Mounts, can't sell them?

67 posts / 0 new
Last post
I have purchased four mounts over the career of my fighter.  Is it true that I can't sell them?  I need to know before I spend a ton on a new one in paragon.  Please advise
Matt James Freelance Game Designer Loremaster.org

Follow me on Twitter!
They are considered mundane equipment.  (i.e. they aren't magic items and the core rules don't allow for selling non-magical stuff).  It'd proably be a possibility in a home game, but not in LFR.
Sorry WOTC, you lost me with Essentials. So where I used to buy every book that came out, now I will be very choosy about what I buy. Can we just get back to real 4e? Check out the 4e Conversion Wiki. 1. Wizards fight dirty. They hit their enemies in the NADs. -- Dragon9 2. A barbarian hits people with his axe. A warlord hits people with his barbarian. 3. Boo-freakin'-hoo, ya light-slingin' finger-wigglers. -- MrCelcius in response to the Cleric's Healer's Lore nerf
No problem, that was my understanding.  Follow-up.  Is there anything preventing me from bringing them on the adventure?  Seems silly, I know.  But, its legal?
Matt James Freelance Game Designer Loremaster.org

Follow me on Twitter!
To clarify, "bring ALL of them" ;)
Matt James Freelance Game Designer Loremaster.org

Follow me on Twitter!
No problem, that was my understanding.  Follow-up.  Is there anything preventing me from bringing them on the adventure?  Seems silly, I know.  But, its legal?



Nothing stopping you by the rules, you can even loan them out to other players to ride.

I would hope they give us rules for selling mounts and vehicles in the future otherwise it's quite silly. 
Blah blah blah
I agree.
Matt James Freelance Game Designer Loremaster.org

Follow me on Twitter!
Just remember that if you bring all of them... if you happen to be in combat the DM can be within their rights to say that the unmounted ones can't contribute without a rider.  And also remember that in the unlikely event that the DM does allow it, they would all share your pool of actions.  So wouldn't be able to do much with them.  If on the extreme off chance that a DM was smoking crack that day and allowed them to take full actions on their own, you'd have to treat them as full party members which would mean addign their levels to the party total and upping the difficulty of encounters by an appropriate amount.

IOW, it's best if youre lending them out rather than just havign them tag along. 
Sorry WOTC, you lost me with Essentials. So where I used to buy every book that came out, now I will be very choosy about what I buy. Can we just get back to real 4e? Check out the 4e Conversion Wiki. 1. Wizards fight dirty. They hit their enemies in the NADs. -- Dragon9 2. A barbarian hits people with his axe. A warlord hits people with his barbarian. 3. Boo-freakin'-hoo, ya light-slingin' finger-wigglers. -- MrCelcius in response to the Cleric's Healer's Lore nerf
Wait - if a mount is mundane equipment, and if a module were to hand one out as a reward, would taking the mount still count against your item slots?

It seems silly that you can't sell a mount (many of which are quite expensive) even if they are "mundane"
CoolWell, regardless, my Nightmare is bound to turn heads.  I'm not sure why it is legal for play considering its alignment is evil.
Matt James Freelance Game Designer Loremaster.org

Follow me on Twitter!
Wait - if a mount is mundane equipment, and if a module were to hand one out as a reward, would taking the mount still count against your item slots?

It seems silly that you can't sell a mount (many of which are quite expensive) even if they are "mundane"



I woudl suspect that takign the mount woudl use up your selection for that mod but would not count as a found item slot (much like selecting a scroll or consumable).  However, I don't know of any mounts given out as treasure so i can't say for sure if they have done such a thing.
Sorry WOTC, you lost me with Essentials. So where I used to buy every book that came out, now I will be very choosy about what I buy. Can we just get back to real 4e? Check out the 4e Conversion Wiki. 1. Wizards fight dirty. They hit their enemies in the NADs. -- Dragon9 2. A barbarian hits people with his axe. A warlord hits people with his barbarian. 3. Boo-freakin'-hoo, ya light-slingin' finger-wigglers. -- MrCelcius in response to the Cleric's Healer's Lore nerf
Wait - if a mount is mundane equipment, and if a module were to hand one out as a reward, would taking the mount still count against your item slots?

