Clarification on Mounted Combat

[Crushgrip]

Hi all,

Not to beat this horse to death (pun intended) but I am a bit confused on the use of a controlled mount in combat. I know that in the Dragon Talk: Sage Advice podcast at time 21:00 Jeremy Crawford states that the controlled mount and the character share the same turn but that the mount gets a move as well as an action (but limited to Dash, Disengage or Dodge) and the character also gets its move and action. This does not make sense to me and the reason is time. Let me explain.

First, lets look at the foundation template for combat. As described on page 189 of the PHB we have combat broken up into a round, which represents a time frame of 6 seconds in which all of the combatants each takes a turn. Initiative is rolled and an order is determined for each combatants turn within the 6 seconds of time. It is my understanding that each combatants turn is consuming that entire 6 seconds of that round and from a time/distance perspective, that makes sense. For example, we have a 5th level paladin that has a movement of 30' and 2 attacks as an action. Let's say the pally wants to move 30' and then attack. Assuming that it takes half that time to move and the other half to get in the two attacks we would have a movement speed of 30 feet over 3 seconds (10 feet per second average speed) which is totally reasonable jogging rate for a human. Even though we have an initiative order to the combat, all of the combatants moves and actions are taking place over that 6 seconds in time. This is where I get confused.

Let's take a look at the mount separately. Assume our pally is riding their warhorse that has a speed of 60'. Whether or not it is acting independently or controlled does not matter at this time. Lets again assume that the warhorse wants to move and then use the Dash action. It would move 60' and then another 60' for a total distance of 120' during its turn in the round. This entire movement is, by the rules, supposed to take up the 6 second time frame of the turn, correct? If this is correct, then I do not see how there is enough time for the description given by Mr. Crawford. With the scenario of a controlled mount you and the mount share the same initiative and the same turn. Therefore, you are both acting in that same 6 second window of time. If, our pally controls its mount and has it move and then Dash, that should take up the 6 seconds for the round, so how can the pally then still have enough time to still possibly dismount (costing 15' of movement), possibly move another 15' and then make two attacks? The description by Crawford seems to imply that the mounted character actually gets 12 seconds worth of movement/action. Am I missing something here?

[Unoriginal]

The mounted character gives up their movement speed and uses the mount's. The mount's actions are limited to Disengage, Dodge and Dash.

[Quoxis]

I may be wrong here, but it breaks my „suspension of disbelief“ or whatever it’s called to imagine six second turns instead of six second rounds.
It’s not like your horse moves for six seconds, then you attack for six seconds, then the BBEG casts a spell for six seconds while you’re idling around, politeness preventing you from stabbing him another 3 times before he’s done. Your horse moves, you jump off of it and charge on, driving your sword into the bbeg with the momentum of the jump while they’re concentrating on casting the all-ending spell, ignoring the pain (and the awesome movie-like feat of dismount-weapon-sprinting) - all of which happens within the same 6 seconds.

[Unoriginal]

All the turns happen inside a 6 second round. Mostly at the same time, but with a slight difference due to initiative.

[Crushgrip]

All the turns happen inside a 6 second round. Mostly at the same time, but with a slight difference due to initiative.

Agreed! My point is that not only do all combatants turn occur within the same round but that all of their respective movement/actions are also taking up the total time of 6 seconds to complete. For example (and as I understand it):

Say we have our Pally on its mount, a wizard and a troll all entering combat. Round 1: All Roll initiative with the Wiz at a 15, Pally (with controlled mount) at a 10 and the troll at 5. Wizard "goes first" and casts a fireball and then moves 15 feet away from the troll. Pally uses the movement speed of the warhorse for their move part of their turn (60') and then attacks the troll twice with their attack action. Troll moves 5' (just for imaginary positioning on the Pally) and attacks three times. End of round 1.

As I understand it the Wiz casting Fireball + movement = 6 seconds = movement + action during round 1. The Pally movement (from mount) + attack action = 6 seconds = movement + action during round 1. The troll moving 5' + attack action = 6 seconds = movement + action during round 1. All the turn does is give an order to the combat (during the 6 second round 1) with the Wiz happening to get the fireball cast slightly before the Pally moves and attacks, which occurred slightly before the troll moved and attacked. The "suspension of disbelief" is taking combat, which is assumed to be dynamic, and making it static which is just part of the game. No problem with that. My problem comes in with the mounted characters and Crawford saying that our 5th level Pally can (on their turn) use the mounts movement + mounts limited action (Dash/Disengage/Dodge) and still possibly have the Pally use its movement and action all in the same round. If, individually, a warhorse could move and then take the Dash action that would be all it could possibly do in that round. Similarly, our Pally could, individually, take a movement + action for the round. So, Horse movement + action (Dash) = 6 seconds = Pally movement + action...they can't all be happening at the same time!

