Can a Mount be Surprised When the Rider is Not?

[Elethiomel]

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.

Surprise isn't a condition like stun or daze. Surprise is not getting to act because you don't know what the hell is going on. You can't act in the surprise round because you can't act before your initiative count - a surprised character has an effective initiative count in the surprise round of "sometime next round".

The mount acts on the PC's initiative. Since the PC has an initiative count in the surprise round, so does the mount.

Plus it breaks verisimilitude - especially for people who've been in the saddle. A trained horse responds to the rider's commands, and it does so when the rider issues them.

 

[Atavar]

Surprise isn't a condition like stun or daze.

Surprise doesn't have to be a condition like stun or daze in order for something to be affected by it. Within the rules of the game, a horse can be surprised when he is alone. Nothing in the rules says that he becomes immune to being surprised because he has a rider.

Surprise is not getting to act because you don't know what the hell is going on. You can't act in the surprise round because you can't act before your initiative count - a surprised character has an effective initiative count in the surprise round of "sometime next round".

The mount acts on the PC's initiative. Since the PC has an initiative count in the surprise round, so does the mount.

You are assuming that surpirsed characters don't have an initiative count in the surprise round. That isn't true. All of my players and NPCs roll initiative right away, whether they are surprised or not. If they are surprised, they simply cannot act on their initiative count in the surprise round.

You are also assuming that just because something has an initiative count, that it gets to act on its initiative count. Also incorrect. You can't if you are dazed or stunned. You also cannot act if you are surprised.

Plus it breaks verisimilitude - especially for people who've been in the saddle. A trained horse responds to the rider's commands, and it does so when the rider issues them.

Not if something prevents it from doing so, like being surprised. Since the RAW doesn't seem to speak on point, it needs to be Rule Zeroed. For you (and your apparent experiece in the saddle) it seems to mean the horse is never surprised with a rider. For me, it means that a horse, which can be surprised without a rider, doesn't magically become immune to being surprised just because he has a rider.

Both ways to go are correct, and neither is wrong, given the individual DM preference.

Take care,

Atavar

 

[Cameron]

Surprise doesn't have to be a condition like stun or daze in order for something to be affected by it. Within the rules of the game, a horse can be surprised when he is alone. Nothing in the rules says that he becomes immune to being surprised because he has a rider.

You are assuming that surpirsed characters don't have an initiative count in the surprise round. That isn't true. All of my players and NPCs roll initiative right away, whether they are surprised or not. If they are surprised, they simply cannot act on their initiative count in the surprise round.

You are also assuming that just because something has an initiative count, that it gets to act on its initiative count. Also incorrect. You can't if you are dazed or stunned. You also cannot act if you are surprised.

Not if something prevents it from doing so, like being surprised. Since the RAW doesn't seem to speak on point, it needs to be Rule Zeroed. For you (and your apparent experiece in the saddle) it seems to mean the horse is never surprised with a rider. For me, it means that a horse, which can be surprised without a rider, doesn't magically become immune to being surprised just because he has a rider.

Both ways to go are correct, and neither is wrong, given the individual DM preference.

Take care,

Atavar

You are not getting the point.

First off, a well-trained mount will act instantly if the rider tells it to do so. This has nothing to do with a surprise round. For example, a horse is galloping freely along and the rider pulls on the reins. It reacts immediately and slows down. Hard. Yet, you are telling me that it has to be aware of the stop signal coming before it can react to it in a timely manner. I don't think so.

So, what makes an ambush by a third party any different than if it was galloping along and the rider suddenly issues a command? Nothing at all. If the rider saw the threat and told the horse to move (in effect pulling on the reins in the above scenario), it moves. Immediately.

If the horse sees a lion in the tall grass, but the rider didn't, it will react as well. It may rear, it may stop, or it may switch directions, all without being told by the rider. So, yes, you may think that it is wrong that the PCs get (in effect) two attempts at avoiding danger, but that is exactly how it works in real life. And that is how the system in DnD 3.5 works (if you look at the interaction between individual Spot checks and the rule that the mount moves on your initiative).

Many lives have been saved in real life by animals reacting to a danger that the inferior human senses had not perceived yet. It is something to keep in mind.

 

[Doug Sundseth]

First, I'd definitely allow a mount to act when the PC directs it to act. A surprise round is a mechanism to account for a lack of knowledge (IMO; the initiative roll accounts for reaction times), and a mount doesn't need knowledge of anything but his rider's commands to act. Since the rider is acting, that should be sufficient.

That said, I'd still roll spot checks for the mount, but this would not be to advantage the rider. When a mount sees something, it can react. If not otherwise directed by the rider, the mount will act at its own discretion. A horse's discretion is informed by how threatening it finds something. If it sees something really scary (like, say, a squirrel or perhaps a scrap of paper) it is likely to react strongly. The primary defense mechanism of a horse is flight, which will usually mean that the horse will bolt. (Things change somewhat with a war-trained horse, but even there, this wouldn't be an unlikely instinctual reaction.)

Given that, if the horse sees the threat but the rider is clueless, I'd require a Ride check with a DC dependent on the nature of the creature and its distance at the start of the combat. Failure means the horse bolts; failure by 5 or more means the horse bolts without the rider.

ps. Per the MM, a horse has a default WIS of 12. IME, that's about 8 points too high.

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

It is much easier if you simply lock the Rider and Mount's initiative together, and stay completely consistent to that.

Allowing the Mount to get out of sync of the Rider creates at least as many problems as it solves.

 

[billd91]

It is much easier if you simply lock the Rider and Mount's initiative together, and stay completely consistent to that.

Allowing the Mount to get out of sync of the Rider creates at least as many problems as it solves.

I think, based on the discussion above, the only time the mount's initiative should really deviate from the rider's is when the mount is aware of something and the rider is not (rider is surprised and thus, in effect, has not even rolled initiative). In that case, I'd give the mount it's initiative roll... which would be superceded by the rider's when the rider gets his own initiative roll.

 

[billd91]

ps. Per the MM, a horse has a default WIS of 12. IME, that's about 8 points too high.

I don't see a problem with a horse with a Wisdom of 12. Net result is a positive modifier to Spot and Listen check compared to the normal human. Do you have particular experience suggesting horses are particularly imperceptive?

 

[Doug Sundseth]

I don't see a problem with a horse with a Wisdom of 12. Net result is a positive modifier to Spot and Listen check compared to the normal human. Do you have particular experience suggesting horses are particularly imperceptive?

It's not the perception that's the problem; I wouldn't have any problem with giving a horse a bonus to Spot and Listen to counter any reduction in those skills caused by a reduction in WIS.

The problem is that horses have the antithesis of common sense when interacting with humans. (Many of their behaviors make sense for a prey animal.) They don't react calmly in a crisis, they don't have strong willpower, and they can react violently and randomly to unexpected stimuli.

All of that bespeaks low WIS to me.

 

[irdeggman]

/jawdrop. Where is that in the PHB, guessing in the combat section?

pg 157

 

[irdeggman]

I have to agree that a mount acts on the rider's initiative.

There is information in the mounted combat section (pg 157) that indicates that the rider and mount act as one (with the exception of each having its own actions for purposes of movement/full attacks/etc.).

"Your mount acts on your initiative count. . ."

"If your mount charges, you also take the AC penalty associated with a charge."

"With a DC 5 ride check, you can guide your mount with your knees so as to use both hands to attack or defend yourself. This is a free action."