Lord of Monies wrote:The gobwins are listed seperately on that list which is designed to be clear about everything that's still there. If Cavalry meant the riders too then it would need to say what they are or else it's left as a vague thing which is not something a chief warlord should be receiving in a report. We've also seen spidews attacking other units, so when you say it would be complicated to figure that out, 1: that's Kaed's job, not yours, to decide so that helps your argument in no way, and 2: how complicated it may be is irrelevant to the fact that it happens, (Jillian's gwiffons have been seen locking their jaws on the neck of a dwagon!) so for the most accurate portrayal of erfworld rules in this game it stands to reason that mounts can also attack and even level.
Mounts can attack when so directed or on their own accord in combat, that is not in dispude. Their ability to level in no way follows.
Likewise following your logic we'd see spidews
instead of spidew-cavalry
on the Stupid Meal list you keep referring to. That would make them beasts, like dwagons, but the word 'cavalry' has a pretty definite meaning.
Reiterating, if you were correct and spidews were mentioned, they would not be listed as cavalry, but just as 'spidews. This would be more consistent with the idea that the list had on it everything that was left, if as you suggest spidews are separate units to be listed. Please bear with me: if the list, um, lists everything available separately, then spidews would be listed as spidews, and their potential mounts by their respective classes. If that were the case, it would be logical to assume to count 'cavalry' as 'beasts' even if that didn't make much sense. But that is not the case, and we have spidew-cavalry on the list along with everything else.
Also, if you examine the meaning of the word 'cavalry' closely, perhaps you'll agree that it does not normally refer to the mount that is ridden.
We have seen mounts attacking, and they probably count as 'beasts'. However ability to level is not a pre-requisite to having actions, so we could as well conclude that they cannot level and still take part in combat.
To sum it all up, maybe beasts can level, and maybe they cannot -- this could go either way. I do not take issue with the suggestion that they can, but rather with the logic used to arrive to that conclusion.