Hopefully this all makes sense.

Also, here is the link to the Sage Advice I was referencing:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=99tX6tmc73Q

Thank you all for the responses!

[youtellatale]

The rules are not grounded in reality. Magic doesn't exist but yet it appears as though you see no issue with a wizard creating fire out of nothing and then blowing up a half dozen people. Just use that suspension of disbelief in regards to mounted combat.

[JoeJ]

Anytime you use more than one movement mode during your turn the result is weird. If you have a ground speed of 30' and a swim speed of 20' it takes the same amount of time to swim 20' as it does to swim 20' and also walk 10', but only if you do the swimming first. If you walk 10' first, you can only swim 10'.

[Kaliayev]

They don't act on the same turn. They have the same initiative. Since the mount is controlled by the PC, the PC determines who goes first.
Yes, I do think this is silly. (https://www.sageadvice.eu/2018/03/14/rider-on-controlled-mount-wants-to-attack-mid-move-do-rider-and-mount-share-one-turn/)

[Trask]

The rules are not grounded in reality. Magic doesn't exist but yet it appears as though you see no issue with a wizard creating fire out of nothing and then blowing up a half dozen people. Just use that suspension of disbelief in regards to mounted combat.

This argument is the most tired and reductive strawman ever. Wizards conjuring magic is grounded in the game's world as a reality. Because it is fantasy. But in every other aspect, most D&D settings do not abandon all sense of realism. They still have gravity, physics, genetics, people still breathe air etc. In most D&D worlds you cant walk upside down or eat rocks and say "but wizards can conjure fire, how is this not allowed????"

[Crushgrip]

As a note I just wanted to say its your game and you can do what you want. I am just looking for a little discussion to see if my thinking/logic is flawed, or that I am making improper assumptions?


Anytime you use more than one movement mode during your turn the result is weird. If you have a ground speed of 30' and a swim speed of 20' it takes the same amount of time to swim 20' as it does to swim 20' and also walk 10', but only if you do the swimming first. If you walk 10' first, you can only swim 10'.

Agreed, when combining different movements it can get a little strange.


Kaliayev

Re: Clarification on Mounted Combat
They don't act on the same turn. They have the same initiative. Since the mount is controlled by the PC, the PC determines who goes first.
Yes, I do think this is silly.



Right, and I agree. What I would like to focus on is my line of thought though. Does our warhorse in my example use the time of 6 seconds for the round in making a move + and action (Dash/Disengage/Dodge)? As I understand the RAW, every combatant gets a move + action that consumes/uses the entire 6 seconds of the round? If this is correct, then how can our pally on the horse have enough time to have the mount move + use an action (Dash) while also allowing for the pally to also move + action? To me same initiative = 1 move + 1 action.

Cheers.

[leogobsin]

Right, and I agree. What I would like to focus on is my line of thought though. Does our warhorse in my example use the time of 6 seconds for the round in making a move + and action (Dash/Disengage/Dodge)? As I understand the RAW, every combatant gets a move + action that consumes/uses the entire 6 seconds of the round? If this is correct, then how can our pally on the horse have enough time to have the mount move + use an action (Dash) while also allowing for the pally to also move + action? To me same initiative = 1 move + 1 action.

Cheers.

They have enough time in the same way that there's enough time for every combatant to do something that takes 6 seconds and the round overall is still only 6 seconds of real time. Turns working like they do is an abstraction, obviously combat doesn't "really" work by every person taking their turn one after another, while everyone else stands around waiting for it to be their turn. From my understanding "same initiative" means "as though the mount had rolled the same number on its initiative check as the rider.

[sophontteks]

The conbat system was made with balance, ease of use, and enjoyment in mind, not realism. There is hardly anything about the turn-based system that is realistic.

[Eric Diaz]

My 2c:

It is not "realistic" or "unrealistic", it is an abstraction.

Realistic

https://i.imgur.com/ZR3R5YX.jpg

Unrealistic

https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/KGoTmgnvVD2KnXQlyKEyFCOXGyA=/0x176:400x443/1200x800/filters:focal(0x176:400x443)/cdn.vox-cdn.com/imported_assets/1046119/liefeldbill18sd9.jpg

Abstract

https://5.imimg.com/data5/AU/CU/MY-2420068/abstract-painting-500x500.jpg

It has nothing to do with fireballs, either.

This is realistic:

https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-e1d7ab5edf3c841c8d355226911d33d6-c



... which means.... don't take this rules as exact. The 6-seconds thing is just an approximation, and initiative is meant only to organize the game.

