Who does mounted combat better, Ranger, Paladin , or Fighter?

[CyberThread]

We are not included the summon steed spell, as that breaks everything.


Who is the better mounted combantant, the paladin with a regular warhorse and the various spells he gets and benfits, the fighter with a warhorse + all the extra attacks plus possible maneuvers or spells the eldritch grants him, or the ranger beastmaster, who has to be a smaller creature to ride a medium size mount, but gets access to a mount who can do other things that a horse never could.

[Naanomi]

I'd say ranger if you are being tricky, fighter for your more generic mounted fighter. Paladin auras and group buff spells help a mount, but no more than they would help a trained dog next to you; fighter at least has bonus feats to pick up Mounted Combat at a premium. Rogue also makes a surprisingly good Mounted Combat beneficiary; free advantage and extra feat...

[Plus1Sword]

While not flashy or active, with Mounted combat giving you advantage on anything smaller than your monut higher level Champion Fighters have a 27.75% chance to crit. Every hit. At level 20 you have a 27% chance not to crit with all your attacks, with a 38% chance not to crit before then. Along with a Lance(Reach is just nifty) and the Half-Orc passive you'll be laying down some hurt.

[CyberThread]

While not flashy or active, with Mounted combat giving you advantage on anything smaller than your monut higher level Champion Fighters have a 27.75% chance to crit. Every hit. At level 20 you have a 27% chance not to crit with all your attacks, with a 38% chance not to crit before then. Along with a Lance(Reach is just nifty) and the Half-Orc passive you'll be laying down some hurt.



and when your facing higher level things that are immune to crit ? lol.


Good point but not one I'd see actual happen, never rp as high as 10.

[Plus1Sword]

and when your facing higher level things that are immune to crit ? lol.


Good point but not one I'd see actual happen, never rp as high as 10.

I haven't studied the MM in depth, but I don't actually remember any monsters that are immune to crits. A quick peruse tells me none of the Ancient Dragons are immune, nor higher level Demons, nor the Terrasque(Unless I'm just reading the MM wrong, which may very well be the case). You're more likely to find things bigger than your mount than you are to find things immune to critical hits.

[PotatoGolem]

Just out of curiosity, why are you excluding Find Steed? It's the paladin's main reason to be a contender. Paladin has Find Steed, Beastmaster (at least a small one) has his pet, Fighter is more likely to be able to have both ideal stats and the feat. Without Find Steed, Paladin is just clearly worse, but it's kind of a pointless comparison without it.

[PoeticDwarf]

We are not included the summon steed spell, as that breaks everything.


Who is the better mounted combantant, the paladin with a regular warhorse and the various spells he gets and benfits, the fighter with a warhorse + all the extra attacks plus possible maneuvers or spells the eldritch grants him, or the ranger beastmaster, who has to be a smaller creature to ride a medium size mount, but gets access to a mount who can do other things that a horse never could.

Not fighter, paladin can cast find steed for a better animal than fighter can get.
Ranger is for me the best, you don't have to be beast master but an archer can shoot from an elephant.

The beastmaster can be medium, riding a constricter snake.

[CyberThread]

Just out of curiosity, why are you excluding Find Steed? It's the paladin's main reason to be a contender. Paladin has Find Steed, Beastmaster (at least a small one) has his pet, Fighter is more likely to be able to have both ideal stats and the feat. Without Find Steed, Paladin is just clearly worse, but it's kind of a pointless comparison without it.

Because you csn summon a Damn dragon

[Flashy]

Because you csn summon a Damn dragon

Sure, but that's a heavily DM dependent corner case. Using Find Steed to summon the explicitly permitted warhorse is a reasonable thing to consider when trying to decide which class makes the best mounted fighter. Having a horse that's easy to control, benefits from spells, and that you can resummon at will is a legitimate point in the paladin's favor.

It'd be like trying to decide whether a fighter or a ranger is an inherently better archer while ignoring options like Swift Quiver.

[Steampunkette]

Also, that would have to be a dumb DM or a DM making specific allowances for setting and power level of her game.

It specifies Animal and they're in the MM appendix under that heading.

[CyberThread]

Also, that would have to be a dumb DM or a DM making specific allowances for setting and power level of her game.

It specifies Animal and they're in the MM appendix under that heading.

Do you think min/maxers care when it comes to this kind of question

[Hawkstar]

Do you think min/maxers care when it comes to this kind of question

Yes. They play by the rules.

Paladins can get magical horses or maybe bears through their spell. Fighters can ride... anything. Including dragons.

[Steampunkette]

Cyber: Min-Maxers follow the rules. You're thinking of Munchkins.

[coredump]

Also, that would have to be a dumb DM or a DM making specific allowances for setting and power level of her game.

It specifies Animal and they're in the MM appendix under that heading.

While I agree with your first part, I can't find any 'beast' or 'animal' restriction in the spell. I thought there was, but unless I am missing it.... it only refers to it as 'a steed'.

[PotatoGolem]

It just seems odd to me to judge the power level of a spell by a what a super Santa Claus-y DM might let you get away with, even though it's not in the description. I'm having trouble thinking of a low-level equivalent, but it's similar to saying that the best argument against Wish is that a super-lenient DM might allow you to wish for unlimited 9th level slots, or the power to kill anyone you oppose with just a thought, no save.

[Steampunkette]

While I agree with your first part, I can't find any 'beast' or 'animal' restriction in the spell. I thought there was, but unless I am missing it.... it only refers to it as 'a steed'.

"The steed takes on a form that you choose, such as a warhorse, a pony, a camel, an elk, or a mastiff. (Your DM might allow other animals to be summoned as steeds.)"

[Naanomi]

"The steed takes on a form that you choose, such as a warhorse, a pony, a camel, an elk, or a mastiff. (Your DM might allow other animals to be summoned as steeds.)"
Under that interpretation, power-gamers are hoping for what... Giant eagle, giant octopus, or mastodon?

[coredump]

"The steed takes on a form that you choose, such as a warhorse, a pony, a camel, an elk, or a mastiff. (Your DM might allow other animals to be summoned as steeds.)"

Thanks, I read it 5 times, and apparently skipped over that parenthetical each time.....

so much for late-night reading...

[GiantOctopodes]

Under that interpretation, power-gamers are hoping for what... Giant eagle, giant octopus, or mastodon?

Mammoth if outdoors, definitely. Maybe a Giant Spider if in constrained places, a Giant Shark if underwater, if flying I guess a Giant Eagle, sure- it's seemingly the biggest and baddest avian creature which qualifies. The bigger the mount, the more creatures you have advantage against with the Mounted Combatant feat.