Proposed house rule: Spending your hp on behalf of those whose space you share

[Segev]

This is something that I've thought of in terms of mounts an awful lot, but which I wonder isn't just better done as a general rule. The proposed rule is as follows:


When a creature whose space you share takes damage, you may choose to take the damage to your hit points instead of to theirs if they are willing to permit this. Controlled mounts always count as "willing" for this purpose, as do incapacitated creatures.

This covers mounts in general, and also independent mounts who might want to take the hit for their rider. It allows a master to take a hit for his familiar if his familiar is in his space.

I would probably add some fluff text reinforcing the "not all hp damage is meat" rule, pointing out that this can represent actively taking the hit, or otherwise doing something that helps deflect the blow away from the creature you're protecting. I would restrict this to those within your space both to protect the value of Fighting Styles that let you interpose your shield for adjacent allies and to give other potential class features room to expand it to a more general tanking feature.

Note that it explicitly doesn't require your Reaction; this is strictly a function of expending hp to prevent somebody else from having to do so.

Is this overpowered? Useful? Not useful? Too confusing or creates corner cases I'm not seeing as I propose it?

[heavyfuel]

The only abuse I see is that smart mounts might effectively give extra HP to their riders because the mount can also take the damage if they so want.

A Paladin riding on a Pegasus effectively has 58 extra HP because your rule works both ways. Anyone targeting the Pegasus or the Pally will have to deal enough damage to bring both of them down instead of just one of them

[Kane0]

The Mounted Combatant already has this to some extent yes?

[Sigreid]

I could see that as an excellent feat or class feature but wouldn't do it for free.

I might be willing to replace one of the fighter class features to do this as it would give fighters specifically a valuable and unique niche.

[Angelalex242]

This sounds like it should be part of mounted combat, for sure. Otherwise...eh.

[kingcheesepants]

How would this work for something like fireball which is hitting both of them already? Can 1 guy take twice the damage to save his horse?

[Amnestic]

Makes Phantom Steed ridiculously strong at no investment. Its fragility is part of the drawback of it being faster than any other land mount and its easy replaceabilty, and this takes that away.

Agreed with others: make it a (sub)class feature or alternate class feature (Mounted Fighting Style?) or part of a feat.

[Segev]

How would this work for something like fireball which is hitting both of them already? Can 1 guy take twice the damage to save his horse?That would be how it would work, yeah.


Makes Phantom Steed ridiculously strong at no investment. Its fragility is part of the drawback of it being faster than any other land mount and its easy replaceabilty, and this takes that away.

Agreed with others: make it a (sub)class feature or alternate class feature (Mounted Fighting Style?) or part of a feat.

Eh, I find phantom steed to be poorly designed, either not lasting long enough for out-of-combat travel or being too fragile to use in combat. It needs to be changed somehow to be worth spending 10 minutes or a third level spell slot casting, because as-is, you're not getting very far with it.

That said, I had actually forgotten this would be a good use of that house rule, so I will accept your argument that it's a big buff to that spell.

[Reach Weapon]

The only abuse I see is that smart mounts might effectively give extra HP to their riders because the mount can also take the damage if they so want.
I believe there's an active thread implying this would chronically gift some party member a familiar's worth of temp HP.