Polymorph Animal Companion

[Yogibear41]

If I polymorph my Animal Companion does its bonuses to Natural armor, and Str/Dex for virtue of being an animal companion carry over to the polymorphed form in the same way a Polymorphed familiars Natural armor bonus carries over?

[Crake]

I dont think either apply (familiar nor animal companion), neither are ongoing magical effects, theyre just increases to the creatures base natural armor, which is replaced by the polymorph value.

[Gruftzwerg]

1. Familiar and Animal Companion (AC) are abilities on your (main) character-sheet, thus they remain unaffected when your familiar/AC changes form in any way (poly/shapechange/..)

2. A new form and new base stats doesn't change the fact that it is still your familiar/AC

3. The Familiar/AC is still targeted by your ability and thus gets still all regular buffs/abilities from your ability.

4. Familiar and AC are both single abilities that gives a bunch of stuff to your target "familiar/ac". They give multiple (!) buffs. Since you can also acquire a new familiar/ac, these effects are constantly reapplied to your pet. So even if the form change overwrites all stats, these buffs are still reapplied constantly (since the source is still on your character sheet).


@ Crake
Ask yourself the simple question if the familiar/ac stops being a familiar/AC when it changes form?
No it doesn't stop being a familiar/AC, it is still one and thus receives all the familiar stuff that your character (sheet) provides it with. It doesn't lose the empathic link, nor the stat boost, nor any other ability you give to it (e.g. Imp. Evasion).

If it wouldn't reapply, you would cancel your connection to your familiar/ac forever. Reapplying the familiar abilities constantly is the sole functional option here.

[Crake]

@ Crake
Ask yourself the simple question if the familiar/ac stops being a familiar/AC when it changes form?
No it doesn't stop being a familiar/AC, it is still one and thus receives all the familiar stuff that your character (sheet) provides it with. It doesn't lose the empathic link, nor the stat boost, nor any other ability you give to it (e.g. Imp. Evasion).

Those other things are all abilities that polymorph explicitly doesnt remove or override. In the case of natural armor however, polymorph overrides its natural armor stat. Sinces its an adjustment to the familiars base natural armor, rather than a permanent magical bonus of say, an enhancement bonus or something, the polymorph spell overrides it.


If it wouldn't reapply, you would cancel your connection to your familiar/ac forever. Reapplying the familiar abilities constantly is the sole functional option here.

How you got from A to B here perplexes me entirely. Do you lose a template when you polymorph just because you lost the natural armor? No. Theres no transitive logic applied to your statement.

[Gruftzwerg]

Those other things are all abilities that polymorph explicitly doesnt remove or override. In the case of natural armor however, polymorph overrides its natural armor stat. Sinces its an adjustment to the familiars base natural armor, rather than a permanent magical bonus of say, an enhancement bonus or something, the polymorph spell overrides it.



How you got from A to B here perplexes me entirely. Do you lose a template when you polymorph just because you lost the natural armor? No. Theres no transitive logic applied to your statement.

I meant it as extension from "4. Familiar and AC are both single abilities that gives a bunch of stuff to your target "familiar/ac". "

The familiar/animal companion abilities on your character sheet are the source of your familiar/AC being an actual familiar/AC. It provides all the extra/bonus stuff your familiar/ac gets. And this ability doesn't change when your familiar/ac is affected by Polymorph. These (familiar/ac) effects are still on your familiar/AC. That is what I meant here. Your familiar/AC ability is imho constantly providing your familiar/AC with these things. Thus upon polymorphing em, they still are targeted by your (familiar/AC) ability and affected by it.

[Crake]

I meant it as extension from "4. Familiar and AC are both single abilities that gives a bunch of stuff to your target "familiar/ac". "

The familiar/animal companion abilities on your character sheet are the source of your familiar/AC being an actual familiar/AC. It provides all the extra/bonus stuff your familiar/ac gets. And this ability doesn't change when your familiar/ac is affected by Polymorph. These (familiar/ac) effects are still on your familiar/AC. That is what I meant here. Your familiar/AC ability is imho constantly providing your familiar/AC with these things. Thus upon polymorphing em, they still are targeted by your (familiar/AC) ability and affected by it.

Interpret it how you want, it seems to me like polymorph is an overriding effect, the same way it would override a tome of strength/dex/con

[Gruftzwerg]

Interpret it how you want, it seems to me like polymorph is an overriding effect, the same way it would override a tome of strength/dex/con

A tome is different here since there the source of the effect is on the polymorphed target.
The "familiar" or the "animal companion" ability your character has is the source of the effects.
When you polymorph your familiar/animal companion you haven't made any changes to the source of the effects.
Your "familiar/animal companion ability" is still targeting your familiar/animal companion after the changes made my polymorph to it.
Polymorph can't prevent this, since it can sole target its "Target:", which is the familiar/animal companion in our case and not owner/character. It is still your familiar/animal companion, obeying your commands and has all the bonus stuff it had before the change. And I don't see any reason why the ability score bonus and the natural armor bonus shouldn't follow this rule.
Your character still has the "ability" that provides all the stuff & bonuses to your "pet".

[Paragon]

If I polymorph my Animal Companion does its bonuses to Natural armor, and Str/Dex for virtue of being an animal companion carry over to the polymorphed form in the same way a Polymorphed familiars Natural armor bonus carries over?

I think I've got it.

Polymorph's latest version is based on Alter Self whose rules specify you "You retain all supernatural and spell-like special attacks and qualities of your normal form".

I went to the DMG p200 which has a few examples of familiars that have SQ granted abilities.

These granted abilities, I think, come from this line of the Familiar sidebar of the PHB

All familiars have special abilities (or impart abilities to their masters) depending on the master's combined level in classes that grant familiars, as shown on the table below

Therefore, the Nat Armor enhancement as well as Str/Dex, Int and whatnot in this table, are kept under a Polymorph effect and add to the new creature's statistics.

[Duke of Urrel]

By default, a spell of the Polymorph Subschool changes almost everything about its subject. So we should assume that the Polymorph spell, too, must change almost all the attributes of an animal companion unless something in its description – or in the description of the Alter Self spell, which it is based upon – indicates otherwise. Among the relevant exceptions to this default rule is this one from the description of the Alter Self spell (from page 197 of the PLAYER’S HANDBOOK).

Your class and level, Hit Points, alignment, Base Attack Bonus, and Base Save Bonuses all remain the same.

Everything depends on what we interpret “class and level” to mean. Personally, I interpret the phrase strictly to mean these three things: class features, feats, and skill points.

