RAW legal Dragon as a Mount/Animal Companion?

[lunasmeow]

Okay, so I'm relatively new to DMing. I've always been a player. I've played quite a bit of 1e and 2e (20-ish years ago though, so keep that in mind) and just really started playing 3.5 in the last year. Now, one of my players wants to try something.

He has dragon rider levels, which gives him a dragon mount. Now, normally a dragon can't be an animal companion, but he's wondering if since he has one as a mount it could be an exception. As for me, I'm mostly doing RAW, except for simple fixes... no breaking ladders down to sell for infinite money and such. I'm allowing any and all supplements, so long as they are official.

Even spells and feats that are normally explicitly in only Faerun, Eberron, or Greyhawk are okay. People travel between these realms via plane shifting and other means all the time. It's not too much of a stretch to think that some of their spells and other skills would have been brought over as well, just difficult to find maybe.

Is this idea of his legal? If so, is it explicitly legal, or is it a stretch, and by how far of a stretch is it?

Also, said dragon is one he raised. It was his familiar at first, then grew too old to remain a familiar and became his mount.

[atemu1234]

If there is an ACF for you to gain a dragon as an animal companion, it would be in either Draconomicon or Dragon Magic, maybe Races of the Dragon. Apart from that, I don't know. Maybe Diplomacy.

[Chronos]

Why does he want this? The usual reason to want an animal companion is because you want to have an extra creature who follows you around the battlefield... but he already has the dragon.

And how did he get a dragon mount, anyway? The dragonrider class doesn't actually give you a dragon companion. Which is kind of a ripoff, but on the other hand, dragons big enough to ride are extremely powerful, which would make them one heck of a class feature.

[lunasmeow]

Bad wording on my part. It allowed him a dragon mount. Mostly because I said you couldn't ride a dragon (combat wise, not just hitching a ride on a friendly or summoned one) unless you had at least one level of dragon rider.

So he's a half dragon, who was close to his dragon mother. She got killed by adventurers. He took her newly hatched egg, his half sister, as his familiar. She grew older, and because she's his sister, he raised her, and they're questing to destroy the organization that killed their mother, etc, etc... agreed to be his mount when he became a rider. He wants to make her his animal companion as well, so she can get the additional affects of it.

Not that I can see what that would have to do with the technical legality of applying those affects to his mount but...

[Coidzor]

You're just on the cusp of the Supermount (http://community.wizards.com/forum/previous-editions-character-optimization/threads/967311) there, yeah.

Devoted Tracker from Complete Adventurer allows a creature to be both (Paladin or other class that grants) Special Mount and Animal Companion at the same time.

Dragon Steed feat from Draconomicon lets a Special Mount be a Dragon.

Bada bing, bada boom.

[DrMotives]

The thing with animal companion is that it's an animal that the character is especially close to, like a pet that you fight with. While the urban druid can have a vermin or animated object as an animal companion, these are still below PC level intelligence. I can see adding some oozes to that list, going by the same intelligence-based guidelines. The half-sister with a high intelligence score just doesn't jibe with that at all. That'd be better served by looking into the dragon cohort rules from Draconomicon.

[lunasmeow]

You're just on the cusp of the Supermount (http://community.wizards.com/forum/previous-editions-character-optimization/threads/967311) there, yeah.

Devoted Tracker from Complete Adventurer allows a creature to be both (Paladin or other class that grants) Special Mount and Animal Companion at the same time.

Dragon Steed feat from Draconomicon lets a Special Mount be a Dragon.

Bada bing, bada boom.

Actually Dragon Steed gives you a dragonnel as a steed. Not a dragon. Devoted Tracker seems to be a good start though.

[lunasmeow]

The thing with animal companion is that it's an animal that the character is especially close to, like a pet that you fight with. While the urban druid can have a vermin or animated object as an animal companion, these are still below PC level intelligence. I can see adding some oozes to that list, going by the same intelligence-based guidelines. The half-sister with a high intelligence score just doesn't jibe with that at all. That'd be better served by looking into the dragon cohort rules from Draconomicon.

Arcane Hierophant avoids that problem though. "Due to the familiar companion's unusual Intelligence score, it may very well have more skill points than other animals of its kind. The familiar companion is a magical beast (augmented animal), but you can bestow harmless spells on your familiar companion as if it were an animal instead of a magical beast."

[lunasmeow]

Basically he's trying to turn the dragon into a familiar/companion and a mount so it can get all the benefits of each.

[Coidzor]

Actually Dragon Steed gives you a dragonnel as a steed. Not a dragon. Devoted Tracker seems to be a good start though.

When you first qualify, sure, but you get more powerful dragon options as you increase in level.

[Flickerdart]

When you first qualify, sure, but you get more powerful dragon options as you increase in level.
"You gain the service of a dragonnel as a steed. It serves loyally as long as you treat it fairly, much like a cohort." Nothing about getting better dragons. Am I looking at the wrong Dragon Steed feat?

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

Actually Dragon Steed gives you a dragonnel as a steed. Not a dragon. Devoted Tracker seems to be a good start though.


"You gain the service of a dragonnel as a steed. It serves loyally as long as you treat it fairly, much like a cohort." Am I looking at the wrong Dragon Steed feat?

Draconomicon page 139, Dragons As Special Mounts, "A paladin who wishes to be able to summon a dragon special mount must select the Dragon Steed feat (see page 105). She then selects an appropriate dragon from Table 3–15: Dragon Special Mount Availability based on her paladin level." A 12th level Paladin can get an actual dragon as his special mount. Devoted Tracker allows you to add your animal companion benefits to your special mount, whatever it may be.

[Flickerdart]

Draconomicon page 139, Dragons As Special Mounts, "A paladin who wishes to be able to summon a dragon special mount must select the Dragon Steed feat (see page 105). She then selects an appropriate dragon from Table 3–15: Dragon Special Mount Availability based on her paladin level." A 12th level Paladin can get an actual dragon as his special mount. Devoted Tracker allows you to add your animal companion benefits to your special mount, whatever it may be.
If you're using the paladin special mount feature, you don't even need the feat ot being level 12. Just thumb over to the back of the DMG and use the alternate mount rules. A level 11 paladin could choose any CR7 flying creature, which includes for instance a very young (large) gold dragon.

