Warhorse can't attack?

[DwarfFighter]

Reading the rules for mounted combat, I assume this covers Int 2 warhorses.


You can control a mount only if it has been trained to accept a rider. Domesticated horses, donkeys, and similar creatures are assumed to have such training. The initiative of a controlled mount changes to match yours when you mount it. It moves as you direct it, and it has only three action options: Dash, Disengage, and Dodge. A controlled mount can move and act even on the turn that you mount it.

Is there a special provision somehere that allows for combat-conditioned mounts to gain the ability to Attack? Or should we just assume it there is a mistke in those rules?

-DF

[Frogreaver]

Seems fine the way it is to me.

If a player insisted on their mounted warhorse to attack I’d probably houserule that they could but that the PC’s attacks that turn would be at disadvantage Or maybe that the rider was unable to attack at all in turns the horse attacks due to the horses positioning for attacking itself being less than ideal for the rider to attack.

[Unoriginal]

Reading the rules for mounted combat, I assume this covers Int 2 warhorses.


You can control a mount only if it has been trained to accept a rider. Domesticated horses, donkeys, and similar creatures are assumed to have such training. The initiative of a controlled mount changes to match yours when you mount it. It moves as you direct it, and it has only three action options: Dash, Disengage, and Dodge. A controlled mount can move and act even on the turn that you mount it.

Is there a special provision somehere that allows for combat-conditioned mounts to gain the ability to Attack? Or should we just assume it there is a mistke in those rules?

-DF

There is no mistake. A war horse does not attack while it's used as a mount.

[SiCK_Boy]

The ranger beast master animal companion can get this option (with you directing the attack using your own action), but usually, they are not mounts.

Otherwise, if you want the mount to attack, you have to set it free and not ride it... and then, it'll be the DM controlling it, and who knows what it'll do (a panicked horse may just start biting the closest character, even if its one of your allies).

[MaxWilson]

There is no mistake. A war horse does not attack while it's used as a mount.

Well, sort of... even a controlled mount can still make opportunity attacks.

@OP, see also the Controlling A Mount section of the rules (emphasis mine):

Controlling a Mount
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.
You can control a mount only if it has been trained to accept a rider. Domesticated horses, donkeys, and similar creatures are assumed to have such training. The initiative of a controlled mount changes to match yours when you mount it. It moves as you direct it, and it has only three action options: Dash, Disengage, and Dodge. A controlled mount can move and act even on the turn that you mount it.
An independent mount retains its place in the initiative order. Bearing a rider puts no restrictions on the actions the mount can take, and it moves and acts as it wishes. It might flee from combat, rush to attack and devour a badly injured foe, or otherwise act against your wishes.
In either case, if the mount provokes an opportunity attack while you're on it, the attacker can target you or the mount.

Being a controlled mount requires special training, and the rider is able to opt out and let the mount act in an uncontrolled way. If you're interested in a warhorse who attacks, tell your DM you want to buy a warhorse that's fierce enough to attack things when it's uncontrolled instead of running away. It will make it harder for you to control its movement (because it has its own initiative instead of moving on your turn), but you do get more attacks out of the deal, which seems to be what you're looking for.

[x3n0n]

It will make it harder for you to control its movement (because it has its own initiative instead of moving on your turn), but you do get more attacks out of the deal, which seems to be what you're looking for.

However, its movement (since it is off-turn for you) may strand you out of melee reach for your intended target(s), yes?

That is, if you want to do a single attack with its movement, you can Ready it, but Extra Attacks and/or BA attacks would need to be ranged, it seems?

[GlenSmash!]

However, its movement (since it is off-turn for you) may strand you out of melee reach for your intended target(s), yes?

That is, if you want to do a single attack with its movement, you can Ready it, but Extra Attacks and/or BA attacks would need to be ranged, it seems?

This is one of the big advantages of Find Steed. The intelligent mount can use it's initiative and actions to do what you want. Also horse archery is fantastic. Just ask the Mongols, cataphracts etc.

[Contrast]

I would personally as a house rule likely be OK with a playing sacrificing an action to encourage a war trained controlled mount to attack. It would almost always be worse than them just using that action to attack themselves of course but *shrugs*

Your other reasonable option outside DM fiat if you want your mount attacking to be effective is Find Greater Steed which gives you a loyal mount that you can leave uncontrolled but still under your general command. You may run into issues of initiative order and finding yourself stranded out of melee range on your turn in that case though.

[MaxWilson]

However, its movement (since it is off-turn for you) may strand you out of melee reach for your intended target(s), yes?

Yep, that's the downside: it's harder for your to coordinate your actions with it, especially if your DM is using the PHB initiative system (which makes it hard even for PCs to cooperate with each other).


Otherwise, if you want the mount to attack, you have to set it free and not ride it... and then, it'll be the DM controlling it, and who knows what it'll do (a panicked horse may just start biting the closest character, even if its one of your allies).

You can ride it, you just can't control it. At that point you're riding an independent mount and it does what it wants, like any other NPC would.