I cannot agree with Gruftzwerg’s claim that an animal companion is a set of “abilities on your (main) character-sheet,” that is to say, nothing but a class feature. If an animal companion was really nothing but a class feature, it should be totally immune to the Polymorph spell. Not only its natural armor, its Strength bonus, and its Dexterity bonus should stay the same while it was polymorphed, but everything else as well.

A less radical claim might be that your animal companion is not a mere class feature, but that its natural armor bonus, its Strength bonus, and its Dexterity bonus are themselves class features. So the Polymorph spell might allow your animal companion to keep these three attributes even as it changed others.

I cannot accept this claim, either, because these three attributes are nowhere identified as class features. They are simply bonuses or adjustments.

I also disagree with Paragon. It’s true that the natural armor bonus, Strength bonus, and Dexterity bonus of an animal companion are special abilities, but they are not supernatural and not spell-like. They can only be extraordinary.

Following the Alter Self spell, the Polymorph spell allows its subject to keep extraordinary abilities only if they are “derived from class levels.” I interpret this to mean that these abilities are kept only if they are class features. Since I do not regard these attributes as class features, I do not allow an animal companion to keep them while polymorphed.

The description of animal companions on page 36 the PLAYER’S HANDBOOK gives us another reason to say that animal companions, while polymorphed, should not keep their special bonuses to natural armor, Strength, and Dexterity. A druid’s animal companion is “superior to a normal animal of its kind.” In other words, it is above average. However, according to the description of the Polymorph Subschool (on page 320 of the PLAYER’S HANDBOOK):

Unless otherwise noted in the spell's description, the subject of a Polymorph spell takes on all the statistics and special abilities of an average member of the assumed form in place of its own…

The boldface emphasis is my own. Neither the Alter Self spell nor the Polymorph spell makes an exception to this rule, which I call the "rule of averages" in order to sound clever.

An animal companion is an above-average member of its own species, but when you use any spell of the Polymorph subschool to change it into a creature of any other species – or even into itself – then it must, in my opinion, become an average creature with average ability scores, as they appear in the MONSTER MANUAL.

I also apply this "rule of averages" to all inherent bonuses and to the experience bonuses that you add to your ability scores as you advance in level. Both of these things make you exceptional rather than average. But polymorphing must make you average again.

Just to be fair, I also apply this "rule of averages" to the aging penalties that you add to your physical ability scores as you advance in age. I assume that average, in most cases, means average for a young adult, so that by polymorphing, you effectively restore the vigor of youth to an aged creature. Since average creatures are whole and not missing any limbs, I allow polymorphing to regenerate missing limbs and to reverse ability drain, too. (On the other hand, I don’t allow polymorphing to reverse ability damage, because this is not a permanent attribute but only a temporary condition.)

[Gruftzwerg]

I think I've got it.

Polymorph's latest version is based on Alter Self whose rules specify you "You retain all supernatural and spell-like special attacks and qualities of your normal form".
....

Have a close look at the bold part. Polymorph targets your "form" related stuff and nothing else (who would have thought that..^^).
It never has permission to change anything that is not form related!


By default, a spell of the Polymorph Subschool changes almost everything about its subject. So we should assume that the Polymorph spell, too, must change almost all the attributes of an animal companion unless something in its description – or in the description of the Alter Self spell, which it is based upon – indicates otherwise. Among the relevant exceptions to this default rule is this one from the description of the Alter Self spell (from page 197 of the PLAYER’S HANDBOOK).


Everything depends on what we interpret “class and level” to mean. Personally, I interpret the phrase strictly to mean these three things: class features, feats, and skill points.
....

See above. The line about class level dependent stuff is just a friendly reminder (or explanation) of the statement made before: that Polymorph sole changes your "form" (and thus form related stuff) and nothing else.


____________
(@ everybody)

Lets make a small RAW breakdown:

1. Being a familiar or an animal companion is not "form"-related and thus outside of the effect-range of Polymorph.

2. The stuff the familiar or animal companion ability provides your "target pet" with aren't permanent changes! They are sole ongoing changes. If you should ever release your familiar or animal companion, all the stuff vanishes immediately, leaving your former pet with the average stats normal for its "form".
As such, you can't handle the changes made by the familiar or AC abilities as permanent like the changes by "real advancement" (by lvling yourself, what the pet does not).

3. I again come to the conclusion that the ability (familair/ac) your character is the source of the effect placed on your "pet". Polymorphing your pet won't ever affect the "ongoing effect" placed on your pet.

4. Polymorph exchanges your stats. And for a correct calculation that is what you would normally expect. The "base value for the form" gets exchanged and the bonuses provided by the effect of your ability gets added on top.

No matter how you look at it. Polymorph never did have the permission to target, alter, or deny the familiar/AC related stuff.




I cannot agree with Gruftzwerg’s claim that an animal companion is a set of “abilities on your (main) character-sheet,” that is to say, nothing but a class feature. If an animal companion was really nothing but a class feature, it should be totally immune to the Polymorph spell. Not only its natural armor, its Strength bonus, and its Dexterity bonus should stay the same while it was polymorphed, but everything else as well.



Come on, that is an exaggeration of my statement. If you didn't get it, it was meant as:
"Your animal companion/familiar is magically altered animal, that would be otherwise normal for its kind"
And the magical alteration is an ongoing effect, that scales with your characters class level.
Finally, the source of the magical alteration is an ability on your character sheet (familiar/ animal companion) and not your pets sheet. (I hope that this part should be more clear now.)

[spectralphoenix]

I think the most RAW way to look at it is that the animal companion abilities are calculated in a state-based fashion. If you polymorph your wolf into a badger, it keeps the same bonuses. If you polymorph your wolf into a dire wolf, it gets the bonuses of druid of your level-7. If you polymorph it into a dragon or an animal that's too high level for you, it no longer qualifies as your animal companion (though it retains its mind and so is still probably loyal to you.) Your companionship resumes when the effect ends.

[Vaern]

An animal companion's natural armor and increased str/dex scores are not (ex), (sp), or (su). They aren't special abilities or qualities. They also aren't listed as bonuses; they're simply adjustments to the creature's base attributes. I see no reason why an animal companion should keep these adjustments through polymorph, any more than a kobold should keep its racial adjustments to strength, dex, and natural armor.

[Duke of Urrel]

"Your animal companion/familiar is magically altered animal, that would be otherwise normal for its kind" And the magical alteration is an ongoing effect, that scales with your characters class level.
Finally, the source of the magical alteration is an ability on your character sheet (familiar/ animal companion) and not your pets sheet. (I hope that this part should be more clear now.)

I won't say that this is wrong, only that it is different from what I always assumed.

I don't believe the natural armor bonus, the Strength bonus, and the Dexterity bonus of an animal companion are ongoing magical effects, because if they were, they would not function in an antimagic field. It's okay if you believe this is as it should be, but in my opinion, it shouldn't be.

