Mounted Combat Questions

[Fangor the Fierce]

Ok, it appears as though I am stuck in an Arena, and the Paladin I am fighting against has summoned his mount to aid him.

First of all, this was an honorable challenge, from a Fighter with Neutral Good alignment. The paladin calling his mount to help is a very cunning idea, yet i believe it would go against his Paladin code, due to this being labelled as an honorable fight. First of all, am I the only one that thinks like this?

Secondly, mounted combat. He has summoned his mount, who is next to him. On his initiative, he has decided to mount the warhorse while drawing his weapon. With a whopping +11 to Ride checks, I don't see much of a problem here. He is not fast mounting, simply mounting as his move action. Secondly, he then orders the mount to charge. Needless to say, he does not have a direct path to charge, as a pillar separates the two warriors. Question is, does he have the ability to charge, should there NOT be an unobstructed path between himself and I? Reason for my query: Move action was to mount and draw weapon. Can the mount then get a charge on the same round? If the pillar was not blocking me, he is wanting to mount, draw his weapon, charge on his steed, disarm me of my bow, and