It seems silly that you can't sell a mount (many of which are quite expensive) even if they are "mundane"



I woudl suspect that takign the mount woudl use up your selection for that mod but would not count as a found item slot (much like selecting a scroll or consumable).  However, I don't know of any mounts given out as treasure so i can't say for sure if they have done such a thing.
Sorry WOTC, you lost me with Essentials. So where I used to buy every book that came out, now I will be very choosy about what I buy. Can we just get back to real 4e? Check out the 4e Conversion Wiki. 1. Wizards fight dirty. They hit their enemies in the NADs. -- Dragon9 2. A barbarian hits people with his axe. A warlord hits people with his barbarian. 3. Boo-freakin'-hoo, ya light-slingin' finger-wigglers. -- MrCelcius in response to the Cleric's Healer's Lore nerf
SPOILER






AGLA 1-5 allows you to take a Giant ant. I don't have the mod handy but I suspect is take a slot like any magic item would.

Daniel.

I think AGLA 1-5 has a mount as a reward, and it specifies that it counts as a found magic item.  It's a little frustrating that you can't sell it later.
What makes me sad - no more compiled magazines: http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/27580349/Dungeon_and_Dragon_Magazine_PDFs&post_num=24#495423645
I think AGLA 1-5 has a mount as a reward, and it specifies that it counts as a found magic item.



Correct on both counts.
"Of course [Richard] has a knife. He always has a knife. We all have knives. It's 1183, and we're barbarians!" - Eleanor of Aquitaine, "The Lion in Winter"
That...is awful.  What's mundane about Giant Ants?  Oh well, I'll just have to "buy it back" from the "guy I sold it to".
Good discussion all around.

I'll raise these additional mount-related issues in my report this week.

Question:  Since mounts that die "re-spawn" does that lessen, in any way, the "sting" of a mount that is chosen for a Magic Item Slot (that can't be sold later?)
WolfStar76 Community Advocate (SVCL) for D&D Organized Play, Avalon Hill, and the DCI/WPN LFR Community Manager DDi Guide

Created by MyFitnessPal - Free Calorie Counter

Good discussion all around.


I'll raise these additional mount-related issues in my report this week.



Question:  Since mounts that die "re-spawn" does that lessen, in any way, the "sting" of a mount that is chosen for a Magic Item Slot (that can't be sold later?)



Nah. Magic items can't die, so you wind up with the same effect: namely, they're always there at the beginning of the adventure.

Good discussion all around.


I'll raise these additional mount-related issues in my report this week.



Question:  Since mounts that die "re-spawn" does that lessen, in any way, the "sting" of a mount that is chosen for a Magic Item Slot (that can't be sold later?)



Nah. Magic items can't die, so you wind up with the same effect: namely, they're always there at the beginning of the adventure.


This.  Also, the "problem" doesn't show up until you are a few levels higher, and you want a new mount.  As with Magic Items, the mounts become too weak to really add much, so not being able to sell them (particularly since you could use an item slot on them) stings a lot.  Imagine losing your Bloodclaw weapon to a Rust Monster - at the end of the encounter, you would still have your residuum to replace it, but in 5 levels it would be too weak.
What makes me sad - no more compiled magazines: http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/27580349/Dungeon_and_Dragon_Magazine_PDFs&post_num=24#495423645
Good discussion all around.

I'll raise these additional mount-related issues in my report this week.

Question: Since mounts that die "re-spawn" does that lessen, in any way, the "sting" of a mount that is chosen for a Magic Item Slot (that can't be sold later?)

I took the Giant Ant because 20% of its purchase price is more than the extra gold for the module. Just like some of the older modules that had Ritual Scrolls that sold for more than the extra gold - at least this time, it took up an item slot.

Nah. Magic items can't die, so you wind up with the same effect: namely, they're always there at the beginning of the adventure.



Not only does it lessen the sting; I'd argue it gets rid of it altogether.

Mounts aren't magic items; they're consumables.  In core D&D, odds are good that your mount is either going to die or end up permanently separated from the party long before you get to the point of wanting to sell it.

It might suck that you can't sell your giant ant for 360 gp, but considering you would have to pay at least 500 gp to get it back when it died (and it would be even more likely to end up dead in a game where spending time killing it wasn't pointless), I think you come out far ahead.