But maybe these bonuses aren't the effects of ongoing magic. Maybe they are the ongoing mundane effects of having a druid as a master. Maybe they are "ongoing effects" analogous to poisoning, only good effects rather than bad.

But this has some odd consequences, too. Presumably, if you are the animal companion of a druid and the druid dies, you would have to lose your bonuses to natural armor, Strength, and Dexterity. Right?

And what about the bonus Hit Dice of an animal companion? Are these "ongoing effects" of having a druid as a master? Would an animal companion lose them, too, upon the death of its master?

*** *** ***

This isn't the way I see things, of course. I assume that a druid's animal companion, or a sorcerer's or wizard's familiar, is magical only because it was summoned and permanently altered by magic. The summoning is an effect of instantaneous magic, not permanent magic. It endows the creature with special powers that are permanent attributes, so that they do not rely upon any ongoing magic and work just fine inside antimagic fields. They also don't suddenly disappear when the creature's master dies.

But neither do they persist when the creature is polymorphed, unless the text of the polymorphing spell indicates otherwise.

[Paragon]

An animal companion's natural armor and increased str/dex scores are not (ex), (sp), or (su). They aren't special abilities or qualities. They also aren't listed as bonuses; they're simply adjustments to the creature's base attributes. I see no reason why an animal companion should keep these adjustments through polymorph, any more than a kobold should keep its racial adjustments to strength, dex, and natural armor.

Except they are "special abilities" according to my quoting both the Familiar sidebar and DMG's familiar examples previously.

[Paragon]

This isn't the way I see things, of course. I assume that a druid's animal companion, or a sorcerer's or wizard's familiar, is magical only because it was summoned and permanently altered by magic. The summoning is an effect of instantaneous magic, not permanent magic. It endows the creature with special powers that are permanent attributes, so that they do not rely upon any ongoing magic and work just fine inside antimagic fields. They also don't suddenly disappear when the creature's master dies.

But neither do they persist when the creature is polymorphed, unless the text of the polymorphing spell indicates otherwise.

What happens if you lose levels of druid going back from 3rd to second level ? Is the permanently altered AC, permanently back-altered then re-altered when you level up again ?

Then I counter, if a druid spends his days gaining/releasing AC from his list, do all the released animals have AC powers forever ?

[Vaern]

"Your animal companion/familiar is magically altered animal, that would be otherwise normal for its kind"
And the magical alteration is an ongoing effect, that scales with your characters class level.
Finally, the source of the magical alteration is an ability on your character sheet (familiar/ animal companion) and not your pets sheet. (I hope that this part should be more clear now.)

I see no evidence to support the claim that an animal companion is a magically altered animal.

Familiars are animals that become magical beasts and gain new powers upon being summoned. Many of the abilities they gain and offer their master are supernatural and spell-like. Familiars are absolutely magically altered creatures.

Animal companions are superior to others of their kind and have special powers. They don't become superior and gain special powers the way familiars do. They don't become more powerful because they became the druid's animal companion; the druid chooses them to become an animal companion because they are more powerful.
An animal companion is still animal and, aside from a few extra abilities, is described as being "completely typical for its kind." The animal companion itself is listed as an extraordinary ability, and all the abilities it gains are extraordinary. Nothing about the description or abilities implies any sort of magical, spell-like, or supernatural alteration or creation, nor is there anything magical about the abilities they gain.
The DMG reinforces this, not only clarifying that an animal companion is still an animal rather than a magical beast as a familiar or a paladin's special mount, but also saying that the animal companion retains all of its bestial instincts, can not follow complex instructions, may hesitate to attack certain types of creatures, and may even desert the character they are following if being that character's companion consistently puts them in unnatural environments. The animal itself is entirely non-magical, and the druid's ability to command their animal companion doesn't extend any magical or supernatural degree of control over it.

There is nothing, fluff or RAW, that even implies any sort of magical alteration to a druid's animal companion or magical nature to their attribute adjustments, and any inference to the contrary is strictly your own personal interpretation.


Except they are "special abilities" according to my quoting both the Familiar sidebar and DMG's familiar examples previously.

They are not "special abilities." The DMG defines a special ability as being either extraordinary, spell-like, or supernatural in nature, and the adjustments to the animal companion's attributes (and the familiar's natural armor, for that matter) are not marked as falling into any of those categories.
The animal companion table lists 6 columns: Class Level, Bonus HD, Natural Armor Adj., Str/Dex Adj., Bonus Tricks, and Special.
The abilities listed under the heading of special are special abilities. Link, share spell, evasion, etc. are all special abilities. Natural armor and ability score adjustments are not. The same applies to familiars who have a number of abilities listed under the special column, separate from their natural armor adjustment which is not an ability.

If you look at the Dragon Disciple prestige class, you'll see that under their special column they gain the abilities of "Natural armor increase" and "Ability boost." These are special abilities, which are labeled as (Ex) and are derived from class levels. This is what would be necessary if an animal companion or a familiar was to be allowed to keep its increased attributes through a polymorph spell.

[Duke of Urrel]

What happens if you lose levels of druid going back from 3rd to second level ? Is the permanently altered AC, permanently back-altered then re-altered when you level up again ?

Suppose a druid suffers energy drain and loses a class level or two. I don't believe the druid's animal companion should suffer anything as a result. I think the animal companion should stay strong, all the better to come to the aid of the weakened druid.


Then I counter, if a druid spends his days gaining/releasing AC from his list, do all the released animals have AC powers forever ?

In my opinion? Yes, they do.

I haven't actually thought about this, because it hasn't come up in any game that I have played. But it doesn't bother me that there may be some former animal companions of druids running wild, all of which still have extraordinary Hit Dice, natural armor, Strength, and Dexterity. They might be called "druid touched" Animals. They shouldn't increase their Hit Dice or extraordinary abilities any further when they no longer serve druids, though.

*** *** ***

POST-SCRIPT: My opinion of familiars and paladins' special mounts is different. These creatures (in contrast to druids' and rangers' animal companions) are continually bound to their masters by the Empathic Link, which is an ongoing effect of supernatural magic with a range of one mile. In a similar manner, a familiar continually bestows a special bonus (a skill check bonus, a saving throw bonus, or a Hit-Point bonus) upon its master. This special bonus also has a range of one mile, so I assume that it is an ongoing effect of supernatural magic, just like the Empathic Link. Moreover, I assume that it doesn't work in an antimagic field and is not affected by polymorphing.

(In contrast, the natural armor bonus, the Strength bonus, the Dexterity bonus, and the extra Hit Dice that an animal companion has are not ongoing effects of supernatural magic. They also work just fine in an antimagic field and do not fail when the druid or ranger is farther than one mile away. I assume that these special abilities are extraordinary, not supernatural.)

