D&D 5E Attacking with a warhorse

[Mercule]

How about this?

A pc uses his/her bonus action to allow a warhorse to attack.

If you have the mounted combat feat, no need to waste a bonus action. The warhorse makes an attack on its own.

This is exactly what I was thinking -- with the caveat that the mount must be trained to attacked, as a warhorse would be.

 

[I'm A Banana]

I'd let someone use their action to instruct their mount to attack. Possibly even worth it at low levels, for folks who don't wield martial weapons.

The bonus action would make it VERY powerful in comparison to attacking with a second weapon (which is typically limited to a d6 without a feat - a warhorse is like a greatsword!)

 

[not-so-newguy]

I'd let someone use their action to instruct their mount to attack. Possibly even worth it at low levels, for folks who don't wield martial weapons.

The bonus action would make it VERY powerful in comparison to attacking with a second weapon (which is typically limited to a d6 without a feat - a warhorse is like a greatsword!)

A warhorse is a constant drain on food and money, although the resource management aspect of DnD seems to get hand waved in my experience.

 

[I'm A Banana]

A warhorse is a constant drain on food and money, although the resource management aspect of DnD seems to get hand waved in my experience.

Different pillars. Food and money are more for exploration (where the horse more than pays for itself in terms of carrying capacity and ability to live on forage). The economy in combat is actions, and a bonus action for a 2d6+ attack would be a hell of a good value. So much that I'd be surprised if warhorses weren't used in every combat where they'd be available by every character.

 

[ExploderWizard]

So much that I'd be surprised if warhorses weren't used in every combat where they'd be available by every character.

If the terrain and circumstances permit it, that is exactly the idea. If you are in a position to take on foot troops with cavalry- DO IT!! The whole idea is not to be fair or balanced but to crush the enemy. Mounted troops vs. foot is a terrific morale breaker.

Of course, characters can't bring their horses everywhere.

 

[I'm A Banana]

If the terrain and circumstances permit it, that is exactly the idea. If you are in a position to take on foot troops with cavalry- DO IT!! The whole idea is not to be fair or balanced but to crush the enemy. Mounted troops vs. foot is a terrific morale breaker.

Of course, characters can't bring their horses everywhere.

Yeah, that's fair enough. I don't imagine that'd work for every game, but if that's what you want, go for it.

 

[miniaturehoarder]

BTW don't forget if your mount is acting independently, that means you are on a separate initiative tick, which means you are likely using the very punitive Ready system of 5E as your mount won't be moving toward your foes at the same time you are wanting to take your attacks.

I'd probably let a warmount rider in proper control use one of their own attacks to make the mount attack. Sure not very generous, but the beastmaster ranger sets the precedence IMHO.

 

[El Mahdi]

...a trained warhorse is fairly useless if it is unable to attack, that is why it is a WAR horse and cost so much more than a riding horse.

True, but only part of the story. The difference between a War Horse and a Riding Horse isn't just its aggressiveness and ability to attack, but its ability to be ridden into combat in the first place without bolting in fear. That's very expensive training.

I agree, it's mostly useless if unable to attack (with the exception of providing greater mobility/speed to the rider). I think it also ignores the real-world utilization and historical impact that War Horses contributed.

I'd let someone use their action to instruct their mount to attack. Possibly even worth it at low levels, for folks who don't wield martial weapons.

The bonus action would make it VERY powerful in comparison to attacking with a second weapon (which is typically limited to a d6 without a feat - a warhorse is like a greatsword!)

I'd probably let a warmount rider in proper control use one of their own attacks to make the mount attack.

This is what I would do too. Alternatively, I can see a rider giving it free-rein to attack on its own, and allow the rider to supersede/control the mount when preferred.

The rules are unfortunately slim or silent on this. It's a big hole in the rules.

 

[gyor]

The Mounted rules are confusing on how the Paladin's Find steed's Steed works.

One cool thing is the ability to share spells. So a Avenger can cast Haste on himself and the spell will effect himself and his mount, Fey Knight can cast Misty Step and teleport his mount with him and so on.

 

[Flamestrike]

Attacking with a horse?

It probably requires a decent strength score (Barbarian perhaps), and proficiency with improvised weapons:



Not sure how much damage the horse would do though.