[lunasmeow]

Draconomicon page 139, Dragons As Special Mounts, "A paladin who wishes to be able to summon a dragon special mount must select the Dragon Steed feat (see page 105). She then selects an appropriate dragon from Table 3–15: Dragon Special Mount Availability based on her paladin level." A 12th level Paladin can get an actual dragon as his special mount. Devoted Tracker allows you to add your animal companion benefits to your special mount, whatever it may be.

That's what I was looking for. Okay, so basically, I gave him the dragon mount because she agreed to help help him. But if he wants to use Devoted Tracker on her, he'll have to take the Dragon Steed feat, since she's currently just allowing him to ride her instead of technically being his "special mount". Okay. Thanks everybody!

[lunasmeow]

Just to make sure I tell him the right stuff...

1. She becomes his special mount via Dragon Steed and his Paladin levels.

2. Then he uses Devoted Tracker to make her his animal companion as well.

3. He played the variant Sorcerer class that swaps out familiar for Animal Companion, allowing him to apply his sorcerer levels to his animal companion, so that still applies. (He originally got her as his familiar by using the obtain familiar feat.)

4. If he takes Arcane Hierophant, he can then apply familiar bonuses to her again as before.

So, he successfully has merged his mount, animal companion, and his familiar into one uber-dragon? And this is gestalt, so it didn't take as long as it normally would.

[Flickerdart]

Dragon Familiar gets you wyrmlings, doesn't it? I know it's not RAW, but a paladin should be able to actually ride his mount, no?

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

Dragon Familiar gets you wyrmlings, doesn't it? I know it's not RAW, but a paladin should be able to actually ride his mount, no?

Gaining a dragon as your familiar via the Dragon Familiar feat gets you a wyrmling, but you cannot add animal companion or special mount benefits to your familiar. Arcane Heirophant adds your familiar benefits to your animal companion, not the other way around. He's talking about using Dragon Steed to gain a dragon as a special mount, then using Devoted Tracker to add the animal companion benefits to his dragon special mount, then use Arcane Heirophant to add the familiar benefits to his animal companion which is his dragon special mount. Arcane Heirophant adds your familiar benefits to whatever creature is currently benefiting from your animal companion class feature, regardless of whether or not that creature would be a valid choice to serve as a familiar.

[lunasmeow]

Dragon Familiar gets you wyrmlings, doesn't it? I know it's not RAW, but a paladin should be able to actually ride his mount, no?

Yes, it does. She *was* a wyrmling at first. She grew and is therefore no longer his familiar. But with him taking Arcane Hierophant, is he now able to put his caster levels on as a familiar again considering the earlier quote, returning her to a pseudo familiar status that she once had and lost.

Basically:

Familiar, then just a normal ally/half-sister, then mount via dragon steed, then mount and animal companion via Devoted Tracker, then finally regaining familiar bonuses via Arcane Hierophant.

[Flickerdart]

Yes, it does. She *was* a wyrmling at first. She grew and is therefore no longer his familiar. But with him taking Arcane Hierophant, is he now able ot put his caster levels on as a familiar again considering the earlier quote?
Yes. I thought you were trying to double-up on the benefits.

[lunasmeow]

Yes. I thought you were trying to double-up on the benefits.

Ah, no not at all. I'm all for my players making optimized, epic characters as long as it's legal. It just puts more pressure on me to provide awesome enemies and places where he can't use his dragon. Of course, being a good DM in my opinion also means that I have to give him opportunities to actually use his dragon since he went through all that effort. No fun if he never gets to use her because every fight is in a small cave.

[Max Caysey]

A quick comment. Train your mount/ Animal companion as a "warbeast" the template is in mm2.

And take The exalted companion feat, and give your mount the vow of poverty feat. Do it now! Do it! Do it!

[Urpriest]

A quick comment. Train your mount/ Animal companion as a "warbeast" the template is in mm2.

Even if this worked in general (spoiler it doesn't, compare the description in MM2 to the 3.0 Handle Animal rules), you have no reason to believe that it works here, since Dragon is not one of the types allowed by the template. I'm not sure why you're intent on misleading the OP.



And take The exalted companion feat, and give your mount the vow of poverty feat. Do it now! Do it! Do it!

It's a Dragon, it can already take Vow of Poverty.

[Fouredged Sword]

The only hitch I can see is the need to get trackless step AND paladin class features. One requires druid levels thus a neutral alignment, the other requires paladin, and thus one of the extremes.

If you waive the alignment issues, the following is a very possible build.

Paladin 12 // Sorcerer 4 / Druid 3 / Arcane Hierophant 1 / Half dragon LA 4.

You get 5 levels of sorcerer casting, 4 levels of druid casting, and 12 levels of paladin. You need the devoted tracker and dragon mount feat, and it's best to take the animal companion ACF for sorcerer and then get a familiar through obtain familiar. This grants 8 levels of animal companion advancement, and you can boost that back to 12 with a feat (wild bond or something like that, forget the name).

[Melcar]

Even if this worked in general (spoiler it doesn't, compare the description in MM2 to the 3.0 Handle Animal rules), you have no reason to believe that it works here, since Dragon is not one of the types allowed by the template. I'm not sure why you're intent on misleading the OP.

Im sorry... I fail to see how the Handle Animal rules have made this template non-functional. Could you explain that to me? I did however forgot about the small list of creatures that could take this template.



It's a Dragon, it can already take Vow of Poverty. Indeed... forgot that.

[Flickerdart]

It's a Dragon, it can already take Vow of Poverty.
A dragon, giving up fat stacks? Inconceivable!

Now I'm imagining adventuring dragons who enter into a commune, and dump all their loot into one pile so that in the rare case one of them is home, he can enjoy a hoard much larger than a dragon his age would normally amass.

[Urpriest]

Im sorry... I fail to see how the Handle Animal rules have made this template non-functional. Could you explain that to me? I did however forgot about the small list of creatures that could take this template.


I've seen you around on the forum pretty frequently, so I should make sure I know what sort of discussion we're having: have you already seen the argument that the Handle Animal DCs in the Warbeast template are in fact DCs to raise and train a preexisting warbeast, rather than DCs to turn an existing creature into a Warbeast?

If you haven't encountered that argument before, I can outline it for you. If you have, and you just want to argue about it, then this isn't the right thread for that.