And that is, of course, assuming that Raise Dead even works on mounts, since it's completely a DM call as to whether the creature has a soul and wants to come back from its afterlife to continuing serving you.

Mount-owners have it better than core as is.
Nah. Magic items can't die, so you wind up with the same effect: namely, they're always there at the beginning of the adventure.



Not only does it lessen the sting; I'd argue it gets rid of it altogether.

Mounts aren't magic items; they're consumables.  In core D&D, odds are good that your mount is either going to die or end up permanently separated from the party long before you get to the point of wanting to sell it.

It might suck that you can't sell your giant ant for 360 gp, but considering you would have to pay at least 500 gp to get it back when it died (and it would be even more likely to end up dead in a game where spending time killing it wasn't pointless), I think you come out far ahead.

And that is, of course, assuming that Raise Dead even works on mounts, since it's completely a DM call as to whether the creature has a soul and wants to come back from its afterlife to continuing serving you.

Mount-owners have it better than core as is.



Having played with a mount in both a home game and in LFR, I've yet to see one die.

Nobody bothers attack a mount.  If they do, then they are wasting a standard action, and dying to the party that much quicker.

The only real danger mounts face is to blast and burst effects.  I had one encounter where the mount was hit by 3 burst effects in two successive turns.  These dropped the mount from 90hp down to about 50. 

We calculated that even if the mount had not had impenetrable barding, it would have still been up after the blasts.

Okay, so I bought a Nightmare.  I will always have the ability to teleport 10 because that is one of their movement modes.  Pretty powerful, considering.  Yes, it cost me 25k gold, but really that is cheap for such an amazing ability.
Matt James Freelance Game Designer Loremaster.org

Follow me on Twitter!
Okay, so I bought a Nightmare.  I will always have the ability to teleport 10 because that is one of their movement modes.  Pretty powerful, considering.  Yes, it cost me 25k gold, but really that is cheap for such an amazing ability.



Okay, so here is what I'm wondering about teleportation and mounts.

When the mount teleports, do you get to go along?

When you are grabbed, then teleporting gets you out of the grab, which would seem to imply that teleportaion is a personal-only thing.

There is the item "Saddle of the Nightmare" - "Level: 15, Price: 25,000 gp, Item Slot: Mount,
Property: When a mount teleports, the rider on the mount can remain mounted and teleport along with the mount even if the mount’s movement doesn’t normally allow it."

Given that there are no mounts other than the Nightmare with teleport, does this mean that the saddle of the Nightmare is required if you want to teleport with your nightmare, or simply that there might be another mount sometime with teleport that specifically states that you don't get to follow on with the teleport?

Neither choice here seems particularly well thought out.  I'm just curious how you interpret it, as opposed to how it might have been intended if we ever had an inkling of designer intent.

I just assumed that when a mount moves, you move with it; as per normal when you share actions.  You do bring up a great point though.
Matt James Freelance Game Designer Loremaster.org

Follow me on Twitter!
I just assumed that when a mount moves, you move with it; as per normal when you share actions.  You do bring up a great point though.



I thought so too, but the longer I look at that stupid Saddle of the Nightmare, the more I wonder what it's for.

Either

A) it's required in order to teleport with a teleporting mount, and the rules just left that out.

or

B) There are mounts that teleport that state that you can't teleport with them, but we've never seen them, and again the rules just left that out.

or

C) It's an entirely useless item that cost 25,000gp.  (Buy two.  They're on sale.)



I think, unfortunately for Rustybeard, that the saddle is requisite for teleport.  It's hard to explain its existance otherwise. 

As usual, teleport isn't well-covered by movement rules.  Much like how it fell throught he cracks with forced movement, the rules strike me as vague here.  It's the same reason my eladrin taclord never got a mount... I teleport many times per combat, and I've assumed I would have to leave the mount behind.

The clearest indication to the rules intent seems to lie in the aforementioned saddle.  Considering how powerful teleport 10 at-will is, that makes sense.  I think the closest thing to that effect for other items is the level 28 boots of teleportation, and that only gets you your speed in squares.
So here's the question.  Now that Giant Riding Lizard has been hit with the nerf hammer, what is the "best" mount at high-heroic/low-paragon tier.

