Awakened, Magebred AND Warbeast?

[eyebreaker7]

Can an animal be raised and affected so as to be all 3? How much does each step cost?

Magebred cost ???
Warbeast cost ???
Awaken spell (empowered and maximized) cost ???

Also a question about the awaken being maximized AND empowered, How can it be both? Awaken is 5th level. Empowered says it takes up a spell slot 2 levels higher making it use a 7th level spell slot. Maximize says it takes up 3 more spell levels which would make it need a 10th level spell slot????

[Bayar]

Sudden empower and sudden maximize both don't increase the level of the spell once per day.

[Beni-Kujaku]

An animal can definitely be bred to be magebred‚ trained to be a warbeast‚ then awakened.

For the Empowered/Maximized awaken‚ there are a lot of metamagic cost reducers out there that allow you to cast this as less than lv 9‚ like Arcane Thesis‚ or a metamagic rod of empower.

For the WB/MB animal‚ use the WB cost (50 gp/HD if the animal has less than 3HD‚ or 100+75gp/HD if the animal has at least 4 RHD) ‚ then multiply by 2 for Magebred‚ then add the cost for buying the service of a wizard (10x level-equivalent of the spell x caster level + 5x XP cost). The spell equivalent level is 10‚ a wizard with a rod or arcane thesis will cast it as a 8th level spell‚ so their caster level must be at least 15.

So‚ for a horse (3 HD‚ becomes 4 with warbeast) ‚ the cost is 2x(100+75x4) +10x10x15+ 5x250 = 3550 gp. Not that expensive for the end result‚ but remember it is awakened. It is a person‚ not an animal anymore‚ and it won't obey you if you don't convince it.

[eyebreaker7]

An animal can definitely be bred to be magebred‚ trained to be a warbeast‚ then awakened.

For the Empowered/Maximized awaken‚ there are a lot of metamagic cost reducers out there that allow you to cast this as less than lv 9‚ like Arcane Thesis‚ or a metamagic rod of empower.

For the WB/MB animal‚ use the WB cost (50 gp/HD if the animal has less than 3HD‚ or 100+75gp/HD if the animal has at least 4 RHD) ‚ then multiply by 2 for Magebred‚ then add the cost for buying the service of a wizard (10x level-equivalent of the spell x caster level + 5x XP cost). The spell equivalent level is 10‚ a wizard with a rod or arcane thesis will cast it as a 8th level spell‚ so their caster level must be at least 15.

So‚ for a horse (3 HD‚ becomes 4 with warbeast) ‚ the cost is 2x(100+75x4) +10x10x15+ 5x250 = 3550 gp. Not that expensive for the end result‚ but remember it is awakened. It is a person‚ not an animal anymore‚ and it won't obey you if you don't convince it.

Yea was forgetting that part. I'm looking at a Paladin mount. That picture I posted a while back of the dragonborn/half-dragon riding the Megaraptor.
So how do I find out how much a Megaraptor cost to start the price? A Megaraptor has 8 HD so that would be only 700 for the base War Beast. x 2 for it being Magebred = only 1400 gold? I didn't figure in the Awaken spell because I'm not so sure the Megaraptor would go for being a mount. lol. Although it is smart and it is a worthy cause. I mean it's still a Megaraptor. What else is it going to do that would make it have a big problem with being a mount? What do you guys think? Personally I don't think I would mind if I was the Megaraptor. Unless I was given a reason to object. Especially from a Paladin.

Ok I just noticed a part of my Megaraptor info says an egg cost 13,000 gold and another 2,000 to train so with it being Magebread it would be x2 so is the cost of training x2 or the egg as well? I'm guessing just the training?

[Crake]

An animal can definitely be bred to be magebred‚ trained to be a warbeast‚ then awakened.

Both magebred and warbeast are bred. You cannot train an animal into a warbeast. This distinction is clear when you look at regular horses vs warhorses (one of direct examples of warbeast breeding in the template's description), they are separate breeds.

[unseenmage]

Here is a bunch (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?372681-How-do-template-stacked-Animals-compare-to-more-common-corpses-for-necromancy) of templates that could all be on an animal without changing its type.

They even have random d% assigned so your GM could roll fir them being found in some bizarre bazaar.


Both magebred and warbeast are bred. You cannot train an animal into a warbeast. This distinction is clear when you look at regular horses vs warhorses (one of direct examples of warbeast breeding in the template's description), they are separate breeds.
Monster Manual II (iirc) literally has prices for training Warbeasts.

[eyebreaker7]

but remember it is awakened. It is a person‚ not an animal anymore‚ and it won't obey you if you don't convince it.

Worgs are Intelligent mounts, why not raptors? Granted the "awakening" would make them a LOT more intelligent than a worg.:smalltongue:

[Melcar]

Both magebred and warbeast are bred. You cannot train an animal into a warbeast. This distinction is clear when you look at regular horses vs warhorses (one of direct examples of warbeast breeding in the template's description), they are separate breeds.

