D&D 5E How good is the default Paladin at mounted combat?

[FreeTheSlaves]

I see the noble background doesn't give animal handling nor is it included in the Paladin skills.

So what gives?

Is the default Paladin going to have to buy a military saddle, strap in and otherwise bounce around the battlefield all Don Quixote?

 

[obijon_kenobi]

Training in animal handling, or lack thereof, has zero bearing on mounted combat. So the default Paladin is as good as anyone else at mounted combat. (Page 198 of your PHB)

 

[Jaelommiss]

Training in animal handling, or lack thereof, has zero bearing on mounted combat. So the default Paladin is as good as anyone else at mounted combat. (Page 198 of your PHB)

On page 178 of the PHB it says that animal handling can be used to "keep a mount from getting spooked" and "control your mount when you attempt a risky maneuver."

For my own table I would allow players using mounts trained for combat, such as a warhorse, to automatically succeed on checks against getting spooked in combat. If they are riding on something used more for civilian purposes, such as a mule or draft horse, then the check would be required. I might also allow players to spend an action to make an animal handling check to free a mount that has been frightened.

I'd only require a roll for risky maneuvers that go well beyond what the mount is trained to do, such as climbing a jumping over a market stall or using a stack of crates to get onto a rooftop.

Of course, the paladin can use the Find Steed spell to get a mount with higher than normal intelligence and has a telepathic link with it. With such a mount I would waive animal handling checks entirely.

 

[FreeTheSlaves]

Ok, but what about page 178?

It looks like if you need to jump a ditch or the mount sees something spooky you'll be rolling you awesome animal handling skill??

 

[obijon_kenobi]

Sure, but that wasn't the original question. Luckily you don't need animal handling to avoid bouncing around the battlefield "all Don Quixote" (awesome reference, btw ) The easiest solution (which isn't game breaking, and if I was your DM I'd give it the nod) would be to add animal handling to the Paladin's class skill list, right?

 

[Tormyr]

I see the noble background doesn't give animal handling nor is it included in the Paladin skills.

So what gives?

Is the default Paladin going to have to buy a military saddle, strap in and otherwise bounce around the battlefield all Don Quixote?

The default Noble Paladin, yes. But there is nothing stopping you from working with your DM to trade History or Persuasion for Animal Handling, choose a different background, or make your own background. Your DM can help with a background that will fit the framework of the adventure.

 

[Joe Liker]

If you want to be a mounted paladin and be good at handling animals, you need to pay the same price as anyone else during character creation. That's what backgrounds are for. If the existing backgrounds do not suit you, make your own, or swap out one of the skills in an existing background for Animal Handling. There are plenty of people who want to play paladins but do not want to do mounted combat.

I see no reason to give special consideration based solely on tradition; the class is already quite good as written. Giving it an extra skill proficiency option is unfair to the other classes, especially when this situation is easily addressed with other tools in the character creation process.

 

[Parmandur]

Use the Knight variant trait, and substitute animal handling for history. There ya go; if mounted combat is a major concern, the squire will be necessary anyways.