# Animal Companion Leveling



## CrazyNinjabeast (Aug 10, 2011)

I saw the table for how to level up a ranger and druid animal companion, but I didn't see where it says anything about improving the base attack bonus of your companion (I have a wolf) as a 10th level ranger my wolf is level 8 (5 + 3 improved animal companion) so anyways, what is it's base attack bonus, and does it gain animal feats and ability scores as well?


----------



## Vegepygmy (Aug 11, 2011)

Your animal companion is a standard wolf with +4 HD, +4 natural armor bonus, +2 Str and Dex, 3 bonus tricks, evasion and devotion.

A standard wolf has 2 HD, so your animal companion has 6 HD. It thus gains feats at 3 HD and 6 HD, and gets +1 to any stat (at 4 HD) in addition to the +2 Str and Dex it gets for being an improved animal companion. It also gets 4 skill points to spend. Its BAB improves from +1 to +4, and its base saves go up from +3/+3/+0 to +5/+5/+2. See Monster Manual page 290, Creature Improvement by Type.

Its size does not change, regardless of bonus HD.


----------



## Sekhmet (Aug 11, 2011)

Vegepygmy said:


> Your animal companion is a standard wolf with +4 HD, +4 natural armor bonus, +2 Str and Dex, 3 bonus tricks, evasion and devotion.
> 
> A standard wolf has 2 HD, so your animal companion has 6 HD. It thus gains feats at 3 HD and 6 HD, and gets +1 to any stat (at 4 HD) in addition to the +2 Str and Dex it gets for being an improved animal companion. It also gets 4 skill points to spend. Its BAB improves from +1 to +4, and its base saves go up from +3/+3/+0 to +5/+5/+2. See Monster Manual page 290, Creature Improvement by Type.
> 
> Its size does not change, regardless of bonus HD.




At 10th level (with Natural Bond/Improved Animal Companion), your Wolf acts as if you were an 8th level Druid (+4 HD).

 An Animal has 3/4 BAB progression (like a Cleric or a Druid). 
 His BAB is +6, not +4 as stated by Vegepygmy.
 The Wolf's Strength score (13+2 for 8th level Druid equivalent) puts the Wolf's total attack bonus at +8.
 He would have two additional stat points to place wherever you like, plus two feats (for 3rd and 6th HD). 


 It's base saves would be Fort +8, Ref +9, Will +3 (Good Fort and Ref, Poor Will, as per the Animal Type, accounting for ability score modifiers). 
 As Vegepygmy stated, the Wolf also has 4 skill points to place where ever you would like.


----------



## CrazyNinjabeast (Aug 11, 2011)

I should have closed this thread but I have no Idea how to, but as it turned out awakened animals cannot be animal companions, so at any rate I wrote him up as a cohort (12 int. and can speak common) I took the leadership feat, so he joined in with 8 HD(+2 awakened) =10HD (effectively 8 though), And I made him a dire wolf instead, I re-chose his feats, but other than that I worked up from his 6HD BA, AC, and Ability Scores.  But I still have a question regarding AC, do animals gain Nat. Armor as the level up?  

-- Thanks again for all your help


----------



## Sekhmet (Aug 11, 2011)

Good question.
No.

If they increase in size category from advancement, they'll sometimes have some extra natural armour. 
Your best bet is to train it in Warfare, which gives it Armour Proficiency, and give it magically constructed plate barding coupled with an Amulet of Natural Armour and other such AC increases.


----------



## Vegepygmy (Aug 12, 2011)

Sekhmet said:


> At 10th level (with Natural Bond/Improved Animal Companion), your Wolf acts as if you were an 8th level Druid (+4 HD).
> 
> An Animal has 3/4 BAB progression (like a Cleric or a Druid).
> His BAB is +6, not +4 as stated by Vegepygmy.



You are mistaken. If it has 3/4 BAB progression (and it does), then it would have to be 8 HD to get BAB +6...just like a cleric or druid.



			
				Sekhmet said:
			
		

> He would have two additional stat points to place wherever you like, plus two feats (for 3rd and 6th HD).



