Riding another PC, and getting a 3/4 cover "saddle"

[Greywander]

This came up in another thread about creating an actual tank (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?637779-Steel-Commanders-Artificer-riding-a-Paladin-(oh-yeah-it-s-blitzkrieg-time!)) (of the World War variety) by stacking an Artillerist Artificer on top of a Redemption Paladin, forming a super resilient duo with high damage output. Some people suggested putting the paladin on top so they can use Mounted Combatant to take hits in the place of the artificer, which isn't a bad idea, but I was curious if there was a way to inflate the rider's defenses so that people would voluntarily or be forced to target the mount.

One idea I had was for the paladin to be a warforged with a built in howdah (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Howdah)-esque pilot seat that grants 3/4 cover to the pilot. That's a +5 to AC and DEX saves. Perhaps the rider could even duck down behind the barrier for full cover, only popping out when it's their turn.

I... don't think there's any RAW for something like this. The closest thing I can think of would be for the paladin to carry a barrel (or similar sturdy container) strapped to their body, and for the artificer to hide inside. But I don't know if that would count as cover, or if it would count as the artificer riding the paladin (which we need for Mounted Combatant to grant the paladin Evasion). What would be a practical way of implementing this? As a DM, what do you think is a fair compromise? I feel like it's one of those things where the rules don't explicitly allow it, so the DM would have grounds to just say "no", but with a more permissive DM it wouldn't be too hard for players to jury-rig a contraption that could plausibly work for this (for example, literally just welding a barrel to a saddle).

I just don't want to give up my mental image of a gnome artificer riding a warforged paladin into battle; it's just a little awkward to flip the classes around.

[greenstone]

One idea I had was for the paladin to be a warforged with a built in howdah (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Howdah)-esque pilot seat that grants 3/4 cover to the pilot.

Warforged (at least in Eberron) are created, originally to serve as soldiers. I do't see any reason why the creator couldn't add a seat and protection for a rider.

As far as RAW, it is, pretty much as Greywander said, essentially an armoured box the warforged carries. As long as they have carrying capacity, they can do this.

As a GM, I would rule that the mounted combatant feat doesn't apply, because if the rider is inside an armoured compartment then they don't have the mobility to take hits meant for the mount.


I just don't want to give up my mental image of a gnome artificer riding a warforged paladin into battle; it's just a little awkward to flip the classes around.
And now I don't want to either! It's a cool image.

Would it actually work at the table? I think it would. If we consider this from an anime perspective, you basically have a mobile suit and rider. There are animes where the mobile suit is a character in its own right. From a Star Wars perspective, the warforged could be a Manticore droid ridden by a Mandalorian.

[Lunali]

I wouldn't be opposed to letting the PCs build a protective carriage of some kind, but I would rule that something that would provide the sort of protection described would require a mount that is at least two sizes larger than the passenger. I would probably also put restrictions on how much interaction could happen with mounted combatant or other mechanics intended for riding a mount normally.

[GeoffWatson]

3/4 cover (or even any cover) would be too much for a saddle.
Howdahs are on much larger animals (elephants are huge), so not suitable for a medium human-shaped mount.

[Zhorn]

I wouldn't be opposed to letting the PCs build a protective carriage of some kind, but I would rule that something that would provide the sort of protection described would require a mount that is at least two sizes larger than the passenger. I would probably also put restrictions on how much interaction could happen with mounted combatant or other mechanics intended for riding a mount normally.
Agreed. Also as a general restriction would be the 'mount' would need appropriate anatomy.
Ogre/elephant: fine
Shark/roc: not fine
This would be a soft rule, not a hard encoding, like with the rule on what can serve as a mount to begin with.

[Lunali]

Agreed. Also as a general restriction would be the 'mount' would need appropriate anatomy.
Ogre/elephant: fine
Shark/roc: not fine
This would be a soft rule, not a hard encoding, like with the rule on what can serve as a mount to begin with.

With more consideration, I think I would treat it as the equivalent of a carriage, just carried instead of being pulled. With that in mind, I would allow a shark to pull something much like a carriage and a roc to simply carry it in their talons (assuming reasonable sizes).

[Greywander]

Honestly, I feel like the pushback against this is mostly down to mechanical balance, which is fair. 3/4 cover is very strong, so I understand why a DM would ban the idea completely, or impose some strict restrictions on the idea. On the mechanical side, there are some other ways to handle this apart from a ban or limitations. A simple way around this is to throw out the occasional enemy sniper (either an archer with Sharpshooter or a mage with Spell Sniper) who can ignore cover. Not every enemy, so it's still a good benefit for the player, but occasionally they have to deal with the extra challenge of an enemy or two who can bypass cover. Something else you can do is to mirror the players' builds and strategies. Create a similar duo of paladin and artificer, and have the party fight them. They could even be a recurring antagonist, perhaps with ties to the backstory of the paladin or artificer.

There's another angle to consider this from, and that's the Simulationist angle. Could something like this exist? Sure could! Would it be an issue to mount it on a medium humanoid? There's be some challenges to overcome, but it shouldn't be impossible, especially for a warforged built specifically for something like this (they could be 8 feet tall and have a sort of hunched over posture that better accommodates such a protective carriage). The main limitation would probably weight. A barrel weighs a massive 70 lbs, the more spacious chest a more reasonable 25 lbs. I don't know exactly how much material you'd need or how thick it would need to be in order to provide cover, but I'd imagine it would fall somewhere between these two ranges, and might even exceed the weight of a barrel. The paladin has to carry all of that, plus the artificer, plus their own equipment.

A gnome weighs about 40 lbs. Half plate and a shield for the gnome clock in at 46 lbs. Plate and a shield for the paladin clock in at 71 lbs. Just for armor and the gnome, our paladin is already carrying a total of 157 lbs. They still need weapons, a spell focus for the artificer, and whatever random crap the artificer is carrying. A character with STR 16 has a carry capacity of 240 lbs. They can only carry about 80 more lbs of crap. How much does the protective carriage weigh? Well, if it's part of the warforged's body, maybe it weighs nothing. Or, if it's considered a separate piece of equipment, I could easily see it exceeding 100 lbs. It's pretty much a DM call, but you might have to weight (har har) until the artificer can make Gauntlets of Ogre Power for the paladin (who can then spend ASIs on feats instead of boosting STR).

Another limitation could be gold cost. That kind of modification to a warforged's body (or to be mounted on to the warforged's body) most likely isn't cheap, and will take some downtime to build. You don't start with it at 1st level. And heck, you're probably not paying for it before you have plate for the paladin and half plate for the artificer. A similar protective carriage that only provides half cover might be more affordable and weigh much less, so that might be feasible early on.

Point is, there are some practical ways this could be limited without resorting to artificial restrictions. I don't expect everyone to think those limits are sufficient, so YMMV.

Another consequence to consider is that the artificer will be able to grant half cover with their cannon after 15th level. But if they already have 3/4 cover, then they won't gain any benefit from that (though the paladin would). That's pretty late level, though, but something to keep in mind. Heck, you could even strike a compromise and have the protective carriage only grant half cover, but it will stack with the half cover from the cannon to create 3/4 cover. This way, you can't get 3/4 cover until 15th level, which sounds reasonable, and it's reliant on you having a cannon out (which could be destroyed).