[3.5] Mounted Combat: What a FUBAR

[Fax Celestis]

Alright. Mounted combat sucks as written. Nonscaling mounts, hit negation has its issues, ride-by attacks are impossible (so no jousting!), and a plethora of other issues.

Are there any good global mounted combat fixes or replacements? What would you change about the system as it stands to make horseback combat functional above third or fourth level?

[shylocke]

You forgot being able to inflict x10 DMG by level 10

[Big Fau]

You forgot being able to inflict x10 DMG by level 10

That isn't a bad thing seeing as noncasters suck.

One of the biggest changes needed is it needs to work in cramped spaces, as most Paladins are going to be fighting in dungeons at some point or another. Encouraging small-sized riders is a good way to do this, and changing the squeezing mechanics would help immensely.

Edit: As-is, only the Druid, Paladin, and Ranger have any incentive to be mounted warriors and only one of those three classes actually has the support to do it (never mind that a mounted druid isn't going to be fighting outside of Wild Shape). In order to make the option more palpable you need to include some method of obtaining a scaling mount that doesn't involve jumping through hoops or taking 5 levels of Paladin. Wild Cohort doesn't cut it and Dragon Cohort is even worse.

[Telonius]

Two fixes to make it functional at all (due to geometry):

- Change the Ride-By Attack feat to:
When you are mounted and direct your mount to move, your mount may continue moving after you make your attack. This ability may also be used if you direct your mount to charge. Your mount's total movement for the round can’t exceed its speed (or double its speed, if charging). Neither you nor your mount provoke an attack of opportunity from the opponent that you attack.

- When directing your mount to make a charge, the mount is not required to make an attack at the end of the charge (though it may do so if beneficial).


A change to help the mount's survivability at higher levels:

- Add the following to the Mounted Combat feat: If a mount is targeted by a spell, or in the area of an area effect spell, the rider may attempt a Ride check (DC = the DC of the spell or effect). If the Ride check is successful, the mount may use the rider's saving throw in place of its own.

A change to fix hit negation:

- Change the wording of the Mounted Combat feat: Once per round, when your mount is targeted by any physical attack, you may attempt a DC 15 Ride check to force the attack to target you, rather than your mount. You must be aware of the attacker. This ability is ineffective against attacks that ignore miss chance (such as a Seeking arrow).

[Urpriest]

A change to fix hit negation:

- Change the wording of the Mounted Combat feat: Once per round, when your mount is targeted by any physical attack, you may attempt a DC 15 Ride check to force the attack to target you, rather than your mount. You must be aware of the attacker. This ability is ineffective against attacks that ignore miss chance (such as a Seeking arrow).

Huh? That makes the ability worse.

The problem is the 1/round thing, really. Instead of giving it a limit in rounds, I'd have it only function for mounts a certain amount below your HD. This lets you protect weak mounts, while not giving unreasonable benefits to mounts that actually scale.

[Ravens_cry]

Eh, small sized riders aren't hard. So you don't start with an 18 strength in most cases, woo. Plenty of ways to up that.

[Jeff the Green]

Lessee. There needs to be a way for riders to replace their mount's saves as well as AC and give them temporary HP. That should help a lot.

[Flickerdart]

ride-by attacks are impossible (so no jousting!)
Why not? When you're one square over (as you would be in a joust), the closest point from which you can attack the enemy is diagonal to him, which lets you continue movement.

[Telonius]

Huh? That makes the ability worse.

The problem is the 1/round thing, really. Instead of giving it a limit in rounds, I'd have it only function for mounts a certain amount below your HD. This lets you protect weak mounts, while not giving unreasonable benefits to mounts that actually scale.

Ah, sorry - from the tone it sounded like he was thinking it was too much. (Given how easy it is to pump up a skill check, compared to an attack roll, I'd assumed that was the problem, rather than the reverse).

I would be a bit careful of making it too easy to negate hits. If a Fighter (not considering Paladin here) has heavily invested in mounted combat, it ought to be hard but possible to kill the mount. Maybe make it based only on non-scaling mounts, and equal to a number of times per round equal to your iteratives? Or number of mounted combat-like feats (Mounted Combat, Ride-By, Spirited Charge, etc).

[Fouredged Sword]

I once did a build for mid levels that consisted of a halfling cleric who rode around on a rebuked air elemental, attacking with a lance, Divine power and all. It worked out great, and being able to surge of fortune on a lance charge meant never having to wish for a crit in a pinch.

[Grod_The_Giant]

Turn Mounted Combat into a sidekick-style feat like Wild Cohort, with level-appropriate benefits and the ability to train replacement mounts. Maybe scale it off your ranks in Ride.

Allow Ride-By Attack to work as per RAI.

[Snowbluff]

Why not? When you're one square over (as you would be in a joust), the closest point from which you can attack the enemy is diagonal to him, which lets you continue movement.
I concur.

Mounted Charges are still a little weird. I'll have to look this crap up again, but I think you are technically are only counted as charging, but you can still use a standard action attack...