Again, you seem to be thinking the wolf has 8 HD. If it had 8 HD, it would get two +1 stat bumps (at 4 HD and 8 HD). But since it has only 6 HD, it gets only one.



			
				Sekhmet said:
			
		

> It's base saves would be Fort +8, Ref +9, Will +3 (Good Fort and Ref, Poor Will, as per the Animal Type, accounting for ability score modifiers).



*Base* saves don't include ability score modifiers. A 6 HD animal has base saves of Fort +5, Ref +5, Will +2.


----------



## Vegepygmy (Aug 12, 2011)

Sekhmet said:


> Your best bet is to train it in Warfare, which gives it Armour Proficiency, and give it magically constructed plate barding coupled with an Amulet of Natural Armour and other such AC increases.



He can't train it if it has been awakened; its Intelligence is too high. It would have to spend a feat to gain armor proficiency.


----------



## Sekhmet (Aug 12, 2011)

Vegepygmy said:


> If it had 8 HD.




You are correct, for some reason I was adding 6HD and not 4HD.



			
				Vege said:
			
		

> He can't train it if it has been awakened; its Intelligence is too high. It would have to spend a feat to gain armor proficiency.




I don't recall the rule that states animals with a higher intelligence score can no longer learn tricks, and considering the Epic Use Table for Handle Animal gives rules for teaching tricks to and rearing Magical Beasts, Vermin, and "other creatures"...


----------



## CrazyNinjabeast (Aug 12, 2011)

Doesn't matter now   but thanks a lot sekhmet! i'll look into armor and Nat. armor enchantments

[MENTION=40109]Vegepygmy[/MENTION] -- sekhmet is correct about the stats regarding animal companions, 10 lv Ranger = 5th Druid + 3 improved companion = 8HD
Secondly my I decided that Jake the Dog was awakened at Level 5, therefore he could have easily been trained to use armor prior to being awakened, but vegepygmy my be correct regarding armor proficiancies, I will ask my DM about it 

Thanks yet again, you guys here are the best


----------



## CrazyNinjabeast (Aug 12, 2011)

Can I enhance barding? or add effects such as Calling?  And also what are the AC bonuses that heavy barding grants?


----------



## Sekhmet (Aug 12, 2011)

You can have barding of any quality or enchantment (Player's Handbook, Armor Tables). You use the same modifiers as regular armour of it's type (EG: Plate Mail Barding is the same as Plate Mail, Leather Barding is the same as Leather).

Also, I was incorrect - an 8th level Druid only adds 4 HD (as stated by Vegepygmy). A 9th level Druid would add 6 HD - which means the Wolf would be a 6 HD total (2 based, 4 bonus). 

 Remember that some armour enhancements (like Calling) may work on Command Word or Use Activation, and so you need an effective intelligence and a language to use them (like your Awakened Dog does).

 Also, even without proficiency, an animal can wear Masterwork Studded Leather Barding (ac 3, dex 5) at no penalty. (Nonproficiency states that you apply the armor check penalty to all attack and damage rolls, and all strength and dexterity skills - so with no armour check penalty there is no problem.)


----------



## Vegepygmy (Aug 12, 2011)

Sekhmet said:


> I don't recall the rule that states animals with a higher intelligence score can no longer learn tricks, and considering the Epic Use Table for Handle Animal gives rules for teaching tricks to and rearing Magical Beasts, Vermin, and "other creatures"...



An animal with an Intelligence score above 2 is no longer an animal, but a magical beast; the _awaken_ spell specifically notes that an awakened animal's type changes to magical beast.

The Handle Animal skill notes that "You can use this skill on a creature with an Intelligence score of 1 or 2 that is not an animal, but the DC of any such check increases by 5."

Creatures with an Intelligence score above 2 don't learn "tricks." They are smarter than that; they can actually _think_.


----------



## Vegepygmy (Aug 12, 2011)

CrazyNinjabeast said:


> @Vegepygmy -- sekhmet is correct about the stats regarding animal companions, 10 lv Ranger = 5th Druid + 3 improved companion = 8HD



Improved Animal Companion doesn't add 3 HD to your animal companion; it adds 3 to your effective level for the animal companion class ability. Thus, a 10th-level ranger (who is normally treated as a 5th-level druid for purposes of his animal companion) with IAC is treated as an 8th-level druid.