[ZamielVanWeber]

I've seen you around on the forum pretty frequently, so I should make sure I know what sort of discussion we're having: have you already seen the argument that the Handle Animal DCs in the Warbeast template are in fact DCs to raise and train a preexisting warbeast, rather than DCs to turn an existing creature into a Warbeast?

At the risk of derailing the thread a little I am curious about this. I was always a bit confused about the warbeast template.

[Urpriest]

At the risk of derailing the thread a little I am curious about this. I was always a bit confused about the warbeast template.

The thing about the Warbeast template is a bunch of people popularized it after 3.5 came out, and misread it because they weren't familiar with the 3.0 Handle Animal rules.

Basically, all the fluff of the Warbeast template describes Warbeasts as creatures bred for war, rather than merely specially trained. The Combative Mount ability in particular specifies that it is only gained by a Warbeast after it is trained, and is not possessed by untrained Warbeasts (including all Vermin Warbeasts).

The reason people think that you can train a preexisting animal and make it into a Warbeast is because there is a section in the template called Training a Warbeast, which people take to describe a specific regimen that takes an animal and turns it into a Warbeast. In fact, though, that section explains what you need to do to train an existing Warbeast.

The reason that section exists is because, in 3.0, you didn't teach an animal individual tricks with Handle Animal. Instead, you taught it a range of tasks, with different DCs based on if it was domestic or wild. Since Warbeasts are, as mentioned, bred for service to humanoids, you'd expect them to count as domestic, leading to much lower DCs. What the Warbeast template tells you is that, rather than doing that, you need to rear and train the Warbeast "just as the base creature." It then goes on to list the DCs for doing so, following that formula. So the DC to train a Warbeast based on a domestic animal is the same as the (3.0) DC to train a domestic animal, as is the time involved. The same applies for wild animals, and for beasts. In each case, the DC and time are exactly what you would expect if you, as the template says, rear and train the Warbeast as you would the base creature.

[Max Caysey]

The thing about the Warbeast template is a bunch of people popularized it after 3.5 came out, and misread it because they weren't familiar with the 3.0 Handle Animal rules.

Basically, all the fluff of the Warbeast template describes Warbeasts as creatures bred for war, rather than merely specially trained. The Combative Mount ability in particular specifies that it is only gained by a Warbeast after it is trained, and is not possessed by untrained Warbeasts (including all Vermin Warbeasts).

The reason people think that you can train a preexisting animal and make it into a Warbeast is because there is a section in the template called Training a Warbeast, which people take to describe a specific regimen that takes an animal and turns it into a Warbeast. In fact, though, that section explains what you need to do to train an existing Warbeast.

The reason that section exists is because, in 3.0, you didn't teach an animal individual tricks with Handle Animal. Instead, you taught it a range of tasks, with different DCs based on if it was domestic or wild. Since Warbeasts are, as mentioned, bred for service to humanoids, you'd expect them to count as domestic, leading to much lower DCs. What the Warbeast template tells you is that, rather than doing that, you need to rear and train the Warbeast "just as the base creature." It then goes on to list the DCs for doing so, following that formula. So the DC to train a Warbeast based on a domestic animal is the same as the (3.0) DC to train a domestic animal, as is the time involved. The same applies for wild animals, and for beasts. In each case, the DC and time are exactly what you would expect if you, as the template says, rear and train the Warbeast as you would the base creature.

First of all I only argue if I think that I'm right and if so I do it respectfully. Now I do have a question that might clear up some of the things that seem strange.

This (http://www.realmshelps.net/monsters/templates/warbeast.shtml) says that rearing is only necessary if the creature is not domesticated. Is an animal companion not domesticated as per being an animal companion?

And is not, what then constitutes a domesticated animal?

[lunasmeow]

The only hitch I can see is the need to get trackless step AND paladin class features. One requires druid levels thus a neutral alignment, the other requires paladin, and thus one of the extremes.

If you waive the alignment issues, the following is a very possible build.

Paladin 12 // Sorcerer 4 / Druid 3 / Arcane Hierophant 1 / Half dragon LA 4.

You get 5 levels of sorcerer casting, 4 levels of druid casting, and 12 levels of paladin. You need the devoted tracker and dragon mount feat, and it's best to take the animal companion ACF for sorcerer and then get a familiar through obtain familiar. This grants 8 levels of animal companion advancement, and you can boost that back to 12 with a feat (wild bond or something like that, forget the name).

For alignment issues, there is the Sentinel class, which is a NG Paladin variant in Dragon Magazine 310. They protect and revere nature, which makes them very good druids. They also are great adventurers as according to fluff they travel to fight evil wherever it may be found.

The feat is called Natural Bond, btw. It grants three extra animal companion levels (as druid).

Also, this is a gestalt campaign, so it's only taking him 10 levels to get those 20 class levels needed for this.

There is a level 45 level cap here, which gives up to 90 class levels. This is because eventually we're going to have to fight Grumush, (well an avatar of him) and this is a Grumush who ate the Fire elemental/primordial and so is now a god/primordial hybrid. He has an army of elemental orcs. (Basically think the first Avatar's Fire nation, but orcs.)

So yeah. He's going for overwhelming might.

[Urpriest]

First of all I only argue if I think that I'm right and if so I do it respectfully. Now I do have a question that might clear up some of the things that seem strange.

This (http://www.realmshelps.net/monsters/templates/warbeast.shtml) says that rearing is only necessary if the creature is not domesticated. Is an animal companion not domesticated as per being an animal companion?

And is not, what then constitutes a domesticated animal?

Animal companions are tamed, not domesticated. I'm going to use a Curmudgeonism here, and state that if there isn't a game definition for something we default to the real-life definition. Domesticated animals are those bred to live among humans, while tamed animals were originally wild and are merely trained to get along with humans. So for example, dogs are domesticated, but a pet monkey is merely tamed.

[lunasmeow]

Okay, new problem. He's come up with the idea of said dragon being his cohort as well, so she can gain levels? I have no idea at all how cohorts work. They've never come up in my games before. Anyone?

Again, this is a gestalt campaign, with a level 40 level cap, giving him up to 80 class levels. So he can pretty much mix classes up as much as he needs.

[Urpriest]

Okay, new problem. He's come up with the idea of said dragon being his cohort as well, so she can gain levels? I have no idea at all how cohorts work. They've never come up in my games before. Anyone?

It's a bit complicated. If you aren't familiar with how level adjustment, ECL, and hit dice interact in general, I'd recommend the guide in my sig.

