Leap from the Saddle + Adaptable Flanker (Worth the feats?)

[Quirken]

I've got a Ranger/Paladin/Halfling Outrider who has taken devoted tracker and leadership. So his cohort/animal companion/special mount is way cooler than he is. (Campaign is at level 17!) I'm actually RPing the mount as the main character and the rider as his assistant.

I'm looking at the Adaptable Flanker feat. Kinda crummy on its own, given it requires Combat Reflexes AND Vexing Flanker as prerequisites. (Basically, you can help flank from any square you're threatening)

Combine that with the fact my mount has sneak attack damage (Sidewinder Monk. Think monk with sneak attack and flurry of blows) and pounce...

Can this scenario play out, and is it as good as it sounds to me?


Mount charges, rider uses Leap from the Saddle (free action), lands diagonal from the mount, so he grants them both flanking. He can also make a single melee attack.
As a result, the mount's pounce gets full sneak attack damage (+5d6, with flurry of blows. +6d6 next level).
And when the monster is dead, make a Fast Mount (dc20 ride) check to saddle back up as a free action, and repeat on a different enemy.

[Jasdoif]

Can this scenario play out, and is it as good as it sounds to me?


Mount charges, rider uses Leap from the Saddle (free action), lands diagonal from the mount, so he grants them both flanking. He can also make a single melee attack.
As a result, the mount's pounce gets full sneak attack damage (+5d6, with flurry of blows. +6d6 next level).
And when the monster is dead, make a Fast Mount (dc20 ride) check to saddle back up as a free action, and repeat on a different enemy.
It could work...but at the same time, your target could decide to attack you or your mount, and then take a five-foot step to get away from the flanking.

[Quirken]

It could work...but at the same time, your target could decide to attack you or your mount, and then take a five-foot step to get away from the flanking.

True (my rider will have way fewer hitpoints and be quite a bit squishier)... but since the enemy can't five-foot until his turn, I'm guaranteed 5 attempts at sneak attack damage, regardless of what everyone else is doing, plus an extra melee hit.

The advantage I see is that you can charge and get a full attack (w/ sneak) on one turn, versus having to get the rider in position using an entire turn. If the enemy moves out of the way, you still got that sneak attack damage, and you can 5-ft accordingly as well.

And the guaranteed flanking is probably worth 3 feats, right?

[Jasdoif]

The advantage I see is that you can charge and get a full attack (w/ sneak) on one turn, versus having to get the rider in position using an entire turn.Oh, you thought you were getting it all in one turn?

That doesn't work. You can't act between the mount's movement and attack; a readied action takes place before the action that triggers it, and a charge is both the movement and attack in a single action.

[Quirken]

Oh, you thought you were getting it all in one turn?

That doesn't work. You can't act between the mount's movement and attack; a readied action takes place before the action that triggers it, and a charge is both the movement and attack in a single action.

I thought you could do free actions whenever during your turn?


Free actions consume a very small amount of time and effort. You can perform one or more free actions while taking another action normally.

If not, it's probably not worth it, unless I'm looking to charge enemies my allies are already fighting, which is a possibility, but I can probably find less feat-intensive ways to do that (like a 90 degree turn on charge)

As it stands, without the feat I could charge, attack, leap from saddle, and reposition for a flank next turn, rendering the feat tree kind of pointless, if you can't take that free action during the charge action.

[Gwendol]

As always, the rules of mounted combat are... difficult. In this case it is the mount doing the charging, so the rider using a free action dismount does not actually interfere with the full round charge action of the mount.
Also, and this is debatable, due to the wording on mounted charge, your DM may allow you to gain the +2 on the attack roll (and the -2 AC penalty) on your single attack after the dismount.


If your mount charges, you also take the AC penalty associated with a charge. If you make an attack at the end of the charge, you receive the bonus gained from the charge.

I would rule "yes" on the scenario you laid out.

[Quirken]

As always, the rules of mounted combat are... difficult. In this case it is the mount doing the charging, so the rider using a free action dismount does not actually interfere with the full round charge action of the mount.

I would rule "yes" on the scenario you laid out.

I guess the thing to take from all of this is that because mounted combat rules are a little wonky (RAW vs RAI), I need to talk to my DM :smallbiggrin: Thanks Gwendol & Jasdoif!

[Gwendol]

Oh, you thought you were getting it all in one turn?

That doesn't work. You can't act between the mount's movement and attack; a readied action takes place before the action that triggers it, and a charge is both the movement and attack in a single action.

Why not? It happens all the time in Mounted Combat. Take charging as an example: Rider uses a lance, while the mount uses its natural weapons. Rider orders the mount to charge. Now, since the rider uses a lance, he/she will strike the target at a distance of 10', does this mean the mount doesn't get to attack? Probably not. Instead the mount charges on and make its attack moments later when it has covered the additional 5'.