Looking at page 36 of the Player's Handbook, you will see that an 8th-level druid with a wolf companion adds 4 (not 6) HD to the wolf, which normally has 2 HD. 2 + 4 = 6.


----------



## Sekhmet (Aug 12, 2011)

Vegepygmy said:


> An animal with an Intelligence score above 2 is no longer an animal, but a magical beast; the _awaken_ spell specifically notes that an awakened animal's type changes to magical beast.
> 
> The Handle Animal skill notes that "You can use this skill on a creature with an Intelligence score of 1 or 2 that is not an animal, but the DC of any such check increases by 5."
> 
> Creatures with an Intelligence score above 2 don't learn "tricks." They are smarter than that; they can actually _think_.




Epic Skill Use: 
Rear Magical Beast - Time 1 year - DC 30+HD of Magical Beast
Train Magical Beast - Time 2 Months - DC 40+HD of Magical Beast

At level 10, reaching DC46 would not be terribly difficult (would only need a +13 modifier).

Also, the SPECIAL listing does not suggest that creatures with intelligence scores higher than 2 cannot learn tricks, just the for any creature with a one or a two can be taught with an additional +5 DC.


----------



## CrazyNinjabeast (Aug 12, 2011)

I do not have to use handle animal 

I attracted him as a cohort, therefore he wants to listen to me, it would be like making handle people checks for a normal human cohort, it makes no sense 

P.S. still don't understand the animal companion HD thing, but that's ok, it doesn't matter much anymore xD


----------



## Sekhmet (Aug 12, 2011)

CrazyNinjabeast said:


> I do not have to use handle animal
> 
> I attracted him as a cohort, therefore he wants to listen to me, it would be like making handle people checks for a normal human cohort, it makes no sense
> 
> P.S. still don't understand the animal companion HD thing, but that's ok, it doesn't matter much anymore xD




Think about it this way. 
A wolf has 2 HD, right? 

An 8th level Druid adds 4 HD to it's animal companion. (As per the table in the Player's Handbook). 

This makes the Wolf effectively 6 HD.

 Animal Companions don't stay the same "level" or HD as their friends (the Druid), they just get small bonuses from time to time.


----------



## CrazyNinjabeast (Aug 12, 2011)

I understand! I though Druid leveled up with their companions, and rangers leveled up every other level 

Anyways, Jake the Dog is Finished, you Guys should look him over just to make sure I did it right 


Cohort: Jake the Dog

HP: 37 + 8D10 (55 + 8D10 enlarged) (Magical Beats have a D10)
BA: +7 
AC: 19 ( 21) (+3 nat for huge sized, -1 dex)
Grapple: +18 ( +26) (+4 Str. +4 size)
Str: 25 (33) (+8 size)
Con: 17 (21) (+4 size)
Int: 12
Cha: 12
Wis: 12
Dex: 15 (13) (-2 size)

Attack: Bite +14 melee (2D6 +10) (Bite +18 melee (3D6 +14))

Fort: 9 (10)
Reflex: 8 (7)
Will: 7

Skills:

Hide: 6
Listen: 9
Move Silently: 6
Spot: 9
Survival: 2 (+4 if by scent)

Special Abilities:
Trip: successful bite allows free trip (+12 modifier) (+16)

Special Qualities:
Low-Light Vision, Dark vision 60ft, Scent

Feats:
Weapon Focus (Bite), Improved Natural Armor, Improved Natural Attack

Gear:
Ring of Reduce Animal
Ring of Enlarge Animal
+2 Leather armor (Calling) +5 AC

Languages:
Dog???
Common


----------



## Vegepygmy (Aug 12, 2011)

Sekhmet said:


> Epic Skill Use:
> Rear Magical Beast - Time 1 year - DC 30+HD of Magical Beast
> Train Magical Beast - Time 2 Months - DC 40+HD of Magical Beast
> 
> At level 10, reaching DC46 would not be terribly difficult (would only need a +13 modifier).