More specific to your case, if something is both an animal companion or special mount and a cohort then it gets bonus hit dice, which probably makes it ineligible to be a cohort in the first place since cohorts have to have an ECL of your level-2 or lower. If the player wants the dragon as a cohort, it's probably best if it's not also a familiar/animal companion/special mount.

Edit: I had forgotten the level cap (which is kind of zany, but just on the cusp of it really...)...even with that, though, I'd probably advise just making the Dragon a cohort with lots of class levels, since class levels are generally better than bonus HD.

[lunasmeow]

More specific to your case, if something is both an animal companion or special mount and a cohort then it gets bonus hit dice, which probably makes it ineligible to be a cohort in the first place since cohorts have to have an ECL of your level-2 or lower. If the player wants the dragon as a cohort, it's probably best if it's not also a familiar/animal companion/special mount.

Awesome, yeah all the HD he's going to get from the levels will definitely boost its ECL too high for that. Good to know.

...Damn. Now he's probably going to want a second dragon to act as his cohort. I'll be looking at your guide soon. Thanks again!

[Fouredged Sword]

It would be hard to make the whole cohort thing work unless you got to seriously high level. Now, there IS a feat called draconic cohort that lets you subtract something like 4 from the ECL of a dragon cohort. That makes it a maybe. You are looking at something like 11HD for a large very young gold dragon, Plus 6 HD from paladin, then another 10 from dui... um, and then the +5 LA...

Nope, that dragon goes to epic ECL VERY fast. Cohort is going to be HARD to pull off. I suggest just accepting the fact that you are literally riding around on an epic dragon.

On the other hand, it has something like 20+ dragon HD when you are character level 12. Seriously, that gets silly. It has d12HD, full bab, lots of natural attacks, skill caps of 23"+ skill ranks. It can even take epic feats after 20HD. I'm not sure if the natural armor adjustment stacks or falls to the "same bonus type" rule. Ether way, shimmering scales will make your dragon untouchable.

[Max Caysey]

Animal companions are tamed, not domesticated. I'm going to use a Curmudgeonism here, and state that if there isn't a game definition for something we default to the real-life definition. Domesticated animals are those bred to live among humans, while tamed animals were originally wild and are merely trained to get along with humans. So for example, dogs are domesticated, but a pet monkey is merely tamed.

Ok... But it also says under handle animal (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/skills/handleAnimal.htm) that a succesful domesticated animal can be taught trics indicating that a wild animal migt not be taught trics. If this is so, and the druids animal companion can learn trics, then surely it is counted as a domesticated animal once it is an animal companion...

I just wanted to add that here (http://realmshelps.net/monsters/templates/index.shtml) it says that all the templates in the article are accuired. Thus can be added at any time... This list includes Warbeast, which even before I read this I concidered an accuired template. Especially because it can be added to a domestic creature, which had not been bred specially.

[Urpriest]

Ok... But it also says under handle animal (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/skills/handleAnimal.htm) that a succesful domesticated animal can be taught trics indicating that a wild animal migt not be taught trics. If this is so, and the druids animal companion can learn trics, then surely it is counted as a domesticated animal once it is an animal companion...

Hmm...having looked again, according to the rules a successfully reared wild animal becomes domesticated, so in this case there is a rules-based meaning that trumps the real-life meaning. That means that, if you did the work to rear an animal in 3.0, you could train it at the lower domestic DC.

Under that definition I would argue that a 3.5 Druid's animal companion would indeed count as domestic, but that's because in 3.5 the only role of the domestic/not domestic distinction is whether an animal is trainable or not. In 3.0, a Druid's animal companions would likely still have counted as Wild, and would have only been trainable at the higher DCs.

Regardless, I don't see what this has to do with the topic at hand. Even if a Druid's animal companion is domestic, it still doesn't start off with the Warbeast template, since it must be typical of its kind, and there's nothing that allows you to turn a preexisting animal into a Warbeast because being a Warbeast is a matter of breeding. So I'm not sure why you're bringing this up.


I just wanted to add that here (http://realmshelps.net/monsters/templates/index.shtml) it says that all the templates in the article are accuired. Thus can be added at any time... This list includes Warbeast, which even before I read this I concidered an accuired template. Especially because it can be added to a domestic creature, which had not been bred specially.

Use a bit of critical thinking, please. Realmshelps isn't a WotC site, it's a fan compilation of information from the books. The concept of acquired vs. inherited templates didn't exist when MM2 was published, and Warbeast was never republished, so the only way that those guys would know whether the template is acquired or inherited is by having precisely the sort of discussion we are having now. As I described, a large number of people got the impression that Warbeast was acquired because they misread the Training a Warbeast entry, what makes you think the folks who run realmshelps would be any more immune to that than the various optimizers on these boards? Heck, candlekeep had a race listed with negative level adjustment for a while, you didn't believe that WotC actually published one right?

As for the sentence "Especially because it can be added to a domestic creature, which had not been bred specially", you do realize you're trying to make an argument by assuming its conclusion, right? I'm arguing that Warbeast cannot be added to any creature that had not been bred specially, which would include domestic creatures. That's kind of the whole point.

[Max Caysey]

Regardless, I don't see what this has to do with the topic at hand. Even if a Druid's animal companion is domestic, it still doesn't start off with the Warbeast template, since it must be typical of its kind, and there's nothing that allows you to turn a preexisting animal into a Warbeast because being a Warbeast is a matter of breeding. So I'm not sure why you're bringing this up.

Because its not a matter of breeding. A normal horse can be giving the Warbeast template with 2 month of training. So the following line: "If the base creature is a domestic animal, the creature need not be specially reared, but it must be trained for two months (Handle Animal DC 20) to develop its abilities."

Even this: "A warbeast based on a wild animal must be reared for one year (Handle Animal DC 15 + HD of the warbeast), then trained for 2 months (Handle Animal DC 20 + HD of the warbeast)."

I fail to see how it states that the animal has to be bred for this template to be applied as in (inherent). To me this is clearly an accuired template. Find a fawn rear it and train it... Voilà a deer with the warbeast template. Or buy a riding horse, train it for two month... same thing. You get a riding horse the the accuired template.

I would say that an animal companion was for all purpose a domesticated animal in the hands of the druid and therefore would, just like the standard horse or cow, only need two month of training to have the template applied.




As I described, a large number of people got the impression that Warbeast was acquired because they misread the Training a Warbeast entry...