Horse or Camel - Fast.  Low survivability at 38hp.  Cheap.

Warhorse - I'm looking at the +5 damage from charge attacks that the warhorse gives you, and that's really great for a charging focused fighter.   But it's 58hp makes it on the lower end of survivability from stacked area of effect attacks.

Giant Draft Lizard - Okay, so it doesn't get to do much other than carry you around, but it carry you just about anywhere.  It has a speed of 7, which for a dwarf is an upgrade.  It has a climb speed (albeit only 2) which means that you never need to make a climb check.  And it has swamp walk, which will get you through just about any sewer without suffering movement penalties.  At 69hp, it has better survivability than the Warhorse.  Oh, and it only costs 200gp.

Dire Wolf - I really can't see taking this for any character.  Low speed, no special movement, no mount abilities that benefit the rider.  Low HP.

Dire Boar - Decent speed.  Good looking ability, but the to-hit is only +9 vs AC, so at high heroic/low-paragon, you just aren't going to hit anything often.  But if you do, you get 1d10+9, push 2 squares and knocked prone.  If only you could actually hit with it.  But you can't.  So it's really just a 8 speed mount with 85hp.

Giant Ant - 9 speed, shifts 2 squares at a time.  Low hp.  No special landwalk abilities.  Priced the same as a Giant Riding Lizard.

Giant Riding Lizard - Okay, even with the nerf hammer, it's still a decent mount.  Fast! (9 with swampwalk and 4 climb), Higher end 90hp.  Claw is +9 vs AC 1/encounter.  So once every 3-4 encounters, you will get an extra 2d6+5 damage.  It's arguably at home underground, so that +9 probably won't be affected by being indoors.  I'm still tempted to rate this as the best mount in its tier.  Possibly not the best value for the money at 1800gp.

Sea Horse - um.  No.  Has anyone ever seen an adventure where this thing is even usable?

Rage Drake - Mid HP.  More expensive than GRL.  Decent mount ability, but only if the mount is bloodied.  (Would I be tempted to bloody my own mount for the ability?  hmm.  Pre-bloody it before any combat, then keep it on the edge of life/death throughout the entire adventure just to have the +2 to attack and damage.  Arguably at home underground, though since you probably won't have it ever attack (okay, maybe a AoO situationally), that shouldn't matter.

Rhinoceros - When you charge, you get a +13 vs AC gore attack.  Not bad.  Low speed.  Decent HP.  Cost is an issue.

Elephant - Great HP.  Decent Speed.  This guy's trample attack is awesome.  Couple it with Badge of the Berserker, and you can ride through a room like you own the place.  (okay, so indoors, his stamp is +9 vs AC, so you won't actually knock anyone prone, but it looks fun).  I can see DM's having an issue with leading an elephant up or down stairs, even though squeezing rules are fairly straightforward.  And he's 3400hp.  Durn, but I want to like him more than I do.

Riding Shark - um.  Yeah, he sucks.  Moving along...

Hippogriff and Hippogriff Dreadmount - Wow.  Fly 10.  This is awesome.  64 and 66hp respectively does not say much in terms of survivability, but stick a mirriored caparison on either, and they should stick around.  The cost is really high for high-heroic/low-paragon.  I'm going with either being about the same usefulness.

So, here's my ordering of most to least useful.  I've included the actual cost in sold items (what you will have to sell at 20% value in order to buy the mount)

Least Useful                                   Cost in Sold Items
Riding Shark                                      17,000gp
Sea Horse                                          9,000gp
Horse/Camel                                       125gp
Giant Ant                                            9,000gp
Dire Wolf                                            5,000gp
Dire Boar                                            9,000gp
Rage Drake                                       13,000gp
Elephant                                           17,000gp
Rhinoceros                                        13,000gp
Warhorse                                            3,400gp
Giant Draft Lizard                                1,000gp
Giant Riding Lizard                               9,000gp
Hippogriff/Hippogriff Dreadmount      21,000gp
Most Useful

I'm really at a toss-up between the Warhorse for it's charge bonus and comparatively low cost, and the Giant Riding Lizard for it's mobility on the battlefield. 