The Epic Level Handbook is a 3.0 supplement. The 3.0 Handle Animal skill did not allow for the rearing or training of non-animals (thus the need for special epic rules allowing it). In 3.5, training non-animals is not an epic use of the skill, it's just a +5 to the DC.

(If you prefer to use 3.0 rules, that's fine, but we can stop discussing the matter, because I'm only talking about the 3.5 rules.)



			
				Sekhmet said:
			
		

> Also, the SPECIAL listing does not suggest that creatures with intelligence scores higher than 2 cannot learn tricks, just the for any creature with a one or a two can be taught with an additional +5 DC.



It absolutely _does_ suggest that animals with Intelligence scores above 2 cannot be trained using the Handle Animal skill, since the Handle Animal skill can normally _only_ be used to train animals, and the only _exception_ to that is non-animals with an Intelligence score of 1 or 2.

If you could use Handle Animal to train non-animals with Intelligence scores above 2, there would be no need for the language _specifically limiting it_ to creatures with an Intelligence score of 1 or 2. The skill description would simply read: "You can use this skill on a creature that is not an animal, but the DC of any such check increases by 5." It doesn't say that because the skill is intended _only_ for use on creatures of animal-level intelligence (i.e., Intelligence scores of 1 or 2).


----------



## CrazyNinjabeast (Aug 12, 2011)

[MENTION=40109]Vegepygmy[/MENTION] -- thanks for nothing ^_^

I need advise regarding Cohorts now please


----------



## Sekhmet (Aug 12, 2011)

CrazyNinjabeast said:


> [MENTION=40109]Vegepygmy[/MENTION] -- thanks for nothing ^_^
> 
> I need advise regarding Cohorts now please




"Dog" is not really a language.
It looks fine from a cursory glance.



			
				Vegepygmy said:
			
		

> 3.0, Handle Animal, Intelligence



In the 3.5 ELH *update*(which makes it a valid 3.5e book), the use of Handle Animal was not addressed - which means that it was carried over into 3.5e as written.

 The wording in Handle Animal does not have any need to discriminate against Animals of higher than 2 Intelligence, because at the time of writing there were none. 
 However, you're suggesting that any animal raised above 2 intelligence in any even semipermanent fashion would be unable to learn a new trick (rather than having it's available tricks known increased by three, as the formula given provides for). 

 Why does a Wolf that has been Wished one point of Intelligence become unable to learn a trick?
 It does not, and there is no rule that says that. 

 Even changing the type to Magical Beast (through whatever means) does not mean that it is going to forget the tricks that it learned or be unable to learn new tricks, although it might think them slightly demeaning.


----------



## Vegepygmy (Aug 13, 2011)

Sekhmet said:


> In the 3.5 ELH *update*(which makes it a valid 3.5e book), the use of Handle Animal was not addressed - which means that it was carried over into 3.5e as written.



Bah. "The purpose of this booklet is not to provide a comprehensive list of everything that has changed with the 3.5 revision. The changes are too large in number and varied in scope to be able to provide an all-inclusive inventory."



			
				Sekmet said:
			
		

> However, you're suggesting that any animal raised above 2 intelligence in any even semipermanent fashion would be unable to learn a new trick (rather than having it's available tricks known increased by three, as the formula given provides for).



I'm saying that a creature with Intelligence above 2 doesn't _need_ to learn "tricks," because it can actually _think and reason_ (if only poorly). The terminology simply doesn't apply to them; it's like asking "what does the color blue sound like?"

_Your_ Intelligence is above 2; how many "tricks" do _you_ know (or could I teach you)? Can I make you perform them by whistling, snapping my fingers, or giving you verbal commands ("Sit! Beg! Roll over! Good boy!")? *No,* because you're _smarter_ than that. If I want you to do something, I have to "use my words" and _persuade_ you to do it. (Remember, any creature with an Intelligence score of 3 or higher understands at least one language.)


----------



## Sekhmet (Aug 14, 2011)

Actually, positive reinforcement works perfectly well on humans (average intelligence 10). You can train people the same way that you train animals - treats are for good behaviour. 
Over the course of several weeks, modification of their behaviour is evident. 
 Everything from teaching them to fetch your slippers when you shiver and rub your feet together to speaking in a lower register at all times.