[DwarfFighter]

I'm not sure if you have the option of just "releasing" a controlled mount - sure, it makes sens that you can let go of the reins and leave it to its own devices, but rules for that seem to be missing in the same way as the attack option is missing. I feel it makes sense that in a tense combat situation, a mount that is trained to accept orders from the rider would simply interpret "no commands" as "do nothing".

With regards to intelligent mounts, it seems fairly simple for the mount and rider to "sync up": The rider that is out of range of an enemy on his turn can Ready and take his Action as a Reaction when the mount is close enough to strike.

-DF

[x3n0n]

With regards to intelligent mounts, it seems fairly simple for the mount and rider to "sync up": The rider that is out of range of an enemy on his turn can Ready and take his Action as a Reaction when the mount is close enough to strike.

I could have sworn that someone said you can only take one attack with a Readied action, but I don't see that in the RAW anywhere. This is more practical for a (non-bonus-action-dependent) Extra Attack user than I thought.

[Garhi]

I could have sworn that someone said you can only take one attack with a Readied action, but I don't see that in the RAW anywhere. This is more practical for a (non-bonus-action-dependent) Extra Attack user than I thought.

Extra Attack applies to taking the attack action on your turn, if you ready an attack you're not taking the attack action you're taking the "Ready" action.

[Segev]

I would be interested in seeing a rule where a rider could have a controlled mount attack in lieu of one of the rider's own attacks. Essentially making the mount's attack one of his "weapons."

[x3n0n]

Extra Attack applies to taking the attack action on your turn, if you ready an attack you're not taking the attack action you're taking the "Ready" action.

Aha--I was looking at the rules for Ready instead of for Extra Attack. Thanks!

That is, according to RAW, an Extra Attack user *can't* do multiple attacks on its uncontrolled mount's turn. That said, there may be an argument that RAW is stupid here and that it should work. :)

[Snails]

I would be interested in seeing a rule where a rider could have a controlled mount attack in lieu of one of the rider's own attacks. Essentially making the mount's attack one of his "weapons."

I think it could work, but, much as I woe the lack personally, it was a wise design choice to leave that outside the Core rules.

The raw damage of a horse is not going to compete with a PC. But it is conceivable you could get knock downs or ding multiple opponents in a way that is tactically useful.

[MaxWilson]

I'm not sure if you have the option of just "releasing" a controlled mount - sure, it makes sens that you can let go of the reins and leave it to its own devices, but rules for that seem to be missing in the same way as the attack option is missing. I feel it makes sense that in a tense combat situation, a mount that is trained to accept orders from the rider would simply interpret "no commands" as "do nothing".

With regards to intelligent mounts, it seems fairly simple for the mount and rider to "sync up": The rider that is out of range of an enemy on his turn can Ready and take his Action as a Reaction when the mount is close enough to strike.

-DF

I agree, the rules make no provision for switching between the two statuses. You might be stuck with a permanently-independent warhorse.

Readied actions are a terrible way of syncing. For one thing you lose out on Extra Attack, at least by RAW; you also lose out on defensive opportunities like Defensive Duelist/Shield, and offensive opportunities like the PAM reaction attack. Also you lose the freedom to move between attacks: even if the DM lets you have Extra Attack anyway despite RAW, you can't move to one goblin and stab it, then move to a second and cut its head off.

The PHB initiative system is just plain terrible for modeling cooperation between multiple characters. You can't even have two characters cooperate to put a third character on a stretcher and rush them to a medic--even if they move only 30' per round (wasting their normal movement and moving only on a readied action) one character winds up moving his end of the litter entirely separately from the other character when the trigger goes off. It's terrible for other kinds of cooperation as well: whether or not the wizard can buff the fighter with Haste before the fighter attacks may depend entirely on whether the wizard beats the fighter's initiative, even if the fighter wants to wait to be buffed. The fact that intelligent mounts are hard to cooperate with is just another symptom of that.

I recommend using a different initiative system. The DMG ones are okay, or you can steal something from AD&D, or even just have everybody declare actions at the start of the round and have the DM mostly-freeform the initiative order, and call for initiative contests only when he's not sure who would actually go first and it also matters. (Does the evil archmage finish his spell before the monk stuns him?)


Aha--I was looking at the rules for Ready instead of for Extra Attack. Thanks!

That is, according to RAW, an Extra Attack user *can't* do multiple attacks on its uncontrolled mount's turn. That said, there may be an argument that RAW is stupid here and that it should work. :)

"RAW is stupid here and it works" is how I run it at my table. I don't like the idea of warlocks being better at counterbattery fire than fighters are, when both sides are popping in and out of total cover.


I think it could work, but, much as I woe the lack personally, it was a wise design choice to leave that outside the Core rules.

The raw damage of a horse is not going to compete with a PC. But it is conceivable you could get knock downs or ding multiple opponents in a way that is tactically useful.

Also, horses aren't the only mounts in fantasyland.