Since a familiar or magical mount is magically bound to its master whenever the two are no farther than one mile apart, it makes sense to me that any reduction in class level suffered by the master of a familiar or special mount should weaken the latter as well, from a distance of up to one mile away. If the familiar or special mount is farther than one mile away, it should be unaffected until it comes within one mile of its master. I assume that this sympathetic weakening, when it happens, is instantaneous, an aftershock of the same instantaneous magic that caused the master to suffer level loss. Conversely, when the master is restored to their normal class level, the familiar or special mount should also be restored, either immediately or as soon as it comes within a mile of its master.

On the other hand, it seems unnecessary to me that a familiar or a paladin's special mount should suffer the imposition of negative energy levels just because its master does. Unless these negative energy levels become permanent energy drain, the familiar or special mount should be unaffected. But when the master does suffer energy drain, the familiar or special mount should suffer accordingly.

[Gruftzwerg]

I see no evidence to support the claim that an animal companion is a magically altered animal.


While this is easy to oversee, it is still easy to prove imho:


..by performing a ceremony requiring 24 uninterrupted hours of prayer.

You pray for an animal companion, as such it is a divine ability = magical ability. This is not mundane friendship + mundane training. It's a divine magical ability.
(I guess I don't have to argue that the summoned familiar is arcane magic)

Since AMF was brought up, lets make a breakdown here. Since imho the results are interesting here:

Just because the source of the stuff on your animal companion (or familiar) is divine (or arcane) magic doesn't mean that each part of the effect has also to be magical.

Magic can also provide you with mundane stuff/effects. And here we have multiple abilities with friendly "(EX)" reminders.

Sadly not all abilities are featuring such friendly reminder.

But since they are "abilities" they still have to obey the general "Special Abilities (https://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialAbilities.htm)"-rules unless they make explicit callouts. Some of the provided effects an AC gets are marked as "EX". The ability score adjustments have no indicator if they are magically or not and thus would boil down to an DM call. Unless you take the lack of magical indicators as prove for "mundane". Imho also a RAW legal interpretation, but it not the sole legal interpretation. The rule text ain't precise enough for a definite single answer.

To give another example how a magical source can produce a mundane effect: Heroics spell can give you mundane feats (the effect), while the source of the effect is magical. But since both the effect and the target are the same, it is easy to solve in an AFM (you lose the source and thus even the mundane effect).

But for an animal companion and his druid master it would look different.
If sole the AC is in the AMF, it would lose all magical stuff it gets. While if the druid enters an AMF, the animal companion would turn back into a regular animal temporary if we go by strict RAW. (and a summoned Familiar could wink out!...)

PS: As always. This is sole my humble opinion on RAW and I don't advertise it as play advice.

[Pezzo]

Suppose a druid suffers energy drain and loses a class level or two. I don't believe the druid's animal companion should suffer anything as a result. I think the animal companion should stay strong, all the better to come to the aid of the weakened druid.

I never thought about it, but this seems to me the right intrepretation. Unlike a familiar which is "a normal animal that gains new powers and becomes a magical beast when summoned to service by a sorcerer or wizard", the animal companion is just "superior to a normal animal of its kind and has special powers". There's only one thing that is not clear to me, why do they gain HD exclusively by levelling up their master's druid class?


POST-SCRIPT: My opinion of familiars and paladins' special mounts is different. These creatures (in contrast to druids' and rangers' animal companions) are continually bound to their masters by the Empathic Link, which is an ongoing effect of supernatural magic with a range of one mile. In a similar manner, a familiar continually bestows a special bonus (a skill check bonus, a saving throw bonus, or a Hit-Point bonus) upon its master. This special bonus also has a range of one mile, so I assume that it is an ongoing effect of supernatural magic, just like the Empathic Link. Moreover, I assume that it doesn't work in an antimagic field and is not affected by polymorphing.

The paladin's mount entry has the exact same wording of the animal companion: "The paladin's mount is superior to a normal mount of its kind and has special powers". The big difference from a druid's AC would be that the special mount is a spell-like ability, if a 5th level paladin was to lose one level he would lose the means to summon his special mount. But the mount would still exist and retain all it's HDs. The emplathic link is a special ability of the special mount, it's not related to the paladin's level, it comes with it active from the factory.

[ciopo]

I feel myself mostly in agreement woth Gruftwerg here. It is clear to me that if an animal companion is released from service, it loses the AC bonuses, and the most rampant example is using awaken on your AC. Because it's "your class feature" with very specific advancements that make an AC an AC. I would be less sanguine about it if it was worded something like "use the advancing monster rules to determine XYZ", but it does not, and so to me the AC bonuses are "one layer up", if that makes any sense.

Granted, it feels most natural, in case if releasing an AC, to just keep the sheet as is, and I think I have "seen" official stat block of creatures that were "former animal companion", which I suppose could be circumstantial evidence of intent.

I suppose the thought of having an "infinite" army of awakened former animal companions is somewhat amusing

[Vaern]

You pray for an animal companion, as such it is a divine ability = magical ability. This is not mundane friendship + mundane training. It's a divine magical ability.
(I guess I don't have to argue that the summoned familiar is arcane magic)

Animal companions are gained from the Animal Companion (Ex) ability. Extraordinary abilities, as defined by the page you linked yourself, are nonmagical. Praying is not a mechanically defined term and neither implies nor indicates the use or presence of magic. Prayer in this case is just fluff used to justify the 24-hour downtime requirement on the ability to prevent druids from spamming the ability to swap out animal companions on the fly. A druid praying for his animal companion is no more magical than a commoner praying in a temple. Any inference to the contrary is strictly your own personal interpretation and is not RAW.


Just because the source of the stuff on your animal companion (or familiar) is divine (or arcane) magic doesn't mean that each part of the effect has also to be magical.

Magic can also provide you with mundane stuff/effects. And here we have multiple abilities with friendly "(EX)" reminders.

The source of the animal companion is not divine magic. The source is the druid's Animal Companion ability, which grants them their animal companion. The ability itself is extraordinary, and therefore nonmagical in nature in accordance with the rules you have provided regarding special abilities.


Sadly not all abilities are featuring such friendly reminder.

But since they are "abilities" they still have to obey the general "Special Abilities (https://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialAbilities.htm)"-rules unless they make explicit callouts. Some of the provided effects an AC gets are marked as "EX". The ability score adjustments have no indicator if they are magically or not and thus would boil down to an DM call. Unless you take the lack of magical indicators as prove for "mundane". Imho also a RAW legal interpretation, but it not the sole legal interpretation. The rule text ain't precise enough for a definite single answer.