 Pavlovian behavioural modification works on just about everything with a brain and pleasure centers.


----------



## Vegepygmy (Aug 14, 2011)

Sekhmet said:


> Actually, positive reinforcement works perfectly well on humans (average intelligence 10). You can train people the same way that you train animals - treats are for good behaviour.



Then I'll ask it again: how many "tricks" could I teach _you?_


----------



## Talonblaze (Aug 14, 2011)

Vegepygmy said:


> Then I'll ask it again: how many "tricks" could I teach _you?_




Not all magical beasts are capable of understanding all languages even if they have a score of 3. And not all magical beasts have an intelligence score of 3 or higher either. (Such as the basilisk for example. Which also has no language even in it's abyssal form).

So there would have to be some other form of communication. This would be done in a series of oriented commands known as 'tricks'.

It's also been noted in several books (especially for rearing) that Handle Animal is not just for the 'animal' base. If you are trying to raise or rear a dragon for instance, Handle Animal is required despite their intelligence, which is clearly noted in the Draconomicon. Now if one of the smartest creatures in the game is affected by the Handle Animal skill in some fashion, lower ones especially would fall under this category.

All 3.5 material.


----------



## Sekhmet (Aug 14, 2011)

Vegepygmy said:


> Then I'll ask it again: how many "tricks" could I teach _you?_




I'm sure my old Drill Sergeant would say "not too damn many."


----------



## Vegepygmy (Aug 15, 2011)

Talonblaze said:


> Not all magical beasts are capable of understanding all languages even if they have a score of 3.



The ability to understand _all_ languages is irrelevant. I have no idea why you're even bringing it up.



			
				Talonblaze said:
			
		

> And not all magical beasts have an intelligence score of 3 or higher either. (Such as the basilisk for example. Which also has no language even in it's abyssal form).



I hope I've made it clear that such magical beasts would be valid subjects for the Handle Animal skill. You know, non-animals with an Intelligence score of 1 or 2 and all that...?



			
				Talonblaze said:
			
		

> So there would have to be some other form of communication. This would be done in a series of oriented commands known as 'tricks'.



I wouldn't call the Handle Animal skill a "form of communication." I imagine it working just like me training my dog (in real life) to come when I call his name, or whistle in a certain way, etc. If you think me whistling and my dog coming to me is us "communicating," okay. Maybe it is. But what's your point?



			
				Talonblaze said:
			
		

> It's also been noted in several books (especially for rearing) that Handle Animal is not just for the 'animal' base. If you are trying to raise or rear a dragon for instance, Handle Animal is required despite their intelligence, which is clearly noted in the Draconomicon. Now if one of the smartest creatures in the game is affected by the Handle Animal skill in some fashion, lower ones especially would fall under this category.
> 
> All 3.5 material.



The _Draconomicon_ helps prove my case, actually.

Note that before any kind of Handle Animal check can be made, you must first succeed on a _Diplomacy_ check. That alone makes it clear that what is happening is something different than simply training some poor, dumb beast to do what you want. There is (as I alluded to above) some kind of _persuasion_ that has to occur; the dragon has to _agree_ to be trained.

More importantly, the fact that the _Draconomicon_ says the Handle Animal skill should be used _even though_ dragons are intelligent actually acknowledges that you don't normally use Handle Animal that way; it's a specific exception to a general rule.


----------



## Talonblaze (Aug 15, 2011)

Vegepygmy said:
			
		

> The ability to understand _all_ languages is irrelevant. I have no idea why you're even bringing it up.




Because if there is no common language how can even a smart creature understand? If an Orc in their language told a Commoner to move, do you think they would understand? They would have to most likely use force or body gestures until they understand what it means. Similar is same for animals. The difference is how fast or capable of picking these things up is.



			
				Vegepygmy said:
			
		

> I hope I've made it clear that such magical beasts would be valid subjects for the Handle Animal skill. You know, non-animals with an Intelligence score of 1 or 2 and all that...?




Just wanted to make it clear that not all magical beasts are intelligent as people think.



