Mounting

[Xenothelm]

So my party just hit Lv5 and our Paladin can start casting Find Steed, yay!

Our DM has been learning as he goes but he wants to make mounting/dismounting take an action...

For reference, the RAW is that it takes half the rider’s movement to mount or dismount.

I expressed that this was going to be a bit of a nerf to our Pally in combat but I don’t want to push it as I’m already somewhat of this group’s Rules Lawyer and it’s not my character anyway. But it’s still eating at the back of my head lol.

How can I express how much of a nerf this is?

[Damon_Tor]

Does the DM have a casus belli for this change? Was someone using mount/dismount shenanigans to some effect or another? Or is this a simulationist argument?

[Xenothelm]

Does the DM have a casus belli for this change? Was someone using mount/dismount shenanigans to some effect or another? Or is this a simulationist argument?

We literally just hit 5 and I was trying to familiarize my DM with mounted combat rules when he decided to make this change.

[Damon_Tor]

We literally just hit 5 and I was trying to familiarize my DM with mounted combat rules when he decided to make this change.

But did he say why?

If his response is "well it's not realistic to be able to mount and dismount a warhorse in full plate in three seconds while loading and firing a heavy cross bow" then that's a simulationist argument, and to some degree he would have a point, but it's a bit silly to get hung up on whether or not a martial should be able to do unlikely martial things while the wizard is throwing fireballs at people.

And he says something like "taking a full turn to get mounted helps build tension" when that's a narrativist argument, he thinks the extra attention paid to mounting the horse makes the story richer. And that's simply a matter of taste, and it's hard to argue with it.

If his argument is balanced based (ie, "gamist"), well I guess I don't see his issue. Most of the time the paladin is going to start a given encounter already mounted, so what problem is he actually trying to solve? Does he see the paladin mounting and dismounting several times during combat? Why he think this will happen? If it does happen, what sort of imbalance does it create?

[Lunali]

I am opposed to any change made to the rules by a DM that hasn't played with the rules. In this case, the DM most likely thought of an exploit that he thinks will work that may or may not work. The best way to argue against the change is to find out what he thought would happen without it.

[Tetrasodium]

So my party just hit Lv5 and our Paladin can start casting Find Steed, yay!

Our DM has been learning as he goes but he wants to make mounting/dismounting take an action...

For reference, the RAW is that it takes half the rider’s movement to mount or dismount.

I expressed that this was going to be a bit of a nerf to our Pally in combat but I don’t want to push it as I’m already somewhat of this group’s Rules Lawyer and it’s not my character anyway. But it’s still eating at the back of my head lol.

How can I express how much of a nerf this is?

Pretty straight forward rules for mounting

Mounting and Dismounting
Once during your move, you can mount a creature that is within 5 feet of you or dismount. D oing so costs an amount of movement equal to half your speed. For example, if your speed is 30 feet, you must spend 15 feet of movement to mount a horse. Therefore, you can’t mount it if you don’t have 15 feet o f movement left or if your speed is 0.
If an effect moves your mount against its w ill while you’re on it, you must succeed on a DC 10 Dexterity saving throw or fall off the mount, landing prone in a space within 5 feet of it. If you’re knocked prone while mounted, you must make the sam e saving throw.
If your mount is knocked prone, you can use your reaction to dismount it as it falls and land on your feet. Otherwise, you are dismounted and fall prone in a space within 5 feet it.

The change described is even more unexplainable & lacking in motive when you consider how 5e riding atop a mount has almost no benefit on its own. The problem might be more confusion than bizarre change for change sake however.

Here (http://legacy.aonprd.com/coreRuleBook/combat.html#_mounted-combat) is the rule in pathfinder, 3.5 was probably pretty similar

Mount/Dismount a Steed
Mounting or dismounting a steed requires a move action.

Fast Mount or Dismount: You can mount or dismount as a free action with a DC 20 Ride check. If you fail the check, mounting or dismounting is a move action instead. You can't attempt a fast mount or fast dismount unless you can perform the mount or dismount as a move action in the current round.

