D&D 5E Assualt on Dire Wood [OOC]

[Steve Gorak]

Sorry, here're the religion roll (non-proficient, +2 wis): [roll0]

 

[Strahd_Von_Zarovich]

FYI, minor illusion allows the casting of an object only, not a creature. Also, Jeremy Crawford clarified that the object is stationnary. For a moving creature, you'll need to cast silent image, possibly augmented by minor illusion for the sound.
Cheers,

SG

Got it. thanks!

 

[Steve Gorak]

Yes, this is what I meant. I will look into it a bit more, but my gut instinct is the play it as above. If balance issues start creeping in, I will adjust accordingly.

Just another thing to add in, a warhorse is an expensive outlay for a character and I think it should give it's rider some benefits. But bear in mind it is not strictly RAW and it is important to remember that for other games.

So I will read into it, but to be honest my interpretation will be just that, my interpretation.

[MENTION=6805287]3SpdDragster[/MENTION], it's your prerogative, but a horse has 18 str, and there is an exchange of 1 attack (not even an action, an attack!) for a potential of 3 (2 hooves + 1 trample), with ability not taken into account.
I agree that a warhorse should confer some type of benefit to the rider, if they know how to ride properly. Perhaps a successful animal handling check (required to get the warhorse to attack), combined with the sacrifice of 1 attack, would balance things a it more. Failure implying the loss of the horse's attacks, and no more movement? In any case, the horse should use up its action for the hooves attack, so no disengage possible & moving away (on a successful check, if this recommendation is taken) would trigger an AOO from enemies.

Aside from the strategic use of faery fire early in the combat, I think we would have had a much harder time if the enemies had all taken their AOO as characters exited their threatened area without disengaging.
Cheers,


SG

 

[Steve Gorak]

Got it. thanks!

My pleasure!

 

[River Song]

Still one standing by my count! It's not over yet.

 

[Steve Gorak]

Still one standing by my count! It's not over yet.

Ok, thanks!

Note: apologies, I forgot to do the concentration check to maintain hex when Dorn was hit with 13 damage. Dorn hasn't had a successful hit in combat, so this has had no impact.
DC 10 check (higher of 10 or half damage amount): concentration check (proficient) [roll0]
Cheers,

SG

 

[3SpdDragster]

Perhaps a successful animal handling check (required to get the warhorse to attack), combined with the sacrifice of 1 attack, would balance things a it more. Failure implying the loss of the horse's attacks, and no more movement? In any case, the horse should use up its action for the hooves attack, so no disengage possible & moving away (on a successful check, if this recommendation is taken) would trigger an AOO from enemies.

I like the idea, anyone have recommendations on the DC? Once it is sorted I will put a house rule subsection on the front page of the OOC thread to deal with mounted combat.

Aside from the strategic use of faery fire early in the combat, I think we would have had a much harder time if the enemies had all taken their AOO as characters exited their threatened area without disengaging.

I was sure people were using KI to get out of combat. Yann was circling the creature but never, to my knowledge, left combat with it. I thought Dorn disengaged as well? I won't bother rechecking posts but will keep an eye on it.

 

[Binder Fred]

Yann was circling the creature but never, to my knowledge, left combat with it.

Correct.

 

[Binder Fred]

Alright, got more time now.

For the record, I disagree with Steve on Trampling Charge -- pretty much on all particulars and for reasons stated above. As it is, with this character and in this particular case, Trampling Charge is a cute, non-gamebreaking power. One I really enjoy using. Let's just let it be and get back to enjoying all the cool stuff we can all do in this game called D&D.

"Commanding an animal to perform a task or trick that it knows" was a DC10 Move action in both 3.5 and Pathfinder.

 

[Steve Gorak]

I like the idea, anyone have recommendations on the DC? Once it is sorted I will put a house rule subsection on the front page of the OOC thread to deal with mounted combat.

These are some thoughts, considering that unintelligent mounts were not (RAW and RAI) intended to attack. It's not that game-breaking for a warhorse, but would be for a 8 headed hydra...
[sblock]Rider must do an animal handling check to trade one of his/her attacks for the mount to attack. The mount attacks as an action (no other actions allowed for the mount during the round). Failure implies mount will not attack, loses its action, and stops its movement in front of intended target. If the check failed my 5 or more the rider must do a second handle animal check (same DC as the first one) or fall from the mount, and unless a DC 10 dex save is successful, be prone , and take 1d6 damage.

Note: Mount will not attack a creature above its size.

Attack non-threatening foe: DC 5
Attack Threatening foe, normal humanoid: DC 10
Attack Threatening foe, monstrous Humanoid: DC 12

DC modifier for size: 2 sizes smaller: -2 (ex: warhorse attacking a halfling)
DC modifier for for 1 size smaller than mount: +0
DC modifier for same size as mount: +3

Modifier for non-humanoid foe: +2

Fey, fiend, elemental or other extraplanar foe: +3 DC modifier

Note: the mounted combatant feat grants advantage on the checks.[/sblock]

I was sure people were using KI to get out of combat. Yann was circling the creature but never, to my knowledge, left combat with it. I thought Dorn disengaged as well? I won't bother rechecking posts but will keep an eye on it.

I made my comment because Ki was used for dodge, but not disengage, and this didn't trigger an AOO as it should have...
Cheers,

SG