The linked section provides a general rule that an ability not labeled as being extraordinary, spell-like, or supernatural is a natural ability that the creature has due to its physical nature.
Even if I was to concede that an animal companion's attribute adjustments were, in fact, abilities and not simply a stat adjustment (like applying a racial ability score adjustment or adjusting a creature's stats due to a size change), they would fall into this category unless an exception exists. Thus, your own evidence only further reinforces that those abilities are neither magical in nature nor the result of an ongoing magical enhancement, and they would thus be lost to polymorph.


To give another example how a magical source can produce a mundane effect: Heroics spell can give you mundane feats (the effect), while the source of the effect is magical. But since both the effect and the target are the same, it is easy to solve in an AFM (you lose the source and thus even the mundane effect).

Yes, heroics is an example of a magical source granting something an extraordinary ability.
And the animal companion class feature an example of a nonmagical source granting something an extraordinary ability.

All of the animal companion's special abilities are extraordinary. The class feature providing those abilities is extraordinary. The source of that class feature is class levels. Neither the animal companion nor the class feature that grant it can be traced back to a magical source of any kind.


If sole the AC is in the AMF, it would lose all magical stuff it gets. While if the druid enters an AMF, the animal companion would turn back into a regular animal temporary if we go by strict RAW.
If we go by strict RAW, an AMF suppresses spell, spell-like, and supernatural abilities. The animal companion has none of these things and would thus be completely unaffected by an AMF. The animal companion class feature itself is also none of these things, so the animal companion would also be completely unaffected by its druid stepping into an antimagic field.
An animal companion, other than the extra abilities it gains by being an animal companion, is described as being completely typical for its kind. So it is a regular animal inside of an AMF, but only by nature of having already been a regular animal to begin with.

[Paragon]

I'm pretty sure you got me convinced that AC and Familiar shouldn't be treated the same.

As for Special Qualities, if you'd taken the 37s necessary to just find the part I quoted from the DMG about familiars, you'd have seen that "granted abilities" are very much indeed inside the SQ line making Familiars able to be polymorphed while keeping their SQs.

I would need to find different druid NPCs and check their AC stats to statute on the AC but the Ex pretty much sells me the mundane part therefore lost in polymoph.

But I very much disagree (and the table of AC advancement does as well) that a druid losing levels would indeed see her AC losing abilities. The power of mundane friendship is scaled to the druid level in the hardware

[Asmotherion]

1. Familiar and Animal Companion (AC) are abilities on your (main) character-sheet, thus they remain unaffected when your familiar/AC changes form in any way (poly/shapechange/..)

2. A new form and new base stats doesn't change the fact that it is still your familiar/AC

3. The Familiar/AC is still targeted by your ability and thus gets still all regular buffs/abilities from your ability.

4. Familiar and AC are both single abilities that gives a bunch of stuff to your target "familiar/ac". They give multiple (!) buffs. Since you can also acquire a new familiar/ac, these effects are constantly reapplied to your pet. So even if the form change overwrites all stats, these buffs are still reapplied constantly (since the source is still on your character sheet).


@ Crake
Ask yourself the simple question if the familiar/ac stops being a familiar/AC when it changes form?
No it doesn't stop being a familiar/AC, it is still one and thus receives all the familiar stuff that your character (sheet) provides it with. It doesn't lose the empathic link, nor the stat boost, nor any other ability you give to it (e.g. Imp. Evasion).

If it wouldn't reapply, you would cancel your connection to your familiar/ac forever. Reapplying the familiar abilities constantly is the sole functional option here.

I agree with this. Familiar/AC gets a bonus for being your companion. It doesn't cease to be your companion when poly'ed. Thus, it gets the buffs.

[Gruftzwerg]

Animal companions are gained from the Animal Companion (Ex) ability. Extraordinary abilities, as defined by the page you linked yourself, are nonmagical. Praying is not a mechanically defined term and neither implies nor indicates the use or presence of magic. Prayer in this case is just fluff used to justify the 24-hour downtime requirement on the ability to prevent druids from spamming the ability to swap out animal companions on the fly. A druid praying for his animal companion is no more magical than a commoner praying in a temple. Any inference to the contrary is strictly your own personal interpretation and is not RAW.

....

Point for you. Seems you have more ranks in "Spot" than me^^

Sorry, that was an oversight somehow. But really weird since we get a "Magical Beast", but yeah..

But still doesn't change the outcome for the initial question regarding Polymorph.

Imho it is still an ongoing effect. Being "EX" doesn't matter here. It is still not "form related" and thus outside of what Polymorph is targeting.

[Vaern]

Sorry, that was an oversight somehow. But really weird since we get a "Magical Beast", but yeah..

I did also notice while browsing sample NPCs in the DMG that all of their animal companions are, in fact, listed as magical beasts rather than animals. But, the DMG also says in its section on animal companions that, "The animal is still an animal. It’s not a magical beast, as a familiar or a paladin’s mount is." which is consistent with the PHB saying that the animal companion is a typical animal besides being stronger than normal. Is there anywhere other than the sample NPCs that says that an animal companion becomes a magical beast, since the DMG's text seems to conflict with its own sample characters?

[Crake]

I agree with this. Familiar/AC gets a bonus for being your companion. It doesn't cease to be your companion when poly'ed. Thus, it gets the buffs.

I think this is where the difference of perception lies. Some people think of companion bonuses as “buffs”, an always on bonus, wheras others think of them as “adjustments”, the adjustments are made and done. Essentially, one is a permanent effect, and the other is an instantaneous effect. If you consider it a permanent effect, then it would persist through polymorph, since its “always on”, but if you consider it an instantaneous effect, then it doesnt persist through polymorph, because polymorph overrides the stats.

Personally, I think instantaneous fits best due to the nonmagical nature of the effect, it doesnt go away in an AMF, and I dont think theres any precedent for a mundane, permanent effect.

[Paragon]

Races of the Wild puts the "Animal Companion Benefits" entry in the Special Qualities of the Druid/Ranger that has an AC as well as the qualities themselves in the AC's own entry p83 then 85 which would lean toward the "they nothing but an (Ex) class feature" meaning they'd keep their bonuses under Polymorph.

[ciopo]

A side/parallel arguments occured to me :

There are other spells/feats/features that manipulate "build resources" in a way similar to what animal companion (the feature, not the creature) does. Examples are soulmelds that give feats ( the actual feats, not the benefit of X feat, important distinction) , chamaleon "floating feat" used to get open minded/expanded knowledge.

