Anemic Horses

[Klaus]

I am not so concerned about what horses can really carry, I'm concerned about the fact that Dragonborn have a hidden disadvantage (which is against the design philosophy of 4e where everything is supposed to be up front). It will likely be a level or two before the PCs can easily afford riding horses and longer before they can afford warhorses. And Rage Drakes? There's no guide on how much they should cost, but non-combatant riding horses cost 75 GP and are level 1, combat-capable warhorses cost 680 gp and are level 3. So, a Rage Drake must cost at least 1,000 gp. Further, Rage Drakes have the same carrying capacity as a riding horse anyway!

I think that all player races should be able to easily get mounts during early heroic tier. Further, I'd prefer for it to be horses, to save the coolness of exotic mounts for paragon tier. It would be one thing if going over load reduced speed by one, but reducing them to slowed is ridiculous. It means the majority of medium sized defender types will be faster on foot once they've accumulated any serious amount of gear.

Afford? Throw a Human Guard (level 3) and a warhorse (Level 3) at the party. If the party declares it's trying not to kill the horse, it is merely unconscous at 0 hp. After it is healed, use a simple skill challenge (skills: Nature, Insight, Heal) for the party to gain the horse's confidence. If they succeed, they have a new warhorse.

 

[Plane Sailing]

I can't imagine a PC putting a 14 into their main stat anymore.

Maul Fighter in my new campaign chose to have Str 13 and Con 18 - because he wanted lots of hit points and knew that Con would help him with maul-specific powers in the future.

- helping the imagination since 1999 -

Cheers

 

[Syrsuro]

I can press 175 lbs over my head, but I can't press 300, it's because I don't have enough muscle. And given what I know about muscle and how and why it weighs several times more than fat, needing another 15 lbs. of it to almost double that figure is pretty close to fact (although looking at this chart now, that'd be the jump from 14 to 18). But really, 18 str is about the average for a D&D fighter (I'd say it's 17, honestly). I can't imagine a PC putting a 14 into their main stat anymore.

You are right. If the weight of characters was actually in any way related to their strength, the average fighter would weigh 220#. But in reality D&D it does not. In reality (in my experience) most players give their characters weights that are 200# or lower.

Especially when the PHB lists the weight range for humans as 135 to 220 pounds, putting weights over 200# at the very high end of the range.</p>

It was this tendency that led to my assertion about the weight of the average fighter - not assumptions as to what the real-world equivalent strength would weigh as that is irrelevant to the game rules.

No, I can't see the difference, because it's the same thing. I suggested slapping on extra capacity for a horse. You suggested slapping on extra capacity for your drake.

So, you really don't see the difference between making a ruling on facts that are not part of the RAW (the weight capacity of a Rage Drake) versus making changes to the rules as they are written. Really. You don't see a difference.


Both are certainly allowed, but they differ significantly in the extent to which they are 'changing' the rules (technically, my approach doesn't change a single rule of the game).
I'm all for house rules. I just don't agree either with the OP that there is a problem or with your approach. (If you had suggested adding 100# to the carry weight I would have agreed that was a valid approach. It was the ludicrous 720# that got my attention, as well as the later mistaken logic - suggesting changing the overall formula (crossing into major overhaul of the gamerules) behind that number into a formula that wasn't correct in any version).

You can't just state your opinion and use that for ammunition in an argument. You literally said "If drakes aren't strong enough to carry dragonborn, I will make them that way, because that's what I want". And while that is totally fine (and I even agree with you), that is certainly not a valid argument as to why I can't do the same thing with a horse.

Actually, I said quite a bit more than that. I gave facts as support FOR my opinion (information from external sources on the real-world weight capacity of horses, the fact that Rage Drakes are included in Dragonborn encounters, differences in Rage Drake anatomy (based on the visual image in the text), etc.)

EDIT: You also claim that these things are "facts", which is laughable. It's a fact that horses are not appropriate mounts for dragonborn? Really? No, I don't think so. It's unlikely as written but it's certainly not inappropriate and it's definitely not a fact.

Actually, I think I was for the most part pretty clear about what was fact and was inference from that fact.

Ok, when I stated that Dragonborn on Rage Drakes were cooler I didn't explicitely clarify that that part was opinion - but I thought that was implied.</p>
Carl

 

[darkadelphia]

So, you really don't see the difference between making a ruling on facts that are not part of the RAW (the weight capacity of a Rage Drake) versus making changes to the rules as they are written. Really. You don't see a difference.

There are rules for the capacity of a Rage Drake. A quadruped can carry its strength x 12.5 before it is slowed. A Rage Drake has the same strength score as a riding horse.

 

[Syrsuro]

There are rules for the capacity of a Rage Drake. A quadruped can carry its strength x 12.5 before it is slowed. A Rage Drake has the same strength score as a riding horse.

You're right. I hadn't put two and two together yet to arrive at four.

Ok, now I will consider crossing over from 'ruling' to 'house rule' and rule that rage drakes have a higher carry capacity than a horse. It's not final yet, I have to look over the other mounts first and see what they look ike. But I still like Rage Drakes (or some kind of drake) as the typical dragonborn mount.

I don't object to house rules - in fact I think they are what make the game work as the official rules tend to be generic and devoid of flavor.

But they sure as heck ain't gonna carry 720#s.

And I hold to my original position which is that horses, due to their anatomy and physiology (especially the spindly legs) ought to be on the low end as far as what they can carry for their strength and can't carry Dragonborn.