If I were building a non-melee character, and simply wanted a workhorse for mobility to get wherever I wanted to be, I'd take the Giant Draft Lizard - hands down.  Ride up a wall to stay out of melee and cast safely. 

With a melee character, I'm tempted to recommend:

1) Buy a camel at level 1. 
2) Buy a warhorse as soon as practical for the charge attack and loan your camel to a party member. 
3) Buy the Giant Riding Lizard at around level 9/10 for the mobility when needed, use the warhorse until it either dies or you are in a situation where the terrain calls for the Giant Riding Lizard.  Loan the camel to a party member.  Oh, and take the Practiced Rider power.  Besides letting you change mounts in a hurry, you can use the minor action to dismount opposite your opponent, and use your mount to force your enemy to either attack the mount, or take an attack of opportunity from it when it comes for you.  On your turn, minor to mount, standard to attack, and minor to dismount opposite again.






Flying mounts.  The ability to fly is awesome ;)
Matt James Freelance Game Designer Loremaster.org

Follow me on Twitter!

Sea Horse - um.  No.  Has anyone ever seen an adventure where this thing is even usable?



Mild spoiler.
Show

This would have been useful in WATE1-4, though I have no idea where you would "stable" a sea horse. This is why I greatly prefer the Pearl Sea Horse (wonderous item, lvl 9, 4200 gp) for the odd occasion where it might become useful.

Sea Horse - um.  No.  Has anyone ever seen an adventure where this thing is even usable?



Mild spoiler.
Show

This would have been useful in WATE1-4, though I have no idea where you would "stable" a sea horse. This is why I greatly prefer the Pearl Sea Horse (wonderous item, lvl 9, 4200 gp) for the odd occasion where it might become useful.



I'm imagining buying two riding horses, a wagon and using a big vat to carry it around.  How you get it from the vat to the body of water and back again is beyond me.

Of course, if you are going to that much trouble, get a shark and use it for intimidate checks.  "rarrr, I'm a sharrrrk!"

Flying mounts.  The ability to fly is awesome ;)



Well, if it gets compiled into the end of month issue, there's a slightly less expensive path to flying mount. 

The current dragon has Familiar Mount as a ritual (your mount grows to large, and you can ride it).  25gp component cost.  Couple that with a familiar that flys (there's one with Fly 6(hover)) in the same article, and you can fly around all you want.


I can see DM's having an issue with leading an elephant up or down stairs, even though squeezing rules are fairly straightforward.



Forget the stairs... I'd have a problem with taking a 10-1/2' tall, 15,000 lb. mount inside anywhere except a giant cavern.  (better hope there's no rope bridges in there...)

Sorry WOTC, you lost me with Essentials. So where I used to buy every book that came out, now I will be very choosy about what I buy. Can we just get back to real 4e? Check out the 4e Conversion Wiki. 1. Wizards fight dirty. They hit their enemies in the NADs. -- Dragon9 2. A barbarian hits people with his axe. A warlord hits people with his barbarian. 3. Boo-freakin'-hoo, ya light-slingin' finger-wigglers. -- MrCelcius in response to the Cleric's Healer's Lore nerf
I can see DM's having an issue with leading an elephant up or down stairs, even though squeezing rules are fairly straightforward.



Forget the stairs... I'd have a problem with taking a 10-1/2' tall, 15,000 lb. mount inside anywhere except a giant cavern.  (better hope there's no rope bridges in there...)




Well, per the rules, a large creature is a large creature is a large creature.  And large creatures can squeeze to medium. 

I imagine that 4e elephant mounts are actually dwarf or young versions of what we think of as elephants, and hence are large instead of huge. 

I can see DM's having an issue with leading an elephant up or down stairs, even though squeezing rules are fairly straightforward.



Forget the stairs... I'd have a problem with taking a 10-1/2' tall, 15,000 lb. mount inside anywhere except a giant cavern.  (better hope there's no rope bridges in there...)




Well, per the rules, a large creature is a large creature is a large creature.  And large creatures can squeeze to medium. 

I imagine that 4e elephant mounts are actually dwarf or young versions of what we think of as elephants, and hence are large instead of huge. 



