Using a combat mount that is not an animal companion.

[Oryan77]

Do Warhorses that are not animal companions ever level up with the party?

Also, if the owner is not riding it, but still wants it to attack in combat, does the owner need to make a DC 20 Handle Animal check each round or is that DC check only to train it to attack?

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

Take a look at the Wild Cohort feat. Otherwise, no.

I'm not sure about the second one, but I myself don't like attacking horses, except maybe on occasion. I see the horse as a speed booster and a way to supercharge your lance, but I don't see any need for it to be attacking like an aggressive animal.

 

[Vegepygmy]

Do Warhorses that are not animal companions ever level up with the party?

No.

Also, if the owner is not riding it, but still wants it to attack in combat, does the owner need to make a DC 20 Handle Animal check each round or is that DC check only to train it to attack?

The DC 20 Handle Animal check is to train the mount. I think you're thinking of the DC 20 Ride check that must be made every round to control a mount that is not trained for combat. Warhorses, being trained for combat, do not require such checks.

 

[Jackinthegreen]

The DC 20 Handle Animal check is to train the mount. I think you're thinking of the DC 20 Ride check that must be made every round to control a mount that is not trained for combat. Warhorses, being trained for combat, do not require such checks.

Considering he specifically said "if the owner is not riding it, but still wants it to attack in combat" there wouldn't be a ride check. The DC 20 Handle Animal check works to train the animal to attack, and then the Handle Animal rules state that to get an animal that isn't a companion to attack would be a move action as noted near the bottom in the Action section. There wouldn't be a check to perform, but there is the move action to point out the target and such. Druids and rangers get to handle their animal companions as free actions.

 

[radja]

You could pick a warhorse (awakened or not) as a cohort using the leadership feat. That horse would level up. Cohorts from the leadership feat need not be humanoid.

 

[Schmoe]

Considering he specifically said "if the owner is not riding it, but still wants it to attack in combat" there wouldn't be a ride check. The DC 20 Handle Animal check works to train the animal to attack, and then the Handle Animal rules state that to get an animal that isn't a companion to attack would be a move action as noted near the bottom in the Action section. There wouldn't be a check to perform, but there is the move action to point out the target and such. Druids and rangers get to handle their animal companions as free actions.

My interpretation was always that you could give it a command as a move action, such as "Attack that orc," and it would continue to do so as long as it made sense. So if the orc ran away, the horse would chase after it. If the horse killed the orc, it would just sort of stand around and do horsey things. If you wanted to get the horse to change targets, or to do something else, you would need to spend another move action to command it.

 

[Jackinthegreen]

My interpretation was always that you could give it a command as a move action, such as "Attack that orc," and it would continue to do so as long as it made sense. So if the orc ran away, the horse would chase after it. If the horse killed the orc, it would just sort of stand around and do horsey things. If you wanted to get the horse to change targets, or to do something else, you would need to spend another move action to command it.

I don't see anything in the skill description to explicitly indicate whether it's a certain way, other than the fact that it says having the creature perform an attack is a move action. Compare to the Spiritual Weapon description which does say it continues attacking.

Admittedly, it is a bit silly to think that the animal wouldn't continue doing what it was commanded to do unless otherwise told not to. Your interpretation would be a completely reasonable houserule, if in fact there is nothing in the rules stating that the animal continues what it was doing unless interrupted.

 

[Vegepygmy]

Considering he specifically said "if the owner is not riding it, but still wants it to attack in combat" there wouldn't be a ride check.

Good catch. Blew my Reading Comprehension check there, I did.

The DC 20 Handle Animal check works to train the animal to attack, and then the Handle Animal rules state that to get an animal that isn't a companion to attack would be a move action as noted near the bottom in the Action section. There wouldn't be a check to perform, but there is the move action to point out the target and such.

Actually, there is a check required. It's a DC 10 Handle Animal check to get an animal to perform a trick it knows. "For instance, to command a trained attack dog to attack a foe requires a DC 10 Handle Animal check." (And the DC increases by 2 if the animal has already taken damage.)

 

[Vegepygmy]

I don't see anything in the skill description to explicitly indicate whether it's a certain way, other than the fact that it says having the creature perform an attack is a move action.

"Down (DC 15): The animal breaks off from combat or otherwise backs down. An animal that doesn't know this trick continues to fight until it must flee (due to injury, a fear effect, or the like) or its opponent is defeated."

 

[Jackinthegreen]

"Down (DC 15): The animal breaks off from combat or otherwise backs down. An animal that doesn't know this trick continues to fight until it must flee (due to injury, a fear effect, or the like) or its opponent is defeated."

The wording on the Down trick is almost there... I suppose it's the closest we'll get to explicitly saying that telling the animal to attack means it will continue attacking. In this case it's implicit.

You're correct on the general handling. It is a DC 10 to get it to do a trick it knows, with a +2 to the DC if it has certain conditions.