Find Steed, Find Greater Steed, and Combat

[Yunru]

The mounted combat rules only apply when you're... mounted in combat.
Thus a player controlled mount that is not mounted acts just like any other player controlled character.

 

[Hriston]

That is one interpretation. It is not consistent with other spells of this type, however.

Every other spell that summons a controlled creature is very explicit about how control works. They lay out in detail whether you need to take actions to give orders, when the summoned creature acts, what it does if not commanded, etc.

Find greater steed just says "you control the mount in combat." If read the way you read it, that leaves a host of questions open about how it's supposed to work. However, if read as a reference to the mounted combat rules, it provides the same level of precise detail as all the other summoning spells.

What sort of questions does it raise that aren't already answered by the rules for playing the game and that you use, for example, for controlling your PC or, if you're the DM, a monster in combat?

 

[Blue]

I might base its behavior off the PC's paladin oath.

In terms of behavior, the spell description says that the mount is unusually intelligent, strong and loyal (1st sentence) and you have an instinctive bond that allos you to fight as a seamless unit (2nd paragraph). Also it's celestial, fey or fiend, not beast.

Since these are listed in the spell they might be a good basis for it's behavior.

 

[tglassy]

I always get upset when a DM suggests that a player is getting too powerful with a perfectly logical, legal combination of abilities. No. They are not too powerful. They are simply ready for more than you are giving them. I threw the freaking Demogorgan at my players at one point because I knew they were powerful. Up the anti. Make your monsters fight better. Rejoice that they have figured out something powerful, because now you can bring about something even more so. Let them shine, and then knock them down. If it becomes that big of a deal, have the baddies target the steed. Make a baddie who curses the steed so it becomes sickly and unusable, and force them on a quest to heal it.

I had a DM who allowed my Rogue get a hold of a Shield Guardian. Big mistake. Went through the entire Tomb of Horrors with only me, a partner, and Herman, my Shield Guardian who wore a Cap of Disguise to look like an Orc Bodyguard wearing a tuxedo and sunglasses. Killed the Lich by accident, because a room with a bunch of huge statues and a portal that apparently led to the Vault, we got stuck and in a rage I had Herman throw all the statues through the portal. Which went to the Vault and killed the lich for us. Didn't even realize it until we got there. It was awesome. We felt like kings. Especially since fighting the Lich with only the three of us would have been impossible at level 8. Totally unrealistic, but we had a blast. Took the money and built a castle, had a town grow out of it, and when we played another campaign later, that town became a base for our new characters.

I should NOT have had that Shield Guardian, it made things way too easy. But it was fun as hell. Especially since I, having a Rogue, always seemed to figure out a way out of the problems, usually without combat. And Herman is legendary in our group. My sword was a Frostbrand named "The Common Cold." "You have been killed by The Common Cold" was my tag line.

Let them play. Let them feel awesome. Don't worry if other characters don't feel as awesome, let them find their own way to be awesome. Help them along if you have to, but don't nerf someone else because they play better. I promise you it will be ok.

Edit: Oh I forgot, Herman died in the Tomb of Horrors. Getting to the last room, turning the key makes the floor rise up into the ceiling. You're supposed to get out of the room, and everyone made it but Herman. He got squished. My DM was so relieved. It was a fitting end.

 

[jayoungr]

I always get upset when a DM suggests that a player is getting too powerful with a perfectly logical, legal combination of abilities.

You're the one reading that into my question. I'm ASKING whether the combination is logical and legal, because I was surprised at how strong it appeared to be and I was unfamiliar with the spell. The length of this discussion is showing me that it's not obvious to everyone (a lot seems to center around the word "control").

I haven't decided yet how I'll handle it at the table, so just chill.

 

[Autumn Bask]

I always get upset when a DM suggests that a player is getting too powerful with a perfectly logical, legal combination of abilities. No. They are not too powerful. They are simply ready for more than you are giving them. I threw the freaking Demogorgan at my players at one point because I knew they were powerful. Up the anti. Make your monsters fight better. Rejoice that they have figured out something powerful, because now you can bring about something even more so. Let them shine, and then knock them down. If it becomes that big of a deal, have the baddies target the steed. Make a baddie who curses the steed so it becomes sickly and unusable, and force them on a quest to heal it.

As someone who has played with a couple DMs who take this approach, I can assure you it is not so universally beloved and foolproof as you make it out to be; for all of the reasons I listed in my previous post, which you ignored.

Advice like this for DMs (i.e. "how to handle imbalance" vs. the more simple question of "is this imbalanced") is highly situational. It depends on the dynamics at their table and the goals of the campaign. That's why a forum is a useful place to ask for it; so that a variety of voices can be heard. Some may say different things, but that's fine, because we all play at different tables.

 

[jayoungr]

I also feel like "just target their toys" can be kind of a dick move if not handled properly. It's a tool in the DM's toolbox, but not one for every situation.

 

[Saeviomagy]

It just seems like this one single spell makes any character who takes it into a better version of the beastmaster ranger. I know the beastmaster is universally considered to be poorly designed, but it doesn't seem like one spell should be able to outdo an entire class.

That's just indicative of how poorly designed it is. At low level a beastmaster who chooses an animal as his companion is typically worse off than the exact same character ignoring their class ability and simply buying the same trained animal.

 

[Russell1382]

I think we're overlooking the fact that Find Greater Steed has a casting time of 10 minutes. You wouldn't be able to cast it in combat anyway.

 

[Seramus]

Your average player can just get a horse of their own. The stronger steeds summoned by FGS are more campaign dependent, but a 10+ level party should be able to get one in most established settings (FR/Oerth/etc). The main benefit of the spell is making those mounts moderately death proof (costing a slot and some time), which is handy since mount death is a comedic trope at this point. In that sense, I have no problem with the summoned mounts doing whatever an ordinary version of the mount could do. Because they could just get the ordinary version.