Except when they're huge. Elephants from AV are huge natural beasts. Which means you're going to have reach problems with a melee character while sitting on top of it. Also, mounts can't take Opportunity Attacks. Check DMG 46 - 47: mounts share your actions on your turn, and share your immediate action. There are no rules allowing your mount to take an opportunity attack in either the DMG or AV, so unless its somewhere else and I'm missing it, they can't do it.
I can see DM's having an issue with leading an elephant up or down stairs, even though squeezing rules are fairly straightforward.



Forget the stairs... I'd have a problem with taking a 10-1/2' tall, 15,000 lb. mount inside anywhere except a giant cavern.  (better hope there's no rope bridges in there...)




Well, per the rules, a large creature is a large creature is a large creature.  And large creatures can squeeze to medium. 

I imagine that 4e elephant mounts are actually dwarf or young versions of what we think of as elephants, and hence are large instead of huge. 



Except when they're huge. Elephants from AV are huge natural beasts. Which means you're going to have reach problems with a melee character while sitting on top of it. Also, mounts can't take Opportunity Attacks. Check DMG 46 - 47: mounts share your actions on your turn, and share your immediate action. There are no rules allowing your mount to take an opportunity attack in either the DMG or AV, so unless its somewhere else and I'm missing it, they can't do it.



OMG.  Yep the elephant is huge.  Nice catch.  Another strike against it.  It's stopped by a single 5' door.

You're right that the rules are silent on opportunity actions.  So the question is, which of several possible options should be followed.
 
1) The mount is inert, and gets no opportunity action. 
2) The mount is a creature, and all creatures get an opportunity action.
3) The opportunity action got skipped in the writing, and either the player or the mount can take the opportunity action, but not both.

The consensus around our usual table seemed to be that the player and mount should share an opportunity action, just as the other actions.

But again.  The rules are silent, and it would be great to actually get some of the holes in the mount rules filled in.

(Never having taking an opportunity action with a mount, I don't have a vested interest either way, but would simply like an actual answer at some point.)
You're right that the rules are silent on opportunity actions.  So the question is, which of several possible options should be followed.
 
1) The mount is inert, and gets no opportunity action. 
2) The mount is a creature, and all creatures get an opportunity action.
3) The opportunity action got skipped in the writing, and either the player or the mount can take the opportunity action, but not both.

The consensus around our usual table seemed to be that the player and mount should share an opportunity action, just as the other actions.

But again.  The rules are silent, and it would be great to actually get some of the holes in the mount rules filled in.

(Never having taking an opportunity action with a mount, I don't have a vested interest either way, but would simply like an actual answer at some point.)



I would think that since all other types of actions are explicitly mentioned, the rules are pretty clear. Anything else is really wishful thinking. As a parallel, look at ranger beast companions. They must be specifically ordered to take an opportunity attack, and doing so requires both the creatures opportunity action (implicitly) and the player's immediate action.

Similarly, conjurations, familiars, and summoned creatures do not receive opportunity actions unless explicitly stated.

A parallel to the "mounts are creatures" argument is "mounts are gear," and my boots don't get an opportunity action.

As mounts provide such significant tactical advantage, I wouldn't be terribly keen on giving them additional power above those explicitly given them.
You're right that the rules are silent on opportunity actions.  So the question is, which of several possible options should be followed.
 
1) The mount is inert, and gets no opportunity action. 
2) The mount is a creature, and all creatures get an opportunity action.
3) The opportunity action got skipped in the writing, and either the player or the mount can take the opportunity action, but not both.

The consensus around our usual table seemed to be that the player and mount should share an opportunity action, just as the other actions.

But again.  The rules are silent, and it would be great to actually get some of the holes in the mount rules filled in.

(Never having taking an opportunity action with a mount, I don't have a vested interest either way, but would simply like an actual answer at some point.)



I would think that since all other types of actions are explicitly mentioned, the rules are pretty clear. Anything else is really wishful thinking. As a parallel, look at ranger beast companions. They must be specifically ordered to take an opportunity attack, and doing so requires both the creatures opportunity action (implicitly) and the player's immediate action.

Similarly, conjurations, familiars, and summoned creatures do not receive opportunity actions unless explicitly stated.

A parallel to the "mounts are creatures" argument is "mounts are gear," and my boots don't get an opportunity action.

As mounts provide such significant tactical advantage, I wouldn't be terribly keen on giving them additional power above those explicitly given them.



