mattcolville
Adventurer
billd91 said:
I agree. In fact, I'd probably allow the player to make checks for both rider and mount and if either is not surprised, neither is the other.
-
The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Can a Mount be Surprised When the Rider is Not?
- Thread starter Atavar
- Start date
I agree. In fact, I'd probably allow the player to make checks for both rider and mount and if either is not surprised, neither is the other.
Snifferdoo
First Post
Moorcrys
Explorer
I'd say if the player has ever used the mount to make a spot or listen check when he has failed it, or in any way has looked to the mount as a separate entity with regards to acting when the player cannot, then I'd treat it separately for surprise. If he never, ever uses it in that way, then I'd let it act in tandem with him and force no separate check.
Pagan priest
First Post
Bad DM, no donut. The horse acts when the riders tells it to. I suspect that most of the posters who have said otherwise don't have a lot of time in the saddle of a real horse. Not that I am an expert, I haven't ridden a horse in several years now. The only way surprise would matter would be if the horse was surprised at having a rider.
On the other hand, having the horse roll for surprise can be reasonable. It might notice somethig that the rider misses. Unless the rider has a magical connection to facilitate communication, the only thing the rider would know would be that something is wrong. IRL, animals react differently to different stimuli, so a nearby fire would cause a different reaction than a nearby dragon, which in turn would be different from the reaction to goblins in the bushes at the edge of the path. Recognizing just what the various reactions mean is the hard part.
On the other hand, having the horse roll for surprise can be reasonable. It might notice somethig that the rider misses. Unless the rider has a magical connection to facilitate communication, the only thing the rider would know would be that something is wrong. IRL, animals react differently to different stimuli, so a nearby fire would cause a different reaction than a nearby dragon, which in turn would be different from the reaction to goblins in the bushes at the edge of the path. Recognizing just what the various reactions mean is the hard part.
exempt
First Post
I would have the mount roll a Spot/Listen check to see if it notices something.
If it fails, then it still acts on the rider's turn, but it can't do anything special other than move (like fight; though it probably couldn't anyway since it's a surprise round).
If it succeeds and the rider succeeds, then the mount acts on the rider's turn and it can do more than move (like fight).
If it succeeds but the rider fails, then the mount can do what it is trained or has the intelligence to do. For horses, this would be simply sit there until goaded to move, but more advanced mounts could take off and fight without their ride knowing what's up.
And yes, the mount acts on your turn: Your mount acts on your initiative count as you direct it. You move at its speed, but the mount uses its action to move. (from d20srd.org: http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/specialAttacks.htm#mountedCombat).
If it fails, then it still acts on the rider's turn, but it can't do anything special other than move (like fight; though it probably couldn't anyway since it's a surprise round).
If it succeeds and the rider succeeds, then the mount acts on the rider's turn and it can do more than move (like fight).
If it succeeds but the rider fails, then the mount can do what it is trained or has the intelligence to do. For horses, this would be simply sit there until goaded to move, but more advanced mounts could take off and fight without their ride knowing what's up.
And yes, the mount acts on your turn: Your mount acts on your initiative count as you direct it. You move at its speed, but the mount uses its action to move. (from d20srd.org: http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/specialAttacks.htm#mountedCombat).
Laman Stahros
First Post
I think you are missing the point in the OP. The DM called for the horse to make a Spot check, not the player. The player was opposed to it on the grounds that the horse is controlled by the PC, who made his Spot check.calypso15 said:
In the games that I GM, I do not make mounts make Spot checks. There is enough going on at the table without trying to shoehorn reality into a fantasy game. YMMV.
green slime
First Post
IMO, a needless complication.
Consider:
Which would you rather keep track of?
4 PC's with 2 cohorts and a monolithic group of enemies (say 20 worg riders), or the same + 6 mounts + animal companions, and 20 mounted goblins plus 20 worg.
After you've finished rolling Spot checks, annoted the results, and determined initiative, its time to go home.
What does it add? Is this benefit worth it?
Consider:
Which would you rather keep track of?
4 PC's with 2 cohorts and a monolithic group of enemies (say 20 worg riders), or the same + 6 mounts + animal companions, and 20 mounted goblins plus 20 worg.
After you've finished rolling Spot checks, annoted the results, and determined initiative, its time to go home.
What does it add? Is this benefit worth it?
ThirdWizard
First Post
Drowbane said:
I think it's in the combat chapter under mounted combat, but I haven't used the actual book for anything in so long I can't be sure.
Thanks for the great replies everyone. I can see a DM choosing to hand-wave the issue and only require one role from the rider to make things simpler. However, I see nothing wrong with my ruling, either.
If a mount is paralyzed can he still act on the rider's turn just because the rider isn't paralyzed? No. Can a mount become paralyzed? Yes.
If a mount is dazed can he still act on the rider's turn just because the rider isn't dazed? No. Can a mount become dazed? Yes.
If a mount is surprised can he still act on the rider's turn just because the rider isn't surprised? I say no. Can a mount become surprised? Well, if it can become surprised when it is alone, then it can become surprised when it has a rider. It doesn't magically gain immunity to surprise when someone climbs onto its back.
In my campaign's case only one of the characters is mounted, and the foes are rarely mounted, so the extra roles/time issue isn't really a factor for me.
As it stands, I see nothing in the RAW that makes mounts immune to surprise, and since it doesn't specifically say how to handle mount surprise that leaves it a Rule 0 issue.
Thanks,
Atavar
If a mount is paralyzed can he still act on the rider's turn just because the rider isn't paralyzed? No. Can a mount become paralyzed? Yes.
If a mount is dazed can he still act on the rider's turn just because the rider isn't dazed? No. Can a mount become dazed? Yes.
If a mount is surprised can he still act on the rider's turn just because the rider isn't surprised? I say no. Can a mount become surprised? Well, if it can become surprised when it is alone, then it can become surprised when it has a rider. It doesn't magically gain immunity to surprise when someone climbs onto its back.
In my campaign's case only one of the characters is mounted, and the foes are rarely mounted, so the extra roles/time issue isn't really a factor for me.
As it stands, I see nothing in the RAW that makes mounts immune to surprise, and since it doesn't specifically say how to handle mount surprise that leaves it a Rule 0 issue.
Thanks,
Atavar
Similar Threads