Wrong! Read the MM2 again. Warbeast is an applied template, added to an animal by training! Training is literally the way to apply it!

[Crake]

Monster Manual II (iirc) literally has prices for training Warbeasts.


Wrong! Read the MM2 again. Warbeast is an applied template, added to an animal by training! Training is literally the way to apply it!

It has prices for training warbeasts, because warbeasts, being bred different, are more difficult to train. It's literally saying that warbeasts require a more experienced hand and more time and effort to train than normally bred animals, not that you can train a regular animal into a warbeast.

Read the template's intro text "The warbeast is a creature born and raised to serve as a rider’s mount. Bred for exceptional strength, aggression, and surefootedness, these creatures are powerfully built, strongwilled, and openly belligerent."

Even the training section "A warbeast can be reared and trained just as the base creature can." This clearly states that a creature is a warbeast BEFORE training, and not that you train a creature INTO a warbeast.

[Remuko]

Worgs are Intelligent mounts, why not raptors? Granted the "awakening" would make them a LOT more intelligent than a worg.:smalltongue:

anything can be a mount if you can find a way to ride it and for it to allow you to. intelligent creatures can be mounts, like the Worg. If you awaken an animal though, you will have to convince it to allow you differently than a creature with "animal-like" intelligence.

[PraxisVetli]

It's interesting that Warbeast doesn't specify if it's an acquired or inherited template, since that would settle whether or not you need to breed it or train it.

[Melcar]

It has prices for training warbeasts, because warbeasts, being bred different, are more difficult to train. It's literally saying that warbeasts require a more experienced hand and more time and effort to train than normally bred animals, not that you can train a regular animal into a warbeast.

Read the template's intro text "The warbeast is a creature born and raised to serve as a rider’s mount. Bred for exceptional strength, aggression, and surefootedness, these creatures are powerfully built, strongwilled, and openly belligerent."

Even the training section "A warbeast can be reared and trained just as the base creature can." This clearly states that a creature is a warbeast BEFORE training, and not that you train a creature INTO a warbeast.

I'm sorry, but this is not true.

First of all your are quoting the fluff section of the text, when you're stating "bred for exceptional strength... ". That fluff could say anything, without it ever having a bearing on the actual rules. So we completly discard that.

Secondly, if you look under the rules for training a warbeast is says: that a domestic animal only needs 2 month of training. (No mention of it having to be bred for war first.) It further goes on to say that: "A warbeast based on a wild animal must be reared for one year, then trained." A wild animal, being wild, is not bred for war, because if it was, it was not a wild animal, ergo, you do not need to breed it specifically for war.

All you need is rearing and training, or only training if its already a domestic animal. There is no doubt that the template is poorly written, but considering the rules and not the fluff text, there is nothing that points to a warbeast needing to be bred specifically, for it to have the template. Actually, when you look closely at it, its the opposite.

[Crake]

I'm sorry, but this is not true.

First of all your are quoting the fluff section of the text, when you're stating "bred for exceptional strength... ". That fluff could say anything, without it ever having a bearing on the actual rules. So we completly discard that.

Secondly, if you look under the rules for training a warbeast is says: that a domestic animal only needs 2 month of training. (No mention of it having to be bred for war first.) It further goes on to say that: "A warbeast based on a wild animal must be reared for one year, then trained." A wild animal, being wild, is not bred for war, because if it was, it was not a wild animal, ergo, you do not need to breed it specifically for war.

All you need is rearing and training, or only training if its already a domestic animal. There is no doubt that the template is poorly written, but considering the rules and not the fluff text, there is nothing that points to a warbeast needing to be bred specifically, for it to have the template. Actually, when you look closely at it, its the opposite.

You can most definitely breed wild animals, we do it all the time, and in fact that's literally how we domesticate wild animals, by breeding them! In this case, we're just breeding them in the opposite direction, making them MORE aggressive, MORE belligerent, hence why a wild warbeast has different rules from a domesticated warbeast, because they're even harder to rear and train.

Keep in mind, that all animals need to be reared and trained, a warbeast simply has different DCs for their rearing and training, because they're more unruly and aggressive. Basically, the process goes: Breed animal into a warbeast -> infant warbeast must be reared, but uses different rearing DCs to normal animals of it's kind -> reared warbeast is now matured and must be trained, but uses different DCs to normal animals of it's kind.

Final Edit: Also, I'd say this is the clear final nail in the coffin "A warbeast based on a vermin, being mindless, is untrainable." Vermin warbeasts exist, but cannot be trained. Clearly the training rules are referring to actually making existing warbeasts compliant with riders and learning tricks, not actually turning existing animals into warbeasts.