Now, I've seen that the general consensus is that "if you lose the source you lose the effect", the unshaping of the soulmeld, changing the floating feat etc. (With my opinion on that being that it's a fair/common sense ruling, but not as "written")

All this to say, why treat AC differently? Why do you -not- decrease an animal companion bonuses if the druid is level drained /dies and is raised? Other than how bothersome it would be to recalculate the sheet at the table in that moment, of course, but it seems somewhat clear to me that if a druid dies permanently, his former animal companion reverts to the average for his species

(And by extension, the AC bonuses are contingent to the druid level, not inherent to the animal)

[Gruftzwerg]

A side/parallel arguments occured to me :

There are other spells/feats/features that manipulate "build resources" in a way similar to what animal companion (the feature, not the creature) does. Examples are soulmelds that give feats ( the actual feats, not the benefit of X feat, important distinction) , chamaleon "floating feat" used to get open minded/expanded knowledge.

Now, I've seen that the general consensus is that "if you lose the source you lose the effect", the unshaping of the soulmeld, changing the floating feat etc. (With my opinion on that being that it's a fair/common sense ruling, but not as "written")

All this to say, why treat AC differently? Why do you -not- decrease an animal companion bonuses if the druid is level drained /dies and is raised? Other than how bothersome it would be to recalculate the sheet at the table in that moment, of course, but it seems somewhat clear to me that if a druid dies permanently, his former animal companion reverts to the average for his species

(And by extension, the AC bonuses are contingent to the druid level, not inherent to the animal)

That is basically what I have been saying. The AC feature is the source of the bonuses provided. Since the animal needs to be able to revert back in some scenarios, it can sole be an ongoing effect (kinda infinite duration/permanent).

When you polymorph your "AC-pet", you are targeting it and not yourself. You don't lose your AC-feature (not even if you would polymorph yourself, since it is a class feature) and the spell can't affect it any way. No matter how you look at it, it is still your animal companion and your class feature is still providing the bonuses according to your level and the "base pet" you did chose (if you did go fo any higher druid lvl animals).

[ciopo]

It kind of breaks down around the extra HD

-imagines a 15HD wolf polymirohed into a 15HD dragon to whom we then add 14HD worth of d8 hit dices, with all the conseguences of that-

That is to say, while I agree on the technicality, I would be ruling it otherwise, aka polymorph overriding AC bonuses, but that's a ruling and not the rules for me

[Crake]

Since the animal needs to be able to revert back in some scenarios, it can sole be an ongoing effect (kinda infinite duration/permanent).

Disagree. Templates provides instantaneous bonuses that are removed if you remove the template, and there are plenty of spells that have instantaneous effects while still being reversable. Just because it can be reverted/revoked, doesn't necessitate that it's an ongoing effect.

[Gruftzwerg]

Disagree. Templates provides instantaneous bonuses that are removed if you remove the template, and there are plenty of spells that have instantaneous effects while still being reversable. Just because it can be reverted/revoked, doesn't necessitate that it's an ongoing effect.

Can you provide a quote for that (templates provide instantaneous bonuses) rule? I'm not aware of it and thus I won't buy it without. (sorry)

[Vaern]

Races of the Wild puts the "Animal Companion Benefits" entry in the Special Qualities of the Druid/Ranger that has an AC as well as the qualities themselves in the AC's own entry p83 then 85 which would lean toward the "they nothing but an (Ex) class feature" meaning they'd keep their bonuses under Polymorph.

Animal Companion Benefits lists link and share spells as (Ex) abilities as special qualities granted to the character by having an animal companion. It makes no mention of any other bonuses granted by having an animal companion, nor does the companion's stat block list any abilities as being benefits of being the character's animal companion.

The animal companion's description doesn't make any mention of any of its stats or abilities coming from being an animal companion. It lists Evasion (Ex) as an ability that the animal companion has, but does not say that it comes from the character's class feature.

These are the special (Ex) features that they have. It does not list str/dex or natural armor adjustments as abilities or special qualities. They are simply added as part of the animal companion's natural stats, with no mention of their source. As previously stated, if these adjustments are abilities at all, they are not noted as being (Ex), (Sp), or (Su) in the context of special powers that an animal companion has and would therefore be natural abilities, a natural result of the creature's physical form, which would therefore be lost if its physical form changes.

[spectralphoenix]

That is basically what I have been saying. The AC feature is the source of the bonuses provided. Since the animal needs to be able to revert back in some scenarios, it can sole be an ongoing effect (kinda infinite duration/permanent).

When you polymorph your "AC-pet", you are targeting it and not yourself. You don't lose your AC-feature (not even if you would polymorph yourself, since it is a class feature) and the spell can't affect it any way. No matter how you look at it, it is still your animal companion and your class feature is still providing the bonuses according to your level and the "base pet" you did chose (if you did go fo any higher druid lvl animals).

I agree with your starting point, but not your ending point. Your AC feature specifies which kinds of creatures it can apply to, so if you transform your pet into a dragon, it no longer qualifies to be your Animal Companion while under the effects. The same is true if you try to Awaken your AC, which I believe is spelled out in the rules somewhere.

On the flip side, I can sort of see the idea that the AC's bonuses come from being an extraordinary member of its kind. This seems to raise some other questions (if you level up, do you have to go find a more extraordinary wolf somewhere?) but you could probably come up with an internally consistent interpretation for this. But then almost by definition the bonuses are lost when transformed into an ordinary member of its kind by Polymorph.

So no matter which point you start from, the answer is no.

[Gruftzwerg]

I agree with your starting point, but not your ending point. Your AC feature specifies which kinds of creatures it can apply to, so if you transform your pet into a dragon, it no longer qualifies to be your Animal Companion while under the effects. The same is true if you try to Awaken your AC, which I believe is spelled out in the rules somewhere.

On the flip side, I can sort of see the idea that the AC's bonuses come from being an extraordinary member of its kind. This seems to raise some other questions (if you level up, do you have to go find a more extraordinary wolf somewhere?) but you could probably come up with an internally consistent interpretation for this. But then almost by definition the bonuses are lost when transformed into an ordinary member of its kind by Polymorph.

So no matter which point you start from, the answer is no.

Sorry but I have to disagree with your argument, because..

The Animal Companion ability sole limits which "new" animal "pet" you can get. The stuff the class feature gives to your "pet" doesn't care if it gets later changed.

To give you a simple similar example: Enlarge Person
To first cast the spell it requires a legal humanoid target.
But its main effect doesn't care if you are still human or not. It lacks the rules to still check that.

Animal Companion is similar.
At first you have to pick a legal "pet" from a list, when you actively use the ability. But the additional stuff provided by its "passive effect" doesn't care if it is still a legal pet from that list. There is no further "check" involved for providing those extra buffs. The sole thing the passive ability is checking for is your effective druid lvl to determine its strength.