A rule that raises the carry weight of a Rage Drake but leaves that of a horse the same fits the twin requirements I like in a house rule:

It passes the 'reasonableness' check - it fits with the players expectations of what is possible based on their real-world own experience AND (more importantly imho) it is cool. Dragonborn, as massive creatures in their own right, eschewing the puny horses humans ride for massive reptilian creatures is just cool (imho, of course).


Removing the restriction on horses just changes the rules in a way that makes horses into an even more generic mount without adding any 'cool' (imho). So I don't see it as gaining anything to make it worth making the change, imho. Its just more fun, again - imho - to play in a world where there the differences between the races amount to more than just a word on a sheet and few racial abilities.

Carl

 

[Patlin]

Dragonborn are heavy characters, specially when coupled with armor and weapons. For them, it's warhorses, rage drakes or walking.

How about a Dragonborn Charioteer? Possibly a warhorse with an enchanted saddle?

Looking forward to Adventurer's Vault.

 

[darkadelphia]

As a note for everyone suggesting using exotic mounts--think about this. I did the math on how much mounts of any given level should be able to carry based on DMG 184. If a 300 lb dragonborn runs around naked, it needs something with 24 strength to carry it around, i.e. a level 16 quadrupedal brute. Btb mount rules mean Dragonborn have to walk until they're ready to leave the material world and shake the foundations of the universe. I rest my case. ;-) Proposed house rule--when mounted, a character is assumed to be carrying all the gear on the mount. The mount shares whatever encumbrance category the rider has. Unrealistic? Yes, it means a halfling wizard's horse carries far less than a dragonborn fighter. But, it's superior, imo, because it takes away all of the hidden punishments for choices the PCs don't fully understand at character creation.

 

[Syrsuro]

As a note for everyone suggesting using exotic mounts--think about this. I did the math on how much mounts of any given level should be able to carry based on DMG 184. If a 300 lb dragonborn runs around naked, it needs something with 24 strength to carry it around, i.e. a level 16 quadrupedal brute. Btb mount rules mean Dragonborn have to walk until they're ready to leave the material world and shake the foundations of the universe. I rest my case. ;-) Proposed house rule--when mounted, a character is assumed to be carrying all the gear on the mount. The mount shares whatever encumbrance category the rider has. Unrealistic? Yes, it means a halfling wizard's horse carries far less than a dragonborn fighter. But, it's superior, imo, because it takes away all of the hidden punishments for choices the PCs don't fully understand at character creation.

I find your rule wording ambiguous.


"when mounted, a character is assumed to be carrying all the gear on the mount. The mount shares whatever encumbrance category the rider has."


Do you mean: "When mounted, a character is assumed to be carrying all of his own gear as well as all gear that is on the horse, and the encumbrance of the horse and rider together is based on the character's strength"


Or do you mean: "When mounted, a character is assumed to be using the horse to carry all his gear. The encumbrance of the horse and rider together is that of the character."


Or do you mean: "When mounted, the character's gear is not counted against the weight on the horse, only the actual weight of the character itself. The horse and rider together use the rider's encumbrance."


Or, finally, do you mean: "When mounted, the character's gear is not counted against the weight on the horse, only the actual weight of the character itself. The horse and rider together use the worst of the two encumbrance ratings."





And whichever you are describing - how would you treat a situation such as the one that started this where two people are riding on the same horse.Carl

 

[On Puget Sound]

Magic Item: Dragonborn Saddle - Level 2

Effect: A mount wearing this saddle can carry twice the weight its strength would normally allow.

problem solved?

 

[Syrsuro]

Magic Item: Dragonborn Saddle - Level 2

Effect: A mount wearing this saddle can carry twice the weight its strength would normally allow.

problem solved?

Sure - a magic item fix works as well. Not as cool as a rage drake imho, but it definately works.
Frankly - any solution that follows the maxim of Specific overrides General is will work. In 3.5, the way to fix a problem was to change the underlying rules because the PCs, the monsters, everything was expected to follow the same set of rigid and unyielding rules. Fortunately, in 4E that is no longer the case, and instead the general rules are there as a jumping off point - and no single creature is necessarily bound by them, but instead can have specific rules which apply to them according to whatever makes for a fun game.
Increase the carry weight of all quadrupeds? Not a good idea (imho, of course) as it has global effects across the entire game and is thus 'overwhelming force' when applied to a very specific problem.
Recognize that Dragonborn have problems riding a horse and increase the carry weight of a single mount type (either horse or rage drake) so that they can ride something? Much better, imho, as it applies a specific fix and doesn't change anything outside of what needs to be changed. (The fact that I prefer a rage drake - and like the idea of rage drakes being associated with Dragonborn just as Dire Boars are associated with Dwarves - is less important than the fact that there is no reason to change anything beyond the carry capacity of a single type of mount to fix this problem.)
Create a magic item (or a feat or whatever) to get around the specific problem? Another decent solution (although personally, I don't think inventing an item is preferable to modifying a mount to fill the need because although it works for the PC, it doesn't really address the question of what all the other Dragonborn ride in their native lands unless this saddle is commonplace.
What doesn't work, imho, is a fix that ignores that maxim and instead takes the approach of using the sledgehammer of instituting a global fix (like increasing the carry weight formula for all quadrupeds) to solve a narrowly focused problem.

Carl