			
				Vegepygmy said:
			
		

> I wouldn't call the Handle Animal skill a "form of communication." I imagine it working just like me training my dog (in real life) to come when I call his name, or whistle in a certain way, etc. If you think me whistling and my dog coming to me is us "communicating," okay. Maybe it is. But what's your point?




That is exactly my point, as noted above. Despite there being no relevant language between you two, the dog has come to associate what commands are related to what tasks. Body language is a form of communication after all.



			
				Vegepygmy said:
			
		

> The _Draconomicon_ helps prove my case, actually.
> 
> Note that before any kind of Handle Animal check can be made, you must first succeed on a _Diplomacy_ check. That alone makes it clear that what is happening is something different than simply training some poor, dumb beast to do what you want. There is (as I alluded to above) some kind of _persuasion_ that has to occur; the dragon has to _agree_ to be trained.
> 
> More importantly, the fact that the _Draconomicon_ says the Handle Animal skill should be used _even though_ dragons are intelligent actually acknowledges that you don't normally use Handle Animal that way; it's a specific exception to a general rule.




Such would be true if it was the only creature to do so. The Diplomacy is merely to stop the creature from being hostile to you. The Pegasus is another fine example, since it can't even speak back even with understanding. But still requires Handle Animal for training and all that jazz and specifically notes that Diplomacy is only to affect their attitude towards you. But other than that has no bearing on the training process.

If a dog didn't want to be trained (such as negative reinforcement) it will express that and be hostile more likely than not, versus the dog agreeing to such usually with obeying the commands. The difference is as a base animal, the secondary influence is negated with a single Handle Animal check. The actual process isn't different besides that one extra check.


----------



## Vegepygmy (Aug 15, 2011)

Talonblaze said:


> Vegepygmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Not being able to understand _all_ languages is not the same as being unable to understand _any_ language. All creatures with an Intelligence of 3 or greater understand at least one language (usually Common). Monster Manual, page 7. But yeah, if you want to communicate with a creature that understands only Elven (for example), you may have to learn Elven. What's that got to do with anything?



			
				Talonblaze said:
			
		

> That is exactly my point, as noted above. Despite there being no relevant language between you two, the dog has come to associate what commands are related to what tasks. Body language is a form of communication after all.



Right. And the Handle Animal skill allows one to train an animal to "communicate" (or at least receive communications) in such crude ways.

Have you understood something I've said as _requiring_ a "relevant language" to be shared by both an animal and its trainer? If so, you've completely misunderstood me.



			
				Talonblaze said:
			
		

> Such would be true if it was the only creature to do so. The Diplomacy is merely to stop the creature from being hostile to you.



That is incorrect. _All_ mounts with an Intelligence score of 5 or greater must be negotiated with (using Diplomacy) to determine what the mount will and will not do. Dungeon Master's Guide, page 205: "Once the character and mount _reach an agreement,_ they still must train together."*



			
				Talonblaze said:
			
		

> The Pegasus is another fine example, since it can't even speak back even with understanding. But still requires Handle Animal for training and all that jazz and specifically notes that Diplomacy is only to affect their attitude towards you.



It specifically notes no such thing. What the Monster Manual says is: "To be trained, a pegasus must have a friendly attitude toward the trainer (this can be achieved through a successful Diplomacy check)." Nowhere does it say that the required Diplomacy check is _only_ to affect the pegasus's attitude; it simply says that a pegasus won't agree to be trained _at all_ if it doesn't like you.



			
				Talonblaze said:
			
		

> If a dog didn't want to be trained (such as negative reinforcement)...



I'm not sure you understand what "negative reinforcement" actually is.



			
				Talonblaze said:
			
		

> ...it will express that and be hostile more likely than not, versus the dog agreeing to such usually with obeying the commands.



No dog _wants_ to be trained; they're too stupid to understand the concept. That's why you have to _train_ them; because you can't _persuade_ them to do what you want.

* It is worth mentioning, however, that this rule could be interpreted to support Sekhmet's position that such a creature can be "war-trained." Of course, that still wouldn't make the creature proficient in any kind of armor, since only animals gain armor proficiencies by virtue of being "trained for war," and any animal whose Intelligence increases above 2 is no longer an animal, but a magical beast.