There is a lil annoying problem with Polymorphing your Animal Companion thou. And that is that the bonus feat progression is altered. Because these scale with your new forms HD + Bonus HD from your AC ability. And depending on the specific situation this may result in getting 1 more or less bonus feat than the base form of your AC. A lil bit annoying to keep track of. I did run into this issue with my last Hellspawned Rider (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?647962) TO build.

[Crake]

Can you provide a quote for that (templates provide instantaneous bonuses) rule? I'm not aware of it and thus I won't buy it without. (sorry)

A quote for what exactly? Templates aren't effects, they don't have a duration (permanent is a duration), they are simply applied. When they are removed, the changes are removed.


Animal Companion Benefits lists link and share spells as (Ex) abilities as special qualities granted to the character by having an animal companion. It makes no mention of any other bonuses granted by having an animal companion, nor does the companion's stat block list any abilities as being benefits of being the character's animal companion.

The animal companion's description doesn't make any mention of any of its stats or abilities coming from being an animal companion. It lists Evasion (Ex) as an ability that the animal companion has, but does not say that it comes from the character's class feature.

These are the special (Ex) features that they have. It does not list str/dex or natural armor adjustments as abilities or special qualities. They are simply added as part of the animal companion's natural stats, with no mention of their source. As previously stated, if these adjustments are abilities at all, they are not noted as being (Ex), (Sp), or (Su) in the context of special powers that an animal companion has and would therefore be natural abilities, a natural result of the creature's physical form, which would therefore be lost if its physical form changes.

Yup, this seems to be the most sensible reading in my opinion

[Gruftzwerg]

A quote for what exactly? Templates aren't effects, they don't have a duration (permanent is a duration), they are simply applied. When they are removed, the changes are removed.


I don't think that this is the same for the Animal Companion. Because that would cause those ability "adjustments" to stack.

Str/Dex Adj.: Add this value to the animal companion's Strength and Dexterity scores.
And that is imho definitively not the intention here. As such, it can sole be an ongoing effect. Only then can the new "adjustment" overlap with the previous "adjustment".
If it ain't an ongoing effect, there would be nothing to overlap (and thus cause the adjustments to stack).

As such I don't think the comprehension with Templates is legit here.

[Crake]

I don't think that this is the same for the Animal Companion. Because that would cause those ability "adjustments" to stack.

And that is imho definitively not the intention here. As such, it can sole be an ongoing effect. Only then can the new "adjustment" overlap with the previous "adjustment".
If it ain't an ongoing effect, there would be nothing to overlap (and thus cause the adjustments to stack).

As such I don't think the comprehension with Templates is legit here.

The bonus isn't stacking, it's scaling, that doesn't mean it needs to be continuous, just when a new condition is met (the druid gaining sufficient levels), the adjustment is then further adjusted. I don't think either of us are gonna change each other's mind on this, just agree to disagree. You're in the conitnuous camp, im in the instantaneous camp.

[Gruftzwerg]

The bonus isn't stacking, it's scaling, that doesn't mean it needs to be continuous, just when a new condition is met (the druid gaining sufficient levels), the adjustment is then further adjusted. I don't think either of us are gonna change each other's mind on this, just agree to disagree. You're in the conitnuous camp, im in the instantaneous camp.

It ain't a bonus. Compare..



Str/Dex Adj.: Add this value to the animal companion's Strength and Dexterity scores.


..with ...


4. Ability Score: If your character has just attained 4th, 8th, 12th, 16th, or 20th character level, choose one of his or her ability scores and raise it by 1 point. (It’s okay for a score to go above 18.) It’s the overall character level, not the class level, that counts for this adjustment.

The "same bonus" rule doesn't apply here, because it ain't a "bonus". Just like the "adjustments" from level up, the Adjustment the Animal Companion feature would stack, if it ain't an ongoing effect.

We can sole prevent stacking if it is an ongoing effect. Otherwise you would have to add all adjustments which becomes pretty fast broken: +1 +2 +3 +4 +5 +6 = +19

Sorry, but I don't agree that it ain't an ongoing effect. Because that causes dysfunctions imho.

[Vaern]

The "same bonus" rule doesn't apply here, because it ain't a "bonus". Just like the "adjustments" from level up, the Adjustment the Animal Companion feature would stack, if it ain't an ongoing effect.

We can sole prevent stacking if it is an ongoing effect. Otherwise you would have to add all adjustments which becomes pretty fast broken: +1 +2 +3 +4 +5 +6 = +19

Sorry, but I don't agree that it ain't an ongoing effect. Because that causes dysfunctions imho.

It's exactly like the adjustments gained from leveling up a character. Or from a race or a template, for that matter. The adjustment is being made relative to the stats of the base creature, not to the animal companion's current stats.
If the adds a point to her 14 wis at 4th level, she has a +1 adjustment over her starting stats from leveling up. If she puts a second point in wis, the adjustment to her base ability score increases to +2 over its original value. The total adjustment is +2, giving her 16 wis. The +1 she had at 4th level and the +2 she had at 8th level don't add up to give her a +3 for 17 wis.

[Gruftzwerg]

It's exactly like the adjustments gained from leveling up a character. Or from a race or a template, for that matter. The adjustment is being made relative to the stats of the base creature, not to the animal companion's current stats.
If the adds a point to her 14 wis at 4th level, she has a +1 adjustment over her starting stats from leveling up. If she puts a second point in wis, the adjustment to her base ability score increases to +2 over its original value. The total adjustment is +2, giving her 16 wis. The +1 she had at 4th level and the +2 she had at 8th level don't add up to give her a +3 for 17 wis.

How are you ending up with "+2 adjustment" if you don't stack each "+1 adjustment from level up? While you deny it, you have added/summed/stacked the adjustments. As you see, instantaneous "adjustments" add up.

And no, the AC adjustment doesn't add up to +19 (+1 +2 +3 +4 +5 +6 = +19).

So, can we agree that the Animal Companion class feature provides the pet with an ongoing "adjustment" effect?
As said, otherwise we would have to sum up all adjustments and that makes no sense to me.

[Crake]

It ain't a bonus. Compare..



..with ...



The "same bonus" rule doesn't apply here, because it ain't a "bonus". Just like the "adjustments" from level up, the Adjustment the Animal Companion feature would stack, if it ain't an ongoing effect.

We can sole prevent stacking if it is an ongoing effect. Otherwise you would have to add all adjustments which becomes pretty fast broken: +1 +2 +3 +4 +5 +6 = +19

Sorry, but I don't agree that it ain't an ongoing effect. Because that causes dysfunctions imho.

Or you could just take the sensible reading of "the +1 adjustment becomes a +2 adjustment, and is not a separate adjustment in and of itself".