Second-Final Edit: Also, the so called "fluff text" actually contains specific rules, namely that the warbeast template cannot be applied to existing war animals, saying that they've basically already had the warbeast template applied. Animals such as warhorses vs regular horses, which aren't a result of training, but a result of being different breeds. So not only is this "fluff text" clearly not, since it contains actual rules, but it's a further validation that warbeasting is a result of breeding, not training.

[InvisibleBison]

First of all your are quoting the fluff section of the text, when you're stating "bred for exceptional strength... ". That fluff could say anything, without it ever having a bearing on the actual rules. So we completly discard that.

No, we can't. Nowhere in the rules does it say that there is such a thing as a "fluff section of the text" which isn't rules. In the specific case of monster entries, in fact, the "Descriptive Text" section on page 7 of the Monster Manual seems to indicate the opposite.


There is no doubt that the template is poorly written, but considering the rules and not the fluff text, there is nothing that points to a warbeast needing to be bred specifically, for it to have the template. Actually, when you look closely at it, its the opposite.

Even if we accept your position on the fluff/rules dichotomy, this isn't correct. The "Training a Warbeast" section says "A trained warbeast is capable of carrying a rider into battle, and gains the combative mount special quality". Thus, it's clearly possible for their to be untrained warbeasts, which means that being a warbeast has to be a matter of breeding.

[liquidformat]

An animal can definitely be bred to be magebred‚ trained to be a warbeast‚ then awakened.

For the Empowered/Maximized awaken‚ there are a lot of metamagic cost reducers out there that allow you to cast this as less than lv 9‚ like Arcane Thesis‚ or a metamagic rod of empower.

For the WB/MB animal‚ use the WB cost (50 gp/HD if the animal has less than 3HD‚ or 100+75gp/HD if the animal has at least 4 RHD) ‚ then multiply by 2 for Magebred‚ then add the cost for buying the service of a wizard (10x level-equivalent of the spell x caster level + 5x XP cost). The spell equivalent level is 10‚ a wizard with a rod or arcane thesis will cast it as a 8th level spell‚ so their caster level must be at least 15.

So‚ for a horse (3 HD‚ becomes 4 with warbeast) ‚ the cost is 2x(100+75x4) +10x10x15+ 5x250 = 3550 gp. Not that expensive for the end result‚ but remember it is awakened. It is a person‚ not an animal anymore‚ and it won't obey you if you don't convince it.
Um wizards can't get awaken without jumping through some pretty big hoops since awaken only appears on the druid spell list...

You can most definitely breed wild animals, we do it all the time, and in fact that's literally how we domesticate wild animals, by breeding them! In this case, we're just breeding them in the opposite direction, making them MORE aggressive, MORE belligerent, hence why a wild warbeast has different rules from a domesticated warbeast, because they're even harder to rear and train.

Keep in mind, that all animals need to be reared and trained, a warbeast simply has different DCs for their rearing and training, because they're more unruly and aggressive. Basically, the process goes: Breed animal into a warbeast -> infant warbeast must be reared, but uses different rearing DCs to normal animals of it's kind -> reared warbeast is now matured and must be trained, but uses different DCs to normal animals of it's kind.

Final Edit: Also, I'd say this is the clear final nail in the coffin "A warbeast based on a vermin, being mindless, is untrainable." Vermin warbeasts exist, but cannot be trained. Clearly the training rules are referring to actually making existing warbeasts compliant with riders and learning tricks, not actually turning existing animals into warbeasts.

I am not convinced, I can see where you are getting this from but given the fact that the word 'bred' only appears once and in the flavor text of the entry that doesn't bode well for your claim. Furthermore, there is a whole section on 'training a warbeast' but no section about breeding which seems like something they might want to toss some skill DCs into. Also it isn't like WotC is particularly well known for their high quality writing and the training section is vague enough to be left up to interpretation. As for the vermin this wouldn't be the first time that we have conflicting rulings inside of something that would both include and exclude the same thing from taking it...

Altogether I don't think you really have enough to your argument for it to clearly be RAI much less RAW that Warbeast is inherited instead of acquired...

As for the main topic, even if both templates are inherited I think it is reasonable to have both on the same creature, note that both warbeast and awaken add RHD to the creature so that adds a bit of screwyness to the pricing. As such it is good to pay attention that between warbeast and awaken the mount is gaining 3 RHD which has the potential to increase the size category of some animals. My personal favorite is the gnome ranger substitution levels that grants you a wolverine as a base animal choice at 4th level, add in warbeast and you now have a large wolverine that can wear armor as your war mount.

There isn't any reason an awakened animal couldn't serve as a mount especially since there are other magical beasts that can be mounts, the only hurdle is convincing it to be your mount.

[Crake]

Um wizards can't get awaken without jumping through some pretty big hoops since awaken only appears on the druid spell list...