And I am describing that the Warbest template is an accuired template and that I belive you to be the one who have misread the training a warbeast entry.

For what its worth I do understand that realmshelp is not official, I was trying to show that apparently they too had it as an accuired template, and not inherent as you so adamant purpose. I also know that MM2 is 3.0, and that it has not been re-written.

And lastly I do also understand that this might not be or has been the best place to discuss it, but as I said I dont believe you are right on this one, dispite your normal infallible knowledge and understanding of the rules.

[Sewercop]

Okay, new problem. He's come up with the idea of said dragon being his cohort as well, so she can gain levels? I have no idea at all how cohorts work. They've never come up in my games before. Anyone?

Again, this is a gestalt campaign, with a level 40 level cap, giving him up to 80 class levels. So he can pretty much mix classes up as much as he needs.

Well at that level you can finally get some truly amazing dragon mounts under the epic leadership feat , the list is in the srd.(albeit short)
Dragon wyrm brass, 42 level etc
ancient green 40th and other monsters. I believe it would be possible to reverse engineer the cohort LA if you wanted for dragons, but thats outside raw.

Not to mention with all the hd, familar epic progression, arcane hierophant, you can create a supermount++++++ that can crush most anything.
Heck you can make him a god you ride on with divine rank and all, bunch of epic feats, the mount will be so damn powerful its not even fun.

Short of other gods optimized few things can stop him

[Urpriest]

Because its not a matter of breeding. A normal horse can be giving the Warbeast template with 2 month of training. So the following line: "If the base creature is a domestic animal, the creature need not be specially reared, but it must be trained for two months (Handle Animal DC 20) to develop its abilities."

Even this: "A warbeast based on a wild animal must be reared for one year (Handle Animal DC 15 + HD of the warbeast), then trained for 2 months (Handle Animal DC 20 + HD of the warbeast)."

I fail to see how it states that the animal has to be bred for this template to be applied as in (inherent).

It doesn't, and from my interpretation you wouldn't expect it to. If, as I have been telling you, that section describes how to rear and train an animal that is already a warbeast then it wouldn't "state that the animal has to be bred for the template to be applied" because from the writers' point of view nobody would be so silly as to assume they can "apply" a template to an existing creature when the template doesn't list a procedure for doing so.

In general, when arguing with someone you need to either find gaps in their reasoning, or find evidence that their explanation cannot cover. Pointing out evidence that their theory explains better (for example, my explanation lets me predict the DCs and times listed in that paragraph, yours does not) doesn't help you make your case. You need to actually find phrasing that is inconsistent with my interpretation.



To me this is clearly an accuired template. Find a fawn rear it and train it... Voilà a deer with the warbeast template. Or buy a riding horse, train it for two month... same thing. You get a riding horse the the accuired template.

I'm going to assume that you simply forgot that the template explicitly cannot be applied to creatures that already have a "war" version, like horses, rather than that you are just trolling here.




I would say that an animal companion was for all purpose a domesticated animal in the hands of the druid and therefore would, just like the standard horse or cow, only need two month of training to have the template applied.


From my perspective, two months of training is what you need to train a warbeast to follow your instructions, if the warbeast is based on a domestic animal, so this is irrelevant. It may be useful within your interpretation to know that you don't need to rear an animal companion to "apply" the template, but that's pretty obviously not relevant to the discussion we're having right now. Thus, it can't actually be the reason why you brought it up. I'm curious what your actual reason was.




And I am describing that the Warbest template is an accuired template and that I belive you to be the one who have misread the training a warbeast entry.

For what its worth I do understand that realmshelp is not official, I was trying to show that apparently they too had it as an accuired template, and not inherent as you so adamant purpose.

I never said that realmshelps thought that it was an inherited template.

Look, here's the situation, as I see it: my explanation explains why the DCs are what they are, why the rearing and training times are what they are, why the template has certain benefits that are only present in trained warbeasts and not in untrained warbeasts (doesn't make sense if all warbeasts are the result of training), why the template can be applied to creatures that can't be trained (Vermin), and why the template describes warbeasts as "born and raised..." "bred for exceptional..." and the like, while being consistent with the entirety of the text. Your explanation is consistent with the listed DCs and times but doesn't explain them, and appears to be inconsistent with the existence of untrained and untrainable warbeasts and the descriptions of warbeasts as the result of breeding programs. In life, when presented with two explanations, one of which covers more of the available facts, you pick the one with that explains more. The only reason not to is if you believe that there are certain facts that it still fails to explain. What are they, and why haven't you bothered to mention them in the many threads that were actually dedicated to discussing this topic?

[Max Caysey]

It doesn't, and from my interpretation you wouldn't expect it to. If, as I have been telling you, that section describes how to rear and train an animal that is already a warbeast then it wouldn't "state that the animal has to be bred for the template to be applied" because from the writers' point of view nobody would be so silly as to assume they can "apply" a template to an existing creature when the template doesn't list a procedure for doing so.

But it does list a procedure for doing so... Training A Warbeast
A warbeast can be reared and trained just as the base creature can. If the base creature is a domestic animal, the creature need nor be specially reared, but it must be trained for two months (Handle Animal DC 20) to develop its abilities.

A warbeast based on a wild animal must be reared for one year (Handle Animal DC 15 + HD of the warbeast), then trained for 2 months (Handle Animal DC 20 + HD of the warbeast).

A warbeast based on a beast must be reared for one year (Handle Animal DC 20 + HD of the warbeast), then trained for 2 months (Handle Animal DC 25 + HD of the warbeast).

A warbeast based on a vermin, being mindless, is untrainable. A trained warbeast is capable of carrying a rider into battle, and it gains the combative mount special quality (see above).

Market Price: The market price of a warbeast is a function of its Hit Dice: 50 gp/HD for a warbeast of 3 HD or less, or 100 gp + 75 gp/HD for one of 4 HD or more.

It tells you how to apply the template to creature that does not have the template. If the creature was a warbeast in the first place it would eihter 1. have the template already and thus not need training or 2. not be eligible as in the case of a war horse, which cant gain the template. By your logic it would seem that this template cant be applied at all. I was wondering if you could tell me what creatures you think is eligible and how one would apply the warbeast template to it then.



I'm going to assume that you simply forgot that the template explicitly cannot be applied to creatures that already have a "war" version, like horses, rather than that you are just trolling here.