----------



## Talonblaze (Aug 15, 2011)

Vegepygmy said:
			
		

> Not being able to understand _all_ languages is not the same as being unable to understand _any_ language. All creatures with an Intelligence of 3 or greater understand at least one language (usually Common). Monster Manual, page 7. But yeah, if you want to communicate with a creature that understands only Elven (for example), you may have to learn Elven. What's that got to do with anything?




Mostly the problem of conveying what is required of the task. Granted the MM assumes its Common as the default with an Int score of 3 or more (which can be helpful or hindering depending on the race). But let's say in the event you don't have 'Elven' in this instance. How are you, going to convince a beast that only knows such to do as you command? Be it in a peaceful manner or not. Diplomacy is _almost_ useless without shared languages.



			
				Vegepygmy said:
			
		

> Right. And the Handle Animal skill allows one to train an animal to "communicate" (or at least receive communications) in such crude ways.
> 
> Have you understood something I've said as _requiring_ a "relevant language" to be shared by both an animal and its trainer? If so, you've completely misunderstood me.




Ah but magical beasts, dragons and other forms of creatures aren't animals. (By most's definition in terms of creature type), why would one require a Handle Animal to train with them? Why not just use Diplomacy or other social skill to interact with them since they are regarded as a higher form? Just because it all of a sudden CAN speak a language what does that change exactly? A parrot can speak, but its Int remains at 2. 



			
				Vegepygmy said:
			
		

> That is incorrect. _All_ mounts with an Intelligence score of 5 or greater must be negotiated with (using Diplomacy) to determine what the mount will and will not do. Dungeon Master's Guide, page 205: "Once the character and mount _reach an agreement,_ they still must train together."*




Now I wonder why it notes Int 5 or more instead of 3 or more, since apparently that is the mental capacity to speak or understand a language is it not? Isn't an Int of 3 just as capable? Why would they rule out such capabilities? An Int of 3 should be enough for an animal to understand and agree to what its being asked to do, no?



			
				Vegepygmy said:
			
		

> It specifically notes no such thing. What the Monster Manual says is: "To be trained, a pegasus must have a friendly attitude toward the trainer (this can be achieved through a successful Diplomacy check)." Nowhere does it say that the required Diplomacy check is _only_ to affect the pegasus's attitude; it simply says that a pegasus won't agree to be trained _at all_ if it doesn't like you.




That's exactly all Diplomacy does, especially in that RAW situation for the Pegasus. The Diplomacy is to make it friendly, rather than indifferent or hostile. Otherwise training it is pointless. The same is for any hostile creature. It has to be friendly before it can train, regardless of how its done.



			
				Vegepygmy said:
			
		

> No dog _wants_ to be trained; they're too stupid to understand the concept. That's why you have to _train_ them; because you can't _persuade_ them to do what you want.
> 
> * It is worth mentioning, however, that this rule could be interpreted to support Sekhmet's position that such a creature can be "war-trained." Of course, that still wouldn't make the creature proficient in any kind of armor, since only animals gain armor proficiencies by virtue of being "trained for war," and any animal whose Intelligence increases above 2 is no longer an animal, but a magical beast.




You just have to persuade them in a different manner. Not necessarily the same traditional vocal methods. 

As interesting as it is, the MM says magical beasts are 'like' animals but 'can' have an intelligence higher than 2. However, an animal that has an Int of 3 doesn't just suddenly get improved attack, better hit die, abilities and whatnot out of its yahoo for something a parrot can do.

Albiet, the Int score would put them over the known standard limit of 'tricks' I don't necessarily think that all of a sudden puts them out of Animal Companion range due to such. Otherwise every enemy wizard would 'curse' a Druid's companion with intelligence so they lose all their special buffs they no longer qualify for.


----------



## Vegepygmy (Aug 16, 2011)

Talonblaze said:


> Mostly the problem of conveying what is required of the task. Granted the MM assumes its Common as the default with an Int score of 3 or more (which can be helpful or hindering depending on the race). But let's say in the event you don't have 'Elven' in this instance. How are you, going to convince a beast that only knows such to do as you command?