I am not convinced, I can see where you are getting this from but given the fact that the word 'bred' only appears once and in the flavor text of the entry that doesn't bode well for your claim. Furthermore, there is a whole section on 'training a warbeast' but no section about breeding which seems like something they might want to toss some skill DCs into. Also it isn't like WotC is particularly well known for their high quality writing and the training section is vague enough to be left up to interpretation. As for the vermin this wouldn't be the first time that we have conflicting rulings inside of something that would both include and exclude the same thing from taking it...

Altogether I don't think you really have enough to your argument for it to clearly be RAI much less RAW that Warbeast is inherited instead of acquired...

I mean, I think it's pretty obvious and clear, and your end isn't particularly convincing, especially if your assertion is that "well, I'm just gonna ignore this one line by saying 'conflicting rules', and also ignore this 'fluff text' because it suits my argument". Also, considering that the "fluff text" in question actually contains rules, particularly that warcreatures from the monster manual cannot recieve the template, I think it's a pretty poor argument. Either way:


As for the main topic, even if both templates are inherited I think it is reasonable to have both on the same creature, note that both warbeast and awaken add RHD to the creature so that adds a bit of screwyness to the pricing. As such it is good to pay attention that between warbeast and awaken the mount is gaining 3 RHD which has the potential to increase the size category of some animals. My personal favorite is the gnome ranger substitution levels that grants you a wolverine as a base animal choice at 4th level, add in warbeast and you now have a large wolverine that can wear armor as your war mount.

There isn't any reason an awakened animal couldn't serve as a mount especially since there are other magical beasts that can be mounts, the only hurdle is convincing it to be your mount.

I was never arguing against being able to have both templates, merely that people had erroneously characterised warbeast as a trained template, not bred one. I think regular horses and warhorses are the clearest example of proof that the warbeast template is a bred template, considering warhorses and regular horses are quite literally different breeds of horses.

[Max Caysey]

The Warbeast template is added by training (and sometimes rearing) your animal! Its right there in the text! How is this even an argument!

[Melcar]

You can most definitely breed wild animals, we do it all the time, and in fact that's literally how we domesticate wild animals, by breeding them! In this case, we're just breeding them in the opposite direction, making them MORE aggressive, MORE belligerent, hence why a wild warbeast has different rules from a domesticated warbeast, because they're even harder to rear and train.

No... once its been trained/reared its no longer a wild animal! Thats precicely the difference between a domesticated and wild animal, whether its wild or whether its not. If its trained/reared its no longer wild! Hence the rearing!


Keep in mind, that all animals need to be reared and trained, a warbeast simply has different DCs for their rearing and training, because they're more unruly and aggressive. Basically, the process goes: Breed animal into a warbeast -> infant warbeast must be reared, but uses different rearing DCs to normal animals of it's kind -> reared warbeast is now matured and must be trained, but uses different DCs to normal animals of it's kind.

Now you are just making things up... it doesn't say this anywhere!


Final Edit: Also, I'd say this is the clear final nail in the coffin "A warbeast based on a vermin, being mindless, is untrainable." Vermin warbeasts exist, but cannot be trained. Clearly the training rules are referring to actually making existing warbeasts compliant with riders and learning tricks, not actually turning existing animals into warbeasts.

I'd say that this is not clear final nail in the coffin, but a perfect example of poor editing! My oponion luckilly is as valid as yours!


Second-Final Edit: Also, the so called "fluff text" actually contains specific rules, namely that the warbeast template cannot be applied to existing war animals, saying that they've basically already had the warbeast template applied. Animals such as warhorses vs regular horses, which aren't a result of training, but a result of being different breeds. So not only is this "fluff text" clearly not, since it contains actual rules, but it's a further validation that warbeasting is a result of breeding, not training.

The fluff text is fluff... it does not contain rules!

[InvisibleBison]

The fluff text is fluff... it does not contain rules!

Not so. D&D doesn't make a distinction between "fluff" and "rules". All text is rules text.

[Crake]

No... once its been trained/reared its no longer a wild animal! Thats precicely the difference between a domesticated and wild animal, whether its wild or whether its not. If its trained/reared its no longer wild! Hence the rearing!

Yes, but wild animals MUST be reared from birth, wheras non-wild animals are domesticated from birth. That's why you need to rear a wolf in order to train it, but don't need to rear a dog in order to train it. The same goes for a bison vs a cow or an ox.


Now you are just making things up... it doesn't say this anywhere!

Yes it does, it's literally in the handle animal rules, in the phb.


I'd say that this is not clear final nail in the coffin, but a perfect example of poor editing! My oponion luckilly is as valid as yours!

so you're going with "ignoring the rules because they contradict my argument"


The fluff text is fluff... it does not contain rules!

Ah you're right, the section about not being able to apply warbeast to warhorses is the next paragraph.