Its true that Warhorses cant have this template, but a normal non [war]horse can have it, by training them for 2 month; for instance a light horse. FYI there are 4 types of horses. A heavy and light horse and a heavy and light [war]-horse. The two non-[war]-horses can have the template applied.



I never said that realmshelps thought that it was an inherited template.

I never said you said they said that. Im saying you are saying that the template is inherent and not accuired. As in your oponion. And that I find not to be correct IMO.


NB: All of the above are not meant to be specific for the tread of the dragon mount/animal companion, but in general terms. Just to make that clear if it was not.

[Urpriest]

It tells you how to apply the template to creature that does not have the template. If the creature was a warbeast in the first place it would eihter 1. have the template already and thus not need training

Ok, let's clarify something: do you believe that there can exist untrained warbeasts? Because the way the template is set up, a trained Warbeast has the Combative Mount ability, while an untrained one does not. Do you believe that there exist Warbeasts that don't have the Combative Mount ability? Non-Vermin ones?

Because the Training a Warbeast section explicitly says that, once trained, a Warbeast gains the Combative Mount ability. That pretty strongly suggests (to me at least) that the Training a Warbeast section refers to how to give a Warbeast the Combative Mount ability when it doesn't have it yet, and not how to use the Handle Animal skill to go back in time and change an animal so that it was retroactively "Bred for exceptional strength".



or 2. not be eligible as in the case of a war horse, which cant gain the template. By your logic it would seem that this template cant be applied at all. I was wondering if you could tell me what creatures you think is eligible and how one would apply the warbeast template to it then.

As the DM, you can apply the Warbeast template to any Medium-size or larger Animal, Beast, or Vermin (with some appropriate edition changes due to the mention of the Beast type). As a PC in-game, you can't apply it to anything, much like you can't spontaneously make your animal companion Magebred.




Its true that Warhorses cant have this template, but a normal non [war]horse can have it, by training them for 2 month; for instance a light horse. FYI there are 4 types of horses. A heavy and light horse and a heavy and light [war]-horse. The two non-[war]-horses can have the template applied.


Ah, hadn't noticed that the restriction only keeps the "war" creatures themselves from gaining the template, not creatures that otherwise have a "war" form. It does seem that RAI if warhorses are supposed to already have a "war" template then they're the result of applying the template to an ordinary horse, but you're correct that RAW a warbeast horse is completely legal.

[Max Caysey]

Ok, let's clarify something: do you believe that there can exist untrained warbeasts? Because the way the template is set up, a trained Warbeast has the Combative Mount ability, while an untrained one does not. Do you believe that there exist Warbeasts that don't have the Combative Mount ability? Non-Vermin ones?

No... I believe that it is the training that apply the template. Thus, no training no warbeast template.


Because the Training a Warbeast section explicitly says that, once trained, a Warbeast gains the Combative Mount ability. That pretty strongly suggests (to me at least) that the Training a Warbeast section refers to how to give a Warbeast the Combative Mount ability when it doesn't have it yet, and not how to use the Handle Animal skill to go back in time and change an animal so that it was retroactively "Bred for exceptional strength".

I believe the "bred for exceptional strength" is fluff text, and not to be considered mechanic. I do so because of the aforementioned "How to train a warbeast" part. I do not believe this template to be an inherent template. Lets take the wild animal. A wild animal I consider to be found in the wild, thus not bred at all. If that can be reared and trained then its not because it was born with exceptional strength but because you, via its upbringing, train it physically and mentally, to become a beast of war.



As the DM, you can apply the Warbeast template to any Medium-size or larger Animal, Beast, or Vermin (with some appropriate edition changes due to the mention of the Beast type). As a PC in-game, you can't apply it to anything, much like you can't spontaneously make your animal companion Magebred.


Magebred and Warbeast has two very different applications. I consider them nothing alike in terms of application. One is inherent one is accurired.

[Urpriest]

No... I believe that it is the training that apply the template. Thus, no training no warbeast template.

In all cases? Or do you make an exception for Vermin?

[lunasmeow]

Small problem with the build, but easily fixed.

Sentinel doesn't give the "Special Mount" class feature. So for anyone trying this build, you also need a level in Ranger-Knight of Furyondy, found in Dragon Magazine #317. Even better, it gives a "Special Mount" "As a Paladin +5" So level 1 RKoF = L6 Paladin Mount, with a level gained each level you grow. And since it gives the mount "as a Paladin" your Sentinel levels will stack even though Sentinels don't get a Special Mount, because Sentinels are Paladins, and Paladin levels stack per the description in the Magazine.

For more brokenness, use the feats found in Dragon Magazine #325 instead of taking the ACF Sorcerer.


Character Progression Breakdown:

1.) NG Variant Paladin Class: Sentinel 1 - Dragon Magazine #310.

2.) Druid 4

3.) Sorcerer 3/Wizard 1 - Use a normal Sorcerer/Wizard and (ab)use the Theurgic Bond feat to do the same thing as the ACF Sorcerer/Wizard using Obtain Familiar, but better.
(Full levels of Arcane classes to your Animal Companion instead of Half-Levels, and you still only use one feat, Theurgic Bond instead of the Obtain Familiar Feat.) Dragon Magazine #325.

4.) Ranger 1

5.) Arcane Hierophant 1

6.) Ranger-Knight of Furyondy 1 - Dragon Magazine #317

This works better either with a wizard (so you don't have to waste sorcerer levels) or in campaigns that go to high levels though. Or even better (god help the DM) Gestalt campaigns.

So, Sentinel grants paladin levels.
Ranger Knight of Furyondy grants the Paladin "Special Mount" ability that Sentinel lacks.
Devoted Tracker gives said mount animal companion as well.
Arcane Hierophant gives said animal companion familiar status as well.

Take the feats: Holy Mount and Theurgic Mount (Dragon Magazine #325 for both) for more brokeness.


Special Mount Bonuses: Count your Sentinel, Wizard/Sorcerer, Ranger, Druid, & Ranger-Knight of Furyondy levels.
(Wizard, Sorcerer, Ranger, & Druid apply due to Theurgic Mount and Holy Mount.)

Animal Companion Bonuses: Count your Druid, Arcane Hierophant, Wizard/Sorcerer, & Ranger levels.
(Wizard & Sorcerer apply due to Theurgic Bond. Ranger applies for whole instead of ½ due to Theurgic Bond setting the precedent, if you get Druid levels first and so have your animal companion due to your druid class feature instead of your Ranger class feature. Proof Below.)