Yes, exactly. That's the question in _every_ "role-play encounter." How are you going to persuade the other person to do what you want them to do? And yes, the difficulty of that task increases if there are barriers to communication.

_This has nothing to do with training dumb animals;_ you're just talking about interacting with "people" (which, in a fantasy world, may include all kinds of "people" it normally wouldn't, like dragons and pegasi).



			
				Talonblaze said:
			
		

> Ah but magical beasts, dragons and other forms of creatures aren't animals. (By most's definition in terms of creature type), why would one require a Handle Animal to train with them? Why not just use Diplomacy or other social skill to interact with them since they are regarded as a higher form? Just because it all of a sudden CAN speak a language what does that change exactly? A parrot can speak, but its Int remains at 2.



I'll admit it: I'm completely lost. I have no idea what point you're trying to make here, or what question you're really asking me. Parrots (in real life) don't actually speak; they just mimic sounds. If there are stats for parrots in D&D somewhere, point me to them and maybe I'll learn something.



			
				Talonblaze said:
			
		

> Now I wonder why it notes Int 5 or more instead of 3 or more, since apparently that is the mental capacity to speak or understand a language is it not? Isn't an Int of 3 just as capable? Why would they rule out such capabilities? An Int of 3 should be enough for an animal to understand and agree to what its being asked to do, no?



Those are all good questions, and I have no idea what the DMG authors were thinking, so I can't answer them.



			
				Talonblaze said:
			
		

> However, an animal that has an Int of 3 doesn't just suddenly get improved attack, better hit die, abilities and whatnot out of its yahoo for something a parrot can do.



Its type, however, _does_ change to magical beast.


----------



## Talonblaze (Aug 16, 2011)

Vegepygmy said:
			
		

> _This has nothing to do with training dumb animals;_ you're just talking about interacting with "people" (which, in a fantasy world, may include all kinds of "people" it normally wouldn't, like dragons and pegasi).
> 
> I'll admit it: I'm completely lost. I have no idea what point you're trying to make here, or what question you're really asking me. Parrots (in real life) don't actually speak; they just mimic sounds. If there are stats for parrots in D&D somewhere, point me to them and maybe I'll learn something.




Mostly the point of, if dragons and other beasts were 'people' why are you unable to use Handle Animal on humanoids or such? Why are those kinds an exception? They are smart beings are they not? Handle Animal should be useless in any way shape or form just like it would be trying to use it on a Commoner.
Although parrots* 'mimic' so do humans. We just mimic what we are taught. It wouldn't be unlikely that if a parrot wanted food they could be trained to vocalize such just like a dog showing it needs out by sitting near the door. (*If I find the stats, you'll be the first to know.)



			
				Vegepygmy said:
			
		

> Those are all good questions, and I have no idea what the DMG authors were thinking, so I can't answer them.




Well this unfortunately poses a problem for both of us. They used to have the Q&A section of the site but its no longer available to be used for 3.5 stuff if I recall. Which sadly this point could be the key factor for either side.



			
				Vegepygmy said:
			
		

> Its type, however, _does_ change to magical beast.




Which does what exactly? Just change a type? Because as far as I read, the stats for a magical beast are tied in with the type. Which greatly improve the creature. I highly doubt a +1 stat point would change that. Surprised the issue hasn't come up for companions before, with such an issue it would be pretty notable for any animal companion character. (Also begs me to wonder what happened if you cast Tongues on an animal, what would happen?)

-------------------------------------------------

EDIT: Upon browsing Wizard's older archives, most notably their FAQ section of the rules I found this:


			
				WotC Sage said:
			
		

> *Can an animal increase its Intelligence when it gains an ability score increase at every 4 Hit Dice? If its Int increases beyond 2, does it become a magical beast?*
> _The Sage recommends that the DM not allow an animal (or any nonintelligent creature) to increase its Intelligence via HD advancement except as a very special case. Even the biggest
> 18-HD viper in the jungle shouldn’t be able to have an Intelligence of 4.
> Regardless, an animal’s type doesn’t change simply due to an Intelligence increase_ _._


----------