I think the mounts are creatures argument carries a little more weight.

"You can allow the PCs and the creatures they ride to get their own sets of actions, especially if a character rides a powerful, intelligent monster such as a dragon. However, at that point you have effectively added an additional member to the party. If you do this, add an additional XP value of monsters to the encounter equal to the mounts’ XP value. When granting the PCs experience, subtract these “bonus” monsters from the XP total." - DMG pg46

The fact that mounts provoke opportunity actions, and that they can be targeted for enemy attacks places them into the creature category.

I think your comparison with the Ranger's Beast Companion is really a good one.  Given how the beast companion is commanded, and how overall the beast shares the same standard, move, and minor actions with the ranger through a set of commands, this appears to be simply a better written description of how any creature companion of a PC should work.  I would venture to guess that if the mount rules ever get revised to cover the holes, then they will end up reading very much or identically like the beast companion rules.

Pretty much an esoteric discussion though, as relatively few PC's that I've seen utilize mounts, and of those that do, the idea that one will let the mount use the opportunity action instead of the character is probably pretty small. 

Again, it would be nice to see some sort of FAQ covering animal companions that included things like opportunity actions, teleportation (both rider teleportation and beast teleportation), status as ally, use of rider's powers that allow a shift (do they allow the mount+rider a shift instead, or is the shift simply wasted?) and a host of other small issues.


OMG.  Yep the elephant is huge.  Nice catch.  Another strike against it.  It's stopped by a single 5' door.



Which was the point of my statement.  ;)  I thought you knew they were huge.

Sorry WOTC, you lost me with Essentials. So where I used to buy every book that came out, now I will be very choosy about what I buy. Can we just get back to real 4e? Check out the 4e Conversion Wiki. 1. Wizards fight dirty. They hit their enemies in the NADs. -- Dragon9 2. A barbarian hits people with his axe. A warlord hits people with his barbarian. 3. Boo-freakin'-hoo, ya light-slingin' finger-wigglers. -- MrCelcius in response to the Cleric's Healer's Lore nerf
OMG.  Yep the elephant is huge.  Nice catch.  Another strike against it.  It's stopped by a single 5' door.



Which was the point of my statement.  ;)  I thought you knew they were huge.




No.  I had assumed they were large like most of the other mounts, and were being included as some sort of smaller elephant that might fit within a dungeon.

Huge is a whole new level of unwieldy. 

I can well imagine things like riding lizards and giant ants and even the occasional hippogriff squeezing past tight spaces.  But something truly huge, no way.

I'd downgrade the elephant on my listing by quite a bit.  More useful than Sea Horse, but less useful than the Camel.  (Camel/Horse - minimal investment.  Even if it dies in encounter 2, you still get it back at the end of the adventure.  You could amost justify a string of camels being pulled along between encounters.  Not to get into the rules discussion of how you could do so within the framework.  Hmm - two mounts.  Move action - my mount carries me forward.  Standard action - order my backup mount forward. Okay.  Three mounts.  Move action my mount (A) carries me forward.  Standard action, order mount B forward.  Next turn - Standard action, order mount C forward, move action - me and mount A.  Next turn, Standard action - mount B, move action mount C.  Repeat these three turns.  You are now moving at 2/3 speed with 3 mounts.  More complicated with more, but not horribly unwieldy.  Screw it.  I'm getting an ornithopter. Smile)



I just feel obliged to mention that today, I killed a mount... I was not the DM.

The mount was taking aura from swarms and was prone and stuck in it's place and well, I really couldn't not burst 3 swarms twice just because I was going to tag the mount too... and yes, I got to off a mount!  It was kind of entertaining to me and the table.  Though it was on consecrated ground and I exercised my option as a player to just subdue it lol.

Blah blah blah
Mounts look to be a gigantic mess in campaigns like LFR.  I run into issues anytime I play outside of my standard group (i.e. conventions, game days, etc...).  Look for me at DDXP- my mounts will sure be cause for issues.  And no, I don't go out of my way to cause issues.  If a DM rules one way or another, I would never cause a stink.  I'm here to have fun and I have always enjoyed mounts in each edition. 
Matt James Freelance Game Designer Loremaster.org

Follow me on Twitter!