Familiar Bonuses: Count your Wizard/Sorcerer, Druid, & Ranger levels.
(Druid & Ranger apply due to Theurgic Bond.)

Mix this with a Halfling Outrider and it's game over.

Oh, and did I mention that even with all of this the Sentinel still gets to summon his "Celestial Minion" that he normally gets in place of a Special Mount?

Ranger counting for full Druid levels:

Theurgic Bond: You uncover secrets to connecting more fully with your animal companion or familiar from studying another type of magic.
Prerequisite: Ability to gain a familiar, ability to gain an animal companion.
Benefit: Choose a familiar or companion you already have. When determining the abilities of your chosen familiar or animal companion, you can combine the levels of your spellcasting classes that grant either an animal companion or a familiar. For example, a 4th-level druid/3rd-level sorcerer can grant his familiar all of the abilities that a familiar of a 7th-level sorcerer would normally have.
Special: You can gain this feat multiple times. Its effects do not stack. Each time you take the feat, it applies to a different familiar or animal companion.


So, normally Sorcerer's do not get an animal companion. Even when they do using the ACF, they only count for half druid levels. However, it doesn't tell you to count your Sorcerer levels as half if you choose to apply the bonus to an Animal Companion instead of a Familiar. Even beyond that, looking in the actual magazine, none of the feats in that section tell you to add only 1/2 levels, they all make the levels count as full, so it's definitely RAI as well as RAW.

Basically, due to Theurgic Bond giving you a "greater connection" with your animal companion, it takes a class that can normally only count for half druid levels and make it count for whole druid levels.

Theurgic Bond can be used by "Any spellcasting classes that grant either an animal companion or a familiar." Ranger is a spellcasting class that grants an animal companion. Thus due to the precedent above, it should also improve the Ranger's bond so that his levels count for whole instead of half just as it does for a Sorcerer.

[lunasmeow]

I just thought of something. No DM in the world would allow it, but by RAW... It *might* be legal?

We've been treating "Animal Companion", "Special Mount", and "Familiar" as if they were psuedo classes that only animals/magical beasts could take. However they aren't classes.

The rules say that an Animal Companion gains levels from Druid & Ranger.
The rules say that a Paladin's Special Mount gains levels from Paladin levels.
The rules say that a Familiar gains levels from all the arcane classes.

So, a Druid4/Sorcerer4/Ranger2/Paladin5

The Animal Companion gains 5 levels. 4 from Druid, 1 from Ranger.
The Special Mount gains 5 levels. 5 from paladin.
The Familiar gains 4 levels. 4 From Sorcerer.

Previously we said it had the benefits of a Mount5/Companion5/Familiar4.

But all these creatures are the same animal!

So the animal gains 14 levels. Now, the chart doesn't say that only the level gains from being an animal companion give it animal companion abilities... It says that when an animal companion reaches said level it gains these abilities. They just didn't expect us to have merged our Animal Companion with our Special Mount/Familiar.

So technically, said Animal Companion should get the bonuses of a Mount14/Companion14/Familiar14 right!?

Loophole? Maybe. Munchkinry? Hell yeah. But, according to RAW? I think it's legal...

[Metahuman1]

Questions:

1: What is this players build right now? Race, classes he has levels in, and feats. (And if limited list caster, spells he knows.)

2: Do you have/allow use of the Players Handbook II?

[lunasmeow]

Questions:

1: What is this players build right now? Race, classes he has levels in, and feats. (And if limited list caster, spells he knows.)

2: Do you have/allow use of the Players Handbook II?

I allow all printed books that aren't Realm specific. So, not Faerun books in Eberron and vice verse. All general books, and Dragon Magazines (except realm specific stuff) is allowed in any realm. Of course, Eberron books are allowed if playing in Eberron.

I don't have his character sheet here. He has it right now. We meet on weekends.

[Urpriest]

I just thought of something. No DM in the world would allow it, but by RAW... It *might* be legal?

We've been treating "Animal Companion", "Special Mount", and "Familiar" as if they were psuedo classes that only animals/magical beasts could take. However they aren't classes.

The rules say that an Animal Companion gains levels from Druid & Ranger.
The rules say that a Paladin's Special Mount gains levels from Paladin levels.
The rules say that a Familiar gains levels from all the arcane classes.

So, a Druid4/Sorcerer4/Ranger2/Paladin5

The Animal Companion gains 5 levels. 4 from Druid, 1 from Ranger.
The Special Mount gains 5 levels. 5 from paladin.
The Familiar gains 4 levels. 4 From Sorcerer.

Previously we said it had the benefits of a Mount5/Companion5/Familiar4.

But all these creatures are the same animal!

So the animal gains 14 levels. Now, the chart doesn't say that only the level gains from being an animal companion give it animal companion abilities... It says that when an animal companion reaches said level it gains these abilities. They just didn't expect us to have merged our Animal Companion with our Special Mount/Familiar.

So technically, said Animal Companion should get the bonuses of a Mount14/Companion14/Familiar14 right!?

Loophole? Maybe. Munchkinry? Hell yeah. But, according to RAW? I think it's legal...

None of them are levels to begin with, so this isn't just not RAW, it's not even a plausible misreading.

[lunasmeow]

None of them are levels to begin with, so this isn't just not RAW, it's not even a plausible misreading.

Here you go.


Animal Companion Basics: Use the base statistics for a creature of the companion's kind, as given in the Monster Manual, but make the following changes.

Class Level: The character's druid level. The druid's class levels stack with levels of any other classes that are entitled to an animal companion (such as the ranger) such for the purpose of determining the companion's abilities and the alternative lists available to the character.

So, it's adding to the animal's class level. Right?

Although on further inspection, it only has that for Animal Companion, not for Familiar or Special Mount. But still, Mount5/Companion5/Familiar4, with 5 actual levels is better than without, since it should then get fort, will, and reflex saves and the like right? Which would then make the animal companion stat chart bonuses that it gets on top of normal monster class level stuff. Obviously not RAI, but RAW?

[Flickerdart]

So, it's adding to the animal's class level. Right?
No. It's a caption saying "when this table says class level, it's referring to the druid class level of the master." It is meant to help you determine what benefits the animal gets.