[Jasdoif]

I thought you could do free actions whenever during your turn?Yes, but what you're describing is you doing a free action during your mount's turn. For that, you'd need to ready the free action, and you can't interrupt the middle of a single action (like a charge) with one of those.

You can ready a standard action, a move action, or a free action. To do so, specify the action you will take and the conditions under which you will take it. Then, any time before your next action, you may take the readied action in response to that condition. The action occurs just before the action that triggers it.Emphasis mine.



Why not? It happens all the time in Mounted Combat. Take charging as an example: Rider uses a lance, while the mount uses its natural weapons. Rider orders the mount to charge. Now, since the rider uses a lance, he/she will strike the target at a distance of 10', does this mean the mount doesn't get to attack? Probably not. Instead the mount charges on and make its attack moments later when it has covered the additional 5'.The FAQ suggests otherwise:

When you make a mounted charge, must you stop once you are in melee range of your target? Or do you continue past the opponent?If you don’t have the Ride-By Attack feat, your movement for the turn you perform a charge ends when you attack. You must make the attack as soon you can.Personally, I'm pretty sure that whole thing is a result of the mounted combat rules having...low cohesion with the rest of rules (I mean, that FAQ entry suggests that the mount's movement is dictated by the rider's weapon range, adhering to one rule of charging by violating another).

Although...your lance example gives me an idea.



You're considered to share all of your mount's space while mounted...and Adaptable Flanker allows you to designate any square you threaten while adjacent to your designated target. So assuming the mount has a 5-foot melee range, and you can threaten 10 feet away with your weapon....You could grant flanking by designating the square behind your target, solely by virtue of being on your mount when your mount is adjacent to your target (since designating the square doesn't take an action, only designating the target does). Wouldn't even need to dismount.

[Gwendol]

The notion of the mount acting on its turn isn't supported. The mount acts on the riders turn, and to direct it to charge takes a move action.

Quoting the FAQ is not quoting RAW, and in this case the FAQ contradicts the rules, so... I go with the rules.

With mounted combat a certain amount of houseruling is necessary, and the suggested actions are reasonable and not in direct contradiction of the rules.

[Quirken]

You're considered to share all of your mount's space while mounted...and Adaptable Flanker allows you to designate any square you threaten while adjacent to your designated target. So assuming the mount has a 5-foot melee range, and you can threaten 10 feet away with your weapon....You could grant flanking by designating the square behind your target, solely by virtue of being on your mount when your mount is adjacent to your target (since designating the square doesn't take an action, only designating the target does). Wouldn't even need to dismount.

That's definitely one way around it, lol. My rider wouldn't be doing much in combat though. Still, good to keep in mind.

On an unrelated note, there really should be a double weapon that functions both as a reach and normal weapon, depending on which end you use. The mental image I have is a polearm with a spike in the middle. It'd probably make sense to have an attack roll penalty for the spike, but still.

[nedz]

That's definitely one way around it, lol. My rider wouldn't be doing much in combat though. Still, good to keep in mind.

On an unrelated note, there really should be a double weapon that functions both as a reach and normal weapon, depending on which end you use. The mental image I have is a polearm with a spike in the middle. It'd probably make sense to have an attack roll penalty for the spike, but still.

Spiked Chain ?

[Quirken]

Spiked Chain ?

*facepalm*

[Jasdoif]

The notion of the mount acting on its turn isn't supported. The mount acts on the riders turn, and to direct it to charge takes a move action.

Quoting the FAQ is not quoting RAW, and in this case the FAQ contradicts the rules, so... I go with the rules.Oh, man, I had forgotten just how confuddling the mounted combat rules are...I double-checked them and found this little "gem":
Your mount acts on your initiative count as you direct it. You move at its speed, but the mount uses its action to move.So, if you're making a charge on a mount, you'd be moving per the normal rules of a charge (including stopping as soon as you can attack) at the mount's speed...and the mount would move with you (since it's using its action to carry out the movement you need)...so it would have to stop there as well.

So the FAQ quoted above is indeed RAW-legal....The RAW just happens to break the game's basic conventions in a confusing manner. :smallsigh:



With mounted combat a certain amount of houseruling is necessary, and the suggested actions are reasonable and not in direct contradiction of the rules.While I can't accept a general case of allowing a readied action to interrupt the middle of an action such as a charge (I still recall vivid attempts to justify readying five-foot-steps towards charging foes to negate their attacks), I now agree that this particular scenario is perfectly reasonable to houserule in.



That's definitely one way around it, lol. My rider wouldn't be doing much in combat though. Still, good to keep in mind.

On an unrelated note, there really should be a double weapon that functions both as a reach and normal weapon, depending on which end you use. The mental image I have is a polearm with a spike in the middle. It'd probably make sense to have an attack roll penalty for the spike, but still.Well, aside from the spiked chain that's already been mentioned....While mounted, you can wield a lance (which is a reach weapon) in one hand. You could wield a non-reach weapon in your other hand; you won't incur the two-weapon fighting penalties as long as you aren't using both weapons during a full attack.