If it's not an innocent mixup between systems, does the gm have a bunch of extra houserules that would make mounted combat more beneficial than maybe sometimes moving a bit further in order to justify it?

[Xenothelm]

Here (http://legacy.aonprd.com/coreRuleBook/combat.html#_mounted-combat) is the rule in pathfinder, 3.5 was probably pretty similar


If it's not an innocent mixup between systems, does the gm have a bunch of extra houserules that would make mounted combat more beneficial than maybe sometimes moving a bit further in order to justify it?

Nah we’re all 5E players. I’ll try and talk with him in person and really clarify where this is coming from

[Tetrasodium]

Nah we’re all 5E players. I’ll try and talk with him in person and really clarify where this is coming from

being a 5e player doesn't prevent someone from confusing an obscure rule from one system with an obscure rule from another system though. Right now I'm betting that's all it is or they are thinking mounted combat does something super awesome that it doesn't

[Xenothelm]

being a 5e player doesn't prevent someone from confusing an obscure rule from one system with an obscure rule from another system though. Right now I'm betting that's all it is or they are thinking mounted combat does something super awesome that it doesn't

Actually you’re right, he did play in a pathfinder campaign before ours...idk where the 3.5e would’ve come from but hopefully I can talk some sense into him

[Tetrasodium]

Actually you’re right, he did play in a pathfinder campaign before ours...idk where the 3.5e would’ve come from but hopefully I can talk some sense into him

3.5 & pf are pretty similar, pathfinder gets called 3.75 sometimes because it's so similar. I just didn't bother looking for 3.5 mounting rules & couldn't remember. Odds are good that they are the same or very similar

[BullHorn]

If he's already nerfing level 5 abilities, imagine what he'll do to higher level abilities... I hope you're not using Xanathar's cause you can forget about Find Greater Steed :smallbiggrin:

[Xenothelm]

If he's already nerfing level 5 abilities, imagine what he'll do to higher level abilities... I hope you're not using Xanathar's cause you can forget about Find Greater Steed :smallbiggrin:

I’m a glamour bard so I 100% had my eye on it for magical secrets lol...

[Keravath]

I think the interesting thing here is that the OP seems to think taking an action to mount is a significant nerf to the paladin while other posters in the thread say that mounted combat makes little or no difference by itself.

If mounted combat makes no real difference (which is my understanding as well, except for a bit of added mobility, and perhaps with certain feats) then how is it a major nerf to the paladin to use an action to mount? Taking an action just means the paladin won't use the mount in combat unless they are already mounted when it starts. However,sSince the mount doesn't offer any real benefits in combat then most of the time it wouldn't be worthwhile to use 1/2 your movement to mount anyway.

I'm just curious why the OP thinks it is a significant nerf (or why the DM thinks riding in combat would be strong enough to require an action to mount instead of 1/2 movement). Both the DM and OP seem to think mounted combat is strong but the general opinion seems to be that it is not in 5e.

[NaughtyTiger]

How can I express how much of a nerf this is?

as Keravath suggested, How much of a nerf do you think it is?

if it were my paladin it would be annoying, but not that big a nerf. i rarely dismount as i am a gnome.

For what it's worth. i really like that pathfinder rule, i would let cavalier's ability apply, and they actually get a feature instead of a ribbon.

[Xenothelm]

I'm just curious why the OP thinks it is a significant nerf (or why the DM thinks riding in combat would be strong enough to require an action to mount instead of 1/2 movement). Both the DM and OP seem to think mounted combat is strong but the general opinion seems to be that it is not in 5e.

The OP thinks the rules for mounted combat are fine and balanced, RAW. So yes, further restricting them by costing a resource you only get one of per round is a nerf. The creativity with which the Paladin can maneuver is hindered this way and there’s not really any reason for it. I mean, Find Steed is a Paladin exclusive spell, why mess with that?