[Person_Man]

My personal fix:

1) Ride by Attack lets you move in a strait line to the right or left of your target (not directly towards them). This movement does not provoke an attack of opportunity from your target (though it might from other creatures). You get 1 attack against your target whenever you come within your reach (or a full attack if you have Pounce). If you have Trample, your Mount also gets 1 attack (or a full attack if they have Pounce).

2) Alternatively, you can move in a strait line towards your target, but you or your Mount must have the Trample special ability or Feat (which your Mount can take without pre-reqs), and it's Trample attack(s) must be an Overrun attempt(s) (which is an attack action). As long as you OR your mount have the Improved Overrun Feat, this movement does not provoke an attack of opportunity from anyone and your target does not have the option of "stepping aside." You hit the enemy first with your Charge attack(s), then your mount attempt's it's Overrun(s). If your Mount succeeds in it's Overrun attempt(s), your target is knocked Prone and takes natural weapon damage, and then you continue moving in a strait line If it fails, your mount "rears up" and your movement stops in front of your target. (But you and your mount are not knocked Prone).

3) If you have the Mounted Combat Feat, you may use your passive Ride bonus (10 + ranks + Dex + misc) in place of your Mounts AC and Touch AC, and may make a Ride check in place of any Saving Throw. This is a free action that can be done any number of times per round. No custom magic items or crazy shenanigans to boost Ride, though I do allow Soulmelds and sane spells.

4) Powerful mounts (Dinosaurs, magical beasts, etc) can be captured and trained or purchased, or you can take the Wild Cohort Feat. I as a DM won't try to screw you out of using it, though I will probably count it towards your wealth, and toward the overall amount of slack I give you for optimization in general. (Low Tier classes get a lot of slack, high Tier classes get little).

[Flickerdart]

In terms of mounts, I like just abstracting the things, sort of like phantom steed. You want to be a mounted warrior? Ok, you are. Whenever you need a mount, there's a mount, and you get on it and are mounted. If it has cool abilities, it's because of you, and not because you picked a dragon instead of a horse.

[Telonius]

I concur.

Mounted Charges are still a little weird. I'll have to look this crap up again, but I think you are technically are only counted as charging, but you can still use a standard action attack...

The weirdness is that it's your mount that's doing the movement, therefore using the charge action. A charge requires that the creature performing the charge must attack at the end of it.

So, for example, if you're mounted on a horse and using a lance (a weapon with 10 feet of reach) on a charge straight at something, your charge would ordinarily stop as soon as you hit the enemy. But when you hit the enemy, it's still outside your horse's reach, so the horse can't attack, therefore can't charge. Same thing with Ride-By attack; the mount is never going to be able to attack the same target you're targeting.

Common sense is that this is not what the designers intended, but they never released errata to fix it.

[Darrin]

The weirdness is that it's your mount that's doing the movement, therefore using the charge action. A charge requires that the creature performing the charge must attack at the end of it.


According to the PHB/SRD, the attack is optional:

"Attacking on a Charge: After moving, you may make a single melee attack." (emphasis added)

So, assuming you fix Ride-By Attack so you can charge to the nearest square that allows you to attack and continue moving in a straight line, your mount can now charge to a point where it can't attack your target (unless it has freakishly long reach). Allowing both the rider and mount to attack and then continue moving might fix this.

Sometimes I think fixing mounted combat boils down to addressing how Pounce/multiple attacks are supposed to work for both the rider and the mount. It doesn't help that Pounce is kind of ambiguous to begin with: you get a full attack after a charge. So charge = move + single attack, THEN full attack on top of that?

The designers were extremely suspicious of move + full attack, but unfortunately none of them appeared to understand the full implications of their efforts to make this ability exceedingly rare or difficult to achieve. 3.x combat, particularly at mid/high levels, gets very static and tactically uninteresting as the combatants are punished quite heavily for trying to move + attack. Throw mounts into it, and it looks like most of the objections from the designers boil down to stuff that "feels wrong", so they don't want to allow it. A couple examples:

Knight + horse + lance: Great historical image, but breaks most concepts of "realism" if you allow the knight to make multiple attacks with the lance, or allow the horse to attack/pounce and then continue moving. The damage multiplier was supposed to make up for this, but it doesn't hold up when you compare it to all of the other ways you can buff melee damage. To enforce the "one lance attack per charge", you've got to nerf a bunch of combat options that were working just fine for non-mounted characters. Only... now you're nerfing mounted characters for no good reason, and mounted combat is now less effective than staying on foot... which kinda breaks that "realism" thing.

Single melee attack because "you have to wait until the mount gets to your enemy before attacking". This might have worked in Core-only 3.0, but once you add in all the different ways to move + full attack, then the reasoning just looks idiotic and antiquated. It also doesn't address something like, "Ok, I direct my mount to charge (free action), and then delay my turn until the mount gets there (full attack)", which ought to work in Core (if you ignore the "direct my mount" thing happening outside your turn). Another Core-only way around this: make sure your mount is intelligent (Int 3+) so it acts on its own initiative count, and delay your full attack until after it moves.

