetlebaum the Warhorse will be there waiting for him. What's not so hot is that the steed becomes a spell, not a companion. Unless the paladin is level 12, the horse will not always be there. Sure, it means if the horse gets beaten into tar, that when watches come around, it won't be there to be killed at the last, but the fact that it's at risk is, in part, why it would be cared about - the fact that it is, ultimately, mortal, and doesn't just trot on up to heaven halfway through the day.
Giving it a duration makes it much, much more like a spell, and much, much less of a companion. Companions shouldn't have a duration. This seems to be the one thing being neglected in the mention of Bill, or Shadowfax - the fact that they didn't disappear after a certain amount of time, because, despite being there when needed, almost no matter what the circumstaances, they were still very real flesh and blood creatures that required stabling, feeding, and didn't just fold up into some extra-dimensional space.
Dramatic entrances are fine; spell-like durations are not.
How many literary knights and paladins had their mounts pop off after ten hours, with no recourse to get them back for the rest of the day?
I'm all well and good with a paladin being able to "whistle up" his horse. What I'm not fine with is the fact that, no matter what anyone says, after eight, or ten, or however many hours, the horse "poofs" off - or however one wants to describe it. There is absolutely no getting around the fact that the horse will not always be by the paladins side when he needs or wants it. It's great and all that after the teleportation spell is popped off, the paladin can trust in the fact that when he goes from Bumpkissville to Podunk Town, Beetlebaum the Warhorse will be there waiting for him. What's not so hot is that the steed becomes a spell, not a companion. Unless the paladin is level 12, the horse will not always be there. Sure, it means if the horse gets beaten into tar, that when watches come around, it won't be there to be killed at the last, but the fact that it's at risk is, in part, why it would be cared about - the fact that it is, ultimately, mortal, and doesn't just trot on up to heaven halfway through the day.
Giving it a duration makes it much, much more like a spell, and much, much less of a companion. Companions shouldn't have a duration. This seems to be the one thing being neglected in the mention of Bill, or Shadowfax - the fact that they didn't disappear after a certain amount of time, because, despite being there when needed, almost no matter what the circumstaances, they were still very real flesh and blood creatures that required stabling, feeding, and didn't just fold up into some extra-dimensional space.
Dramatic entrances are fine; spell-like durations are not.
Gothmog
First Post
Kai Lord, Olive- I'm not trying to be rude or confrontational, and I am sorry if I have come off that way, but this change strikes me as completely unwarranted. I have been playing D&D for almost 20 years now, and in all that time, I have seen probably 7 paladins played, all of which used their mounts. In all cases, the paladin player in questions got tremendous use out of the mount, and tried to engineer situations where they could be used to full benefit. Paladins are already one of the more potent classes in the game, and while many changes seemed warranted in 3.5, this one seems kinda out there. Also, if the warhorse is a summoned creature- is it the same creature each time, or is it a random summons? This also brings up the topic of whether it can be killed, or if it is brought to 0 hp, is it simply an inconvenience for the paladin?
I guess my point is that I feel the D&D core rules should be published for a mid to slightly higher magic setting, as has been traditional in the past. This seems to be a push in the direction of even more magic, and many people take what is written in the D&D core rules as canon that cannot be contradicted. I guess it bothers me also because its part of the increasing power creep that seems to be insinuating its way into all the WotC stuff (and some 3rd party publishers). The way the paladin's mount was written in 3E, it was an animal infused with the presence of the divine- but otherwise a normal animal. The new explanation (which some people will take as canon and be upset if I change) is that the mount is an outsider summoned at times of need to the side of the paladin. The rules are not sacred, they are only there so that the group can have fun. House ruling is great for some groups, not for others. Do I still play D&D? Yeah, mabye not the same form as everybody else, but nodoby has a monopoly on the "correct" way to play.
I guess my point is that I feel the D&D core rules should be published for a mid to slightly higher magic setting, as has been traditional in the past. This seems to be a push in the direction of even more magic, and many people take what is written in the D&D core rules as canon that cannot be contradicted. I guess it bothers me also because its part of the increasing power creep that seems to be insinuating its way into all the WotC stuff (and some 3rd party publishers). The way the paladin's mount was written in 3E, it was an animal infused with the presence of the divine- but otherwise a normal animal. The new explanation (which some people will take as canon and be upset if I change) is that the mount is an outsider summoned at times of need to the side of the paladin. The rules are not sacred, they are only there so that the group can have fun. House ruling is great for some groups, not for others. Do I still play D&D? Yeah, mabye not the same form as everybody else, but nodoby has a monopoly on the "correct" way to play.
John Crichton
First Post
Re: Only a miracle can save us now!
The 'poof' is just one interpretation of the text. Appearing magically can mean an infinite number of things.jester47 said:
babomb
First Post
I really like this change personally. I was until recently playing a paladin, and I had to keep asking the DM, "What about my horse?" There was the time we got kidnapped, and travelling on boats, and the time we got teleported... Eventually the DM gave me a "pokéball" to store the horse when I couldn't bring it along(which basically amounts to this ability).
Similar Threads