[Damon_Tor]

I think the interesting thing here is that the OP seems to think taking an action to mount is a significant nerf to the paladin while other posters in the thread say that mounted combat makes little or no difference by itself.

If mounted combat makes no real difference (which is my understanding as well, except for a bit of added mobility, and perhaps with certain feats) then how is it a major nerf to the paladin to use an action to mount? Taking an action just means the paladin won't use the mount in combat unless they are already mounted when it starts. However,sSince the mount doesn't offer any real benefits in combat then most of the time it wouldn't be worthwhile to use 1/2 your movement to mount anyway.

I'm just curious why the OP thinks it is a significant nerf (or why the DM thinks riding in combat would be strong enough to require an action to mount instead of 1/2 movement). Both the DM and OP seem to think mounted combat is strong but the general opinion seems to be that it is not in 5e.

The paladin's mount is more relevant than most: it's high intelligence and telepathic link together mean you're free to leave it as an "uncontrolled" mount but still reasonably expect that it will do what you want it to do, which means it can attack and such, and for mounts like the warhorse and elk (and others later, once you have Find Greater Steed) their attacks can knock their targets prone, which is of great benefit to paladins in particular. And of course the spell sharing ability means you can share certain buffs with it, which can be excellent.

But none of this depends on the paladin mounting and dismounting the warhorse in combat, so I'm not sure how much of a "nerf" this would really be.

[Guy Lombard-O]

The only way I can really see it mattering, and which may be the DM's reason for hampering it, is when the paladin shares a spell with the Steed, and then dismounts so the Steed can do things like the Attack action. Still, considering how limited those shared spells are supposed to be, it seems like hitting a mole with a sledge hammer. Or making a mountain out of a nail. Or something.

[Xenothelm]

...and for mounts like the warhorse and elk (and others later, once you have Find Greater Steed) their attacks can knock their targets prone, which is of great benefit to paladins in particular. And of course the spell sharing ability means you can share certain buffs with it, which can be excellent.

If the mount and the pally have a close enough initiative, he should be able to ride it into range, get off and Ready an attack for when the enemy goes prone from the Elk attack in your example. This isn’t possible if getting off took an action to begin with, nor could the Elk attack while the pally was riding it. Or he should just be able to make his 2 attacks since he’s Lv5 and has Extra Attack at this point. Hell, if he pre-cast a searing smite before dismounting, the Elk would get smite dmg on its attack as well!

[Damon_Tor]

If the mount and the pally have a close enough initiative, he should be able to ride it into range, get off and Ready an attack for when the enemy goes prone from the Elk attack in your example.
Why exactly would dismounting benefit the paladin in this case though? He can make that same attack from horseback. I think there's maybe a misunderstanding of some mounted combat rules at your table. Do you guys think it isn't possible to attack while mounted?


nor could the Elk attack while the pally was riding it.
That's not a point without some controversy, mostly because JC made an unclear tweet on the subject that he later walked back. He's clarified that the intention is for the paladin's mount to be able to used as an independent mount. And of course RAW nothing has ever prevented it.


Hell, if he pre-cast a searing smite before dismounting, the Elk would get smite dmg on its attack as well!
While the paladin can "share" a smite spell with his mount, as soon as the mount actually uses it the spell ends, which means they can't both get the extra damage added to their attacks.

[Xenothelm]

Why exactly would dismounting benefit the paladin in this case though? He can make that same attack from horseback. I think there's maybe a misunderstanding of some mounted combat rules at your table. Do you guys think it isn't possible to attack while mounted?

Of course it’s possible to attack while mounted. Maybe the paladin doesn’t want to risk the mount taking damage and being in the middle of the fight. Though this is kind of a benefit vs anything but AoE as the mount would soak up attacks and is infinitely replaceable.



That's not a point without some controversy, mostly because JC made an unclear tweet on the subject that he later walked back. He's clarified that the intention is for the paladin's mount to be able to used as an independent mount. And of course RAW nothing has ever prevented it.

This part I’m still unclear on:

On the pally’s turn, he can decide to “Control the mount”, matching their initiative. So he can have the mount move and take the limited dash, disengage, or dodge actions at the same time he takes his turn.

However, the Find (Greater) Steed spell gives the mount intelligence enough to be independent. So the mounts from these spells have access to their full stat block and actions while mounted.

My question, then, is if the pally and his mount roll a wide initiative gap at the top of combat (let’s say the mount is first in this case), can the pally just instruct his companion on what to do for its turn, then take his own actions regularly later in the initiative count? And if the mount uses up its movement on its turn and even attacks, can the pally still “control” it on his turn later for the purposes of dash/dodge/disengage since it already attacked in that same round?



While the paladin can "share" a smite spell with his mount, as soon as the mount actually uses it the spell ends, which means they can't both get the extra damage added to their attacks.

Thanks for this clarification!

[Guy Lombard-O]

Hell, if he pre-cast a searing smite before dismounting, the Elk would get smite dmg on its attack as well!

The closer calls are things like Divine Favor or (Crown) Spirit Guardians. In my understanding, neither would work ("target" really equals "targets"/effects others, blah, blah), but YMMV by DM.

Also, in your example about the Steed attacking and then paladin wanting to have it D/D/D, it would have already used up its action, so that wouldn't work.

[Xenothelm]

Also, in your example about the Steed attacking and then paladin wanting to have it D/D/D, it would have already used up its action, so that wouldn't work.

I realized as soon as I posted what a silly thought that was lol...

But could the pally use up any leftover movement the mount had on his turn by “Controlling” the mount?

[Guy Lombard-O]

I realized as soon as I posted what a silly thought that was lol...

But could the pally use up any leftover movement the mount had on his turn by “Controlling” the mount?

No, not for an independent mount with its own initiative. The horse's turn is done, including move.

Now, if you want the horse to use its action to ready a 60' move to XXX as a reaction of the paladin mounting it, that would work. A vengeance paladin could make this work quite well, if he cast Haste while mounted upon his Steed. Use the Steed's Haste action for attack, use it's regular action for the reaction move triggered by paladin mounting, and move the 60' (doubled to 120' by Haste) to move to XXX. Your DM will probably even allow the paladin's Haste action to let the paladin mount, I'd think.

[Xenothelm]

No, not for an independent mount with its own initiative. The horse's turn is done, including move.

So just so i have it clear, the Paladin needs to decide at the top of each round if he’s going to control his mount or have it act independently?

[Tetrasodium]

So just so i have it clear, the Paladin needs to decide at the top of each round if he’s going to control his mount or have it act independently?

Pretty much yea, but it makes a mess of initiative & is annoying to the gm. My table has a moon druid paladin, it's also had a moon druid who acted as a mount for another player who was doing some collaborative build stuff with the druid in a previous game and it causes a lot of frustration/timing problems despite being pretty awesome. This time around I told them that this spell (https://www.dndbeyond.com/spells/279196-bond-wildshaped) was a thing.

Basically forcing a mount to become controlled shifts it to the rider's initiative, but it's still technically the rider's initiative if it goes independent again unless the gm tracks both. Of course, an indentation mount can make a reaction to anything the gm wants them to & there's the "moved against their will" thing.

[Guy Lombard-O]

So just so i have it clear, the Paladin needs to decide at the top of each round if he’s going to control his mount or have it act independently?

At this point, I think I'd suggest just a overall review of the rules for mounted combat. These guys are usually pretty good:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WF1FuEQsWAk

[Xenothelm]

At this point, I think I'd suggest just a overall review of the rules for mounted combat. These guys are usually pretty good:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WF1FuEQsWAk

That’s funny, I ended up watching this last night as well as the Sage Advice podcast with Jeremy Crawford on the topic so I think I have a clearer understanding of the RAW, and RAI when it comes to Find Steed.

Now on the subject of taking an action to get on/off? Yea I’ll def be pushing back against this lol.