If you want to restrict multiple melee attacks for mounted characters, then you're deliberately nerfing their combat effectiveness for no good reason, and melee already had it pretty tough to begin with. If you want to fix mounted combat and make it worth investing feats in, then you need to make it at least as effective as being on the ground, if not better. You can either 1) loosen up full attacks for both the mount and rider (realism be damned), or 2) give them some benefits that make it actually advantageous to be on a mount (meaningful attack bonuses, better damage multipliers, etc.). Option #1 may break realism a bit, but may be a more level playing field. Option #2 would be difficult to pull off, considering the shear number of stuff non-mounted melee can do to make their attacks/damage/etc. more interesting.

[Flickerdart]

Another Core-only way around this: make sure your mount is intelligent (Int 3+) so it acts on its own initiative count, and delay your full attack until after it moves.
That doesn't help. If you are using the Mounted Combat special attack, your mount acts on your initiative count regardless of Intelligence. If you are not, the creature acts on its own initiative count, regardless of Intelligence.

[Darrin]

That doesn't help. If you are using the Mounted Combat special attack, your mount acts on your initiative count regardless of Intelligence. If you are not, the creature acts on its own initiative count, regardless of Intelligence.

Your mount only acts on your initiative count if you direct it. If you're not directing it or not using the Ride skill (per the DMG, you'd use Diplomacy for intelligent mounts), then it can act on it's own initiative count.

At least, I think it can. Near as I can tell, no one from WotC ever bothered to actually use the Mounted Combat rules, or they might have noticed some of the more blatant dysfunctions.

[bekeleven]

So, for example, if you're mounted on a horse and using a lance (a weapon with 10 feet of reach) on a charge straight at something, your charge would ordinarily stop as soon as you hit the enemy. But when you hit the enemy, it's still outside your horse's reach, so the horse can't attack, therefore can't charge. Same thing with Ride-By attack; the mount is never going to be able to attack the same target you're targeting.
This has a fix... but but doesn't work for small riders on medium mounts. You see, the rider can treat themselves as being on any square the mount occupies, so you can just say you're lancing from the horse's hindquarters.

[Amphetryon]

The weirdness is that it's your mount that's doing the movement, therefore using the charge action. A charge requires that the creature performing the charge must attack at the end of it.

So, for example, if you're mounted on a horse and using a lance (a weapon with 10 feet of reach) on a charge straight at something, your charge would ordinarily stop as soon as you hit the enemy. But when you hit the enemy, it's still outside your horse's reach, so the horse can't attack, therefore can't charge. Same thing with Ride-By attack; the mount is never going to be able to attack the same target you're targeting.

Common sense is that this is not what the designers intended, but they never released errata to fix it.

From an exceedingly pedantic point of view, you're never the one charging, as the rider in the above scenario, so that any references to 'at the end of' or 'during the charge' cannot apply to the rider at all.

[Flickerdart]

Your mount only acts on your initiative count if you direct it. If you're not directing it or not using the Ride skill (per the DMG, you'd use Diplomacy for intelligent mounts), then it can act on it's own initiative count.

At least, I think it can. Near as I can tell, no one from WotC ever bothered to actually use the Mounted Combat rules, or they might have noticed some of the more blatant dysfunctions.
The rules don't say if.


Your mount acts on your initiative count as you direct it.
What this statement means in English is that on your turn, the mount does what you tell it to do. If you don't tell it to do anything, it does nothing.

[Darrin]

The rules don't say if.


They don't say "must" either. Nor is "direct" explicitly defined as a game term. Nor do the rules say that the mount is incapable of acting on its own (or as the DM decides).

What the DMG does say about Intelligent mounts:

"Mounts with Intelligence scores of 5 or higher are more like NPCs than they are like traditional mounts."

You use Diplomacy to determine what the mount will or will not do. But as an NPC, they have their own agency and can act on their own initiative count.

But we're more or less just talking in circles here. The mounted combat rules really don't support either your position or mine. They are terse, vague, and open to a lot of interpretation.

[Jeff the Green]

"Mounts with Intelligence scores of 5 or higher are more like NPCs than they are like traditional mounts."

Huh. Does this mean that if the party barbarian has Int <5 and the resident halfling rides him, he can act on the halfling's initiative?

[bekeleven]

Huh. Does this mean that if the party barbarian has Int <5 and the resident halfling rides him, he can act on the halfling's initiative?

I tried this with my VoP monk my second or third game ever, but the halfling never got very into it.

[Jeff the Green]

I tried this with my VoP monk my second or third game ever, but the halfling never got very into it.

Clearly you needed to find a halfling cleric of Sune or Sharess.

[Rubik]

You see, the rider can treat themselves as being on any square the mount occupies, so you can just say you're lancing from the horse's hindquarters.This phrase has hilariously dirty connotations if you look at it from the right angle.

[bekeleven]

This phrase has hilariously dirty connotations if you look at it from the right angle.

:smallwink:

[Kane0]

I think you'll find sir, that you simply need a better horse. An amazing horse, in fact.

[Ravens_cry]

I think you'll find sir, that you simply need a better horse. An amazing horse, in fact.
Does it taste just like raisins, sir?