Speaking of level up adjustments, that's another supporting factor for my side of the arguement I think. If you put a level up adjustment into strength, you don't maintain that while polymorphed.

[Gruftzwerg]

Or you could just take the sensible reading of "the +1 adjustment becomes a +2 adjustment, and is not a separate adjustment in and of itself".

Speaking of level up adjustments, that's another supporting factor for my side of the arguement I think. If you put a level up adjustment into strength, you don't maintain that while polymorphed.

I'm arguing that it doesn't behave like the instantaneous adjustment from the level up.

As said, imho it is an ongoing effect that causes the adjustment in the case of the AC class feature.
Otherwise you would add/sum/stack each adjustment, if it would be an instantaneous effect.

And you should decide which interpretation you want. You can't just nitpick some of each interpretation and mix em together..
The options are:

A) an instantaneous adjustment (like the ability score increase from lvlUp)
Allows to add each "adjustment" on top of the previous one, effectively stacking em. The reason is that there is no effect that you could change from e.g. +1 to +2 adjustment. The effect was instantaneous and thus has already done what it was supposed to and is long gone. You can't alter an instantaneous effect at a later point in time (sole an immediate actions at the same time can target/alter instantaneous effects). This would mean that the AC would have a final adjustment of +19 as said...

or

B) an ongoing adjustment
This would allow to readjust the previous "adjustment", since the effect is still there to be targeted and altered. Any new adjustment would just overlap the previous bonus. Your AC would get a final adjustment of +6.

Imho it's option B, since I don't buy the stacking of the adjustment to +19 (which is the conclusion of option A).
So, do you really wanna argue for an instantaneous effect and a total of +19 adjustment? Really?

[Vaern]

How are you ending up with "+2 adjustment" if you don't stack each "+1 adjustment from level up? While you deny it, you have added/summed/stacked the adjustments. As you see, instantaneous "adjustments" add up.
You're completely missing the point. The adjustments are made to the base stats of the creature, not to the animal companion's current stats. The +1 adjustment becomes a +2 as though you had leveled up and placed an ability point in those stats. You do not add the +1 to the +2.


And no, the AC adjustment doesn't add up to +19 (+1 +2 +3 +4 +5 +6 = +19).
No, but a familiar's description is worded a bit differently than the animal companion's and one could argue that this is how their AC adjustment is applied. No sensible DM would allow it, but I tossed it at the RAW thread for a laugh anyway.

[Gruftzwerg]

You're completely missing the point. The adjustments are made to the base stats of the creature, not to the animal companion's current stats. The +1 adjustment becomes a +2 as though you had leveled up and placed an ability point in those stats. You do not add the +1 to the +2.
Which point in the rules am I missing here?

Where does it say to add it to the (unaltered) "base stats of the creature"?
I don't see any indicator for this. Further this would make any Ubermount build that tries to "stack" adjustments from multiple sources dysfunctional. Unless you can present an indicator for this in the rule text, I won't buy it. Sorry.




No, but a familiar's description is worded a bit differently than the animal companion's and one could argue that this is how their AC adjustment is applied. No sensible DM would allow it, but I tossed it at the RAW thread for a laugh anyway.
I meant "Animal Companion" adjustment there. Sorry my bad. I should have known that this will be misleading..
Do you really want the Str adjustment for the animal companion to stack up to +19, because you argue that it is an instantaneous effect?
Imho this is not intended, nor healthy for game balance. And as far as I see it, it all boils down if you treat it as instantaneous effect or an ongoing effect. My bet so far goes to "ongoing effect", since anything else creates either a dysfunction or is bad game balance (or both).

[Vaern]

Where does it say to add it to the (unaltered) "base stats of the creature"?
It's literally the first sentence after the animal companion table.

Animal Companion Basics: Use the base statistics for a creature of the companion’s kind, but make the following changes.

[Gruftzwerg]

It's literally the first sentence after the animal companion table.

That is referring to the Animal Companion base that you initially get. It will always have average/basic stats for an animal of it's kind. I don't see how it is affecting the STR/DEX adjustment to always use the base stats again for each calculation.

Such an interpretation would kill any ubermount build that tries to combine e.g. Animal Companion & Special Mount and cause even dysfunctions with the normal adjustment for every 4th HD. Because those adjustments would target the creatures "base stats", they couldn't stack under your interpretation.
Why hasn't anyone complained in any Ubermount build about this, if you really thing it works like this?
I haven't seen anyone claiming that Special Mount adjustment and Animal Companion adjustment can't stack because both are targeting the base stats. Do you wanna claim that all Ubermounts relying on this concept are dysfunctional?
I never saw people claiming this, but it would be the conclusion of your interpretation.
And do you wanna argue that an Animal Companion can't stack his adjustment (from every 4HD) with the adjustment to STR/DEX, because they are always adding to the "base stats" and not the altered stats?


In my conclusion the first sentence is referring to the "base creature" you initially get and is not meant to limit each adjustment step to start from the base stats. This allows for other adjustments to apply. E.g. the adjustment from extra HD (every 4 HD) that all creatures get.


Unless someone can present a functional other interpretation, imho assuming an "ongoing effect" is the best solution here. It doesn't cause any iffy situations nor dysfunctions. It's cheesy in some cases.., yeah, but power creep is nothing new to 3.5
Any attempt to interpret it as instantaneous effect causes either broken staking (+19 adjustment..) or no stacking at all. And that seems wrong to me in both cases.
But interpreting the adjustments as "ongoing effects" doesn't have these kind of problems.

[Vaern]

Having never seen an ubermount build on here or seen anyone talking about ubermounts before, a quick google leads me to believe that the entire build hinges on the willful misreading of a class feature to give a creature abilities that it's not meant to be given. The mechanics used to make the build work are not dysfunctional; they are just wrong.

The adjustments from animal companion and special mount would stack because they are from separate sources, much like they would if they were a race's ability score's adjustments being added together with a template's adjustments to determine a creature's total racial ability score bonuses and penalties if they could be applied to the same creature, which as far as I can tell they can't.
*Edit* Disregard that last bit. I saw a couple of different builds highlighting the Halfling Outrider's mount feature as being "what makes the build work". Nothing I found actually brought attention to the Devoted Tracker feat beyond simply being present in the build, despite the fact that it is the one thing that actually makes the build possible.

The fact of the matter is that there is nothing dysfunctional about simply adjusting the creature's base stats. It's what the book says to do, it's the way most people, if not everyone, will have been doing it for decades without even thinking about it. There is nothing complicated about it except for the complications you perceive, and the only dysfunctions that exist with it are the ones you've concocted to try proving that your interpretation is the only one that can work. And it seems like every simile I make to try simplifying it for you is only giving you more ground to further twist and misinterpret the point I'm trying to make.