Furthermore, you can't just make your familiar and animal companion and special mount the same animal, since "only a normal, unmodified animal can become a familiar," and a druid selects from a set list of animals "completely typical for its kind except as noted below" (and a familiar is not an animal, besides). I suppose you could technically have a special mount that is simultaneously one of these though, but changing it from the basic warhorse to a custom creature is explicitly up to the DM (since all the various feats merely expand the list of possibilities with other pre-set choices).

[lunasmeow]

No. It's a caption saying "when this table says class level, it's referring to the druid class level of the master." It is meant to help you determine what benefits the animal gets.

Furthermore, you can't just make your familiar and animal companion and special mount the same animal, since "only a normal, unmodified animal can become a familiar," and a druid selects from a set list of animals "completely typical for its kind except as noted below" (and a familiar is not an animal, besides). I suppose you could technically have a special mount that is simultaneously one of these though, but changing it from the basic warhorse to a custom creature is explicitly up to the DM (since all the various feats merely expand the list of possibilities with other pre-set choices).

Cool on the interpretation. I told the players that we were doing strict RAW since I'd never done it and wanted to see how broken it could get without houserules limiting things. Then I saw that and freaked. But as for the mount/companion/familiar mix... the earlier posts make that happen with some feats and class levels. True, I hadn't put them in that particular build in the example, but that was for the sake of simple math.

[Metahuman1]

I allow all printed books that aren't Realm specific. So, not Faerun books in Eberron and vice verse. All general books, and Dragon Magazines (except realm specific stuff) is allowed in any realm. Of course, Eberron books are allowed if playing in Eberron.

I don't have his character sheet here. He has it right now. We meet on weekends.

Ok. If you can maybe E-mail him or give him a phone call or something and find out that information, it might help with suggesting classes and feats that will synergize in the desired fashion.



That said, in the players handbook II, there's a chapter toward the rear of the book for rule for affiliations. In addition to rules for building your own form scratch, there are a lot of example ones. One in particular is Dragon Island, which offers you a way to get the dragon to serve as a willing mount for a time. (and I seem to recall it has a clause that the dragon, being sentient and sapient and intelligent and all, can opt to extend that time indefinably after that at there own volition.).

So, that might be an easier way to get the dragon to work as a mount for the player. (Though other options could be used to then make it more powerful, hence knowing the build still being helpful.)

[LoyalPaladin]

The Draconomicon explains how to rear a dragon that you hatched for riding.

Alternately, if he doesn't have the dragon yet, there is a price for it in the Arms and Equipment Guide.

[Necromancy]

Pathfinder actually covers this little issue pretty well. Perhaps you could just use their rules

Classes with special animal companions can attract a dragon as a companion/mount if they take leadership

The dragon type must share views/goals with its PC

Using the normal cohort rules under leadership, the dragon counts as a cohort 8 levels higher than its ECL, therefore a CR7 dragon could not be taken till level 16

Dragons do NOT grow, hundreds of years do not pass by to make the dragon "level up" with you. Instead, the dragon will only progress in a PC class such as fighter or sorcerer from the time you get it

By these rules, if you want to have a rideable mount, you won't be seeing it till mid to late teens, and by that level, a CR 7-9 dragon isn't going to unbalance so much

[Metahuman1]

Not only is it not gonna unbalance much, it's not gonna contribute much either unless pathfinder greatly increased what a Dragon get's at that CR.

[Necromancy]

Not only is it not gonna unbalance much, it's not gonna contribute much either unless pathfinder greatly increased what a Dragon get's at that CR.

I'm sorry, did you want it to tank for you? What exactly are you expecting out of a minor class benefit?

Go look at the numbers and you tell me if a dragon aquired by these rules is somehow worse than a Druid or Paladin companion at the same level

[squiggit]

AFB but on page one it was mentioned that a paladin can take Dragon Steed to gain a dragon mount.

What advantages does that have over just using the exotic mount rules?

[Urpriest]

AFB but on page one it was mentioned that a paladin can take Dragon Steed to gain a dragon mount.

What advantages does that have over just using the exotic mount rules?

The exotic mount rules, like most "you can generally get things of X sort", fall by the wayside as soon as there's an explicit list published somewhere else.

More relevantly, since there's some DM judgement at work when figuring out the level you need to be to gain a mount, a DM will look at Dragon Steed and reason that if you need a feat to get a Dragon of that power level, then without a feat you'd have a proportionately weaker Dragon.

[Coidzor]

Cool on the interpretation. I told the players that we were doing strict RAW since I'd never done it and wanted to see how broken it could get without houserules limiting things. Then I saw that and freaked. But as for the mount/companion/familiar mix... the earlier posts make that happen with some feats and class levels. True, I hadn't put them in that particular build in the example, but that was for the sake of simple math.

Going by strict RAW Caelic's Supermount (http://community.wizards.com/forum/previous-editions-character-optimization/threads/967311) is the craziest thing you'd run into as far as mount-related shenanigans go. Which I'm certain has already been linked to earlier in the thread

[lunasmeow]

The exotic mount rules, like most "you can generally get things of X sort", fall by the wayside as soon as there's an explicit list published somewhere else.

More relevantly, since there's some DM judgement at work when figuring out the level you need to be to gain a mount, a DM will look at Dragon Steed and reason that if you need a feat to get a Dragon of that power level, then without a feat you'd have a proportionately weaker Dragon.

Exactly. And since he's getting his dragon as soon as possible, and it has to be big enough to ride, he wouldn't get a dragon at all until higher levels without said feat. Also, there literally aren't any dragons at all in our section of the world. There are half-dragons only due to people of dragon descent taking Dragon Disciple levels, because they have an entire country full of half-dragons, so they use that class to keep their heritage strong.

Thus he is only getting his dragon by Paladin summoning since they "summon" their special mount, and it "goes back" once the time limit ends or it is dismissed.

[Metahuman1]

I'm sorry, did you want it to tank for you? What exactly are you expecting out of a minor class benefit?

Go look at the numbers and you tell me if a dragon aquired by these rules is somehow worse than a Druid or Paladin companion at the same level

Not dieing the second something sneeze's in it's general direction would be nice. Which is what my experience with mounts tends to tell me there quite prone too by default.

But, yeah, recommend looking at the affiliation rules, and hey, you can even swing it that way that she's strong enough that she probably won't die in every fight.