[Platypusbill]

This is just a symptom of the combat system being rather simple and turn-based, yet everything is happening at the same time as far as the narrative goes.

The realistic way of handling things would be that A) you can choose to use the mount's speed instead of your own, rather than getting to use both during the same turn, and B) you spend movement as proportions of your speed, e.g. if the horse moves 1/3 of its speed, the rider has 2/3 of their speed to spend during that turn. If you dismount, you cover less distance in the same timespan.

There is a similar problem with the rules for using multiple dfferent speeds:

Using Different Speeds
If you have more than one speed, such as your walking speed and a flying speed, you can switch back and forth between your speeds during your move.

Whenever you switch, subtract the distance you’ve already moved from the new speed. The result determines how much farther you can move. If the result is 0 or less, you can’t use the new speed during the current move.

For example, if you have a speed of 30 and a flying speed of 60 because a Wizard cast the fly spell on you, you could fly 20 feet, then walk 10 feet, and then leap into the air to fly 30 feet more.


The above example is illogical because the character moves 5/6 of his flying speed and 1/3 of his walking speed, i.e 7/6 of their total movement. Effectively, the character gets to use his quick flying speed across his entire move despite walking being half as fast.



But this is small potatoes compared to the hilarious things that can be achieved under the system. If a million people stand in a row 5ft apart and use their action to pass an object to the next person, they could move that object to a location 5 million feet away in the span of six seconds. If a 20th level fighter is getting mugged by a thug at knife-point and beats him on the initiative roll, it's somehow possible for him to pull out a longbow and shoot the mugger four times before the mugger manages to shank him. And so on.

[Crushgrip]

Got it. Thank you all for the responses! This is how I plan on handling it in my game:

Part of the reasoning for this question is that I currently have a Vengeance Paladin of Savras (God of Divination and Fate!) that has just summoned his warhorse with the Find Steed spell.

While you’re mounted, you have two options. You can either control the mount or allow it to act independently. Intelligent creatures, such as dragons, act independently. Our Pally's mount that was summoned by the spell has an INT of 6 and CAN act independently if the player so chooses.

A controlled mount is one that you are controlling or dictating the actions to. An independent mount is one that has the intelligence to act of its own accord and make its own decisions in combat. An independent mount also gains its own initiative. As per the Rules as Written (RAW) on page 198 of the PHB, a controlled mount can only take one of three actions: Dash, Disengage or Dodge. So for a character, if they are on their horse and choose to control it, the character and the mount both have the same initiative and the mount can only do one of the above listed things. If they choose to allow the war horse to act independently, then it rolls its own initiative and I (the DM) get to choose what it decides to do on its turn.

If you are controlling it, then it will not be able to attack, its only actions would be to Dash, Disengage or Dodge. For example, when you are mounted and controlling it, you can move with the mount (speed of 60') then make your usual attack(s). You may also split up your attack(s) during the movement of the mount. As your action on your turn you can make your mount either Dash, Disengage or Dodge.

Examples of how I will handle an encounter with an independent mount - specifically for a Paladin with their Find Steed mount:

Scenario 1 - you have a high initiative and the horse has a low initiative. You act first and, for example, there is a spread out group of Orcs ahead. Because of the telepathic link to Paladin's horse I would allow you to send a couple mental images to the horse of what you would like it to do as part of its turn (perhaps a mental image of the orc you want it to attack and an image of the horse attacking that orc with its hooves). Since you are mounted the only way you can move on your turn is to dismount and then move. Otherwise, you either cast a spell or ready an attack action. The horse then goes and maybe it understands what you want and maybe it doesn’t. Let’s assume it manages to pick the right orc (not sure that horses have the best vision) and charges in and attacks. When you get to the Orc your get to attack as per your readied action. If your mount doesn’t take the wisest path you may get hit by some opportunity attacks.

Scenario 2 - mount has a high initiative. If you had previously communicated to it to charge into battle it will do just that. I will choose where it goes and what it does. When it is your turn you can either attack or dismount and attack, giving both you and the warhorse their perspective "full round" of movement + action(s).

....as I just finished typing the above "Scenario 2" the friggin light bulb came on. How could I have a problem with our Pally controlling the mount to have a movement + action in addition to the Paladin's movement + action in the same round when Scenario 2 totally works based on the RAW? Fact is, I can't. You are all correct and I think I have been making a circular argument! Doh.

I guess that based on my above examples and the description by Jeremy Crawford there would never be a reason for our Pally in question to let his mount act independently? Unless of course he would like the mount to attack that round.

Thank you all for your help with my question!