Artificer Mount Rules Questions

[Setharious]

I was thinking about making a Rock Gnome Battle Smith Artificer, that uses their Steel Defender as a mount. This brought me into trying to learn about mounts, and not really feeling like I understood it very well.
1. If I take control of the mount (the Steel Defender in this case) it only has 3 action options. Does this meant the Steel Defender would not be able to use it's reaction, or would the reaction remain usable since it is specified that only 'actions' are limited.
2. Because of the limited choice in actions, does this mean that I could not use my bonus action to tell my Steel Defender to do something such as repair? Or, in theory, could I hop off my defender, use my bonus action to tell it to do something, hop back on, and then ride away?
3. If I ride up to an opponent, and my mount disengages as it flees, can they still make an attack of opportunity on me, or because the mount is moving me and I am not directly moving myself away is there not chance to hit me with an opportunity attack? Or would we both have to disengage to be able to move away?
4. If the Steel Defender acts independently of me, could I hold my action to use my reaction of 'When my Steel Defender gets close to an enemy I attack it' while allowing my Steel Defender to take other actions in its stat block?

Sorry if my questions are silly or obvious, but I am just struggling to figure out exactly how these things would work.

Also, if anyone knows where a fully accurate stat block of the Steel Defender is, I would really appreciate knowing about it. I keep looking but I do not know which ones are real, and what I can trust to be true. People even say the one on DnD Beyond is incorrect.

[Desteplo]

I thought the same thing! I’m gearing up in a week for the campaign. Here’s what I’ve established with my DM (which I would suggest you talk to first)

1) if you take control of the mount it will move as you direct on your turn and be able to take whatever action.
1b) But if you have it act independently it can do all the normal stuff if you weren’t mounted but it would need to act on its own initiative right after your turn. So you COULD hold action to use your reaction and attack as the mount approaches.
1c)you can control it first round to approach and use your full attack action. Then following turn if everything is still in melee have it act independently. (That way you both can attack while mounted)

2) in the case of a DM that doesn’t like that interpretation; you can mount and dismount after moving with your mount same turn and everyone will have all actions (except you would have used all your movement to mount and dismount. But Then use bonus action to give whatever order

3) you bring up a good point. You are “forced move” away while your mount is moving. Though again ask DM. Easily interpreted that you are controlling the mount (meaning not technically forced) so you would both have to disengage

4) think I already mentioned this one but yes. You can hold action on a charge while riding an independent mount.

5)my input: in the case of all that going on (especially the mounting and dismounting as you approach) there’s no reason the independent mount ruling while you do stuff shouldn’t be allowed

6) what I remember from the revised ranger mounted combat rule: as a mount it can only do the three actions without the dismount thing so reactions don’t work while mounted. The independent initiatives breaks that.

[Setharious]

2) in the case of a DM that doesn’t like that interpretation; you can mount and dismount after moving with your mount same turn and everyone will have all actions (except you would have used all your movement to mount and dismount. But Then use bonus action to give whatever order


If this ended up being the strategy, I would likely go Cavalier Fighter to be able to mount and dismount for 5 feet of movement instead of half.

[Damon_Tor]

I was thinking about making a Rock Gnome Battle Smith Artificer, that uses their Steel Defender as a mount. This brought me into trying to learn about mounts, and not really feeling like I understood it very well.
1. If I take control of the mount (the Steel Defender in this case) it only has 3 action options. Does this meant the Steel Defender would not be able to use it's reaction, or would the reaction remain usable since it is specified that only 'actions' are limited.

A reaction is a type of action, so no, a controlled mount cannot take a reaction.


2. Because of the limited choice in actions, does this mean that I could not use my bonus action to tell my Steel Defender to do something such as repair?

Correct.


Or, in theory, could I hop off my defender, use my bonus action to tell it to do something, hop back on, and then ride away?

It isn't explicit what happens to a formerly-controlled mount's place in initiative if you dismount it. But no, the situation you've described here isn't likely to be functional. You would have to assume that the defender keeps its modified place taking its turn concurrent with your own instead of reverting to its normal place in the initiative, and I doubt that's a typical interpretation.


3. If I ride up to an opponent, and my mount disengages as it flees, can they still make an attack of opportunity on me, or because the mount is moving me and I am not directly moving myself away is there not chance to hit me with an opportunity attack? Or would we both have to disengage to be able to move away?

The mount disengaging is enough to prevent OAs against the rider.


4. If the Steel Defender acts independently of me, could I hold my action to use my reaction of 'When my Steel Defender gets close to an enemy I attack it' while allowing my Steel Defender to take other actions in its stat block?

Yes, but note that Extra Attack does not function on another creature's turn, so you would only be able to make one attack.


Also, if anyone knows where a fully accurate stat block of the Steel Defender is, I would really appreciate knowing about it. I keep looking but I do not know which ones are real, and what I can trust to be true. People even say the one on DnD Beyond is incorrect.

The stat block published in the book Eberron: Rising from the Last War is the official version. As far as I can tell it isn't any different from the version found in the UA article here (https://media.wizards.com/2019/dnd/downloads/UA-Artificer2-2019.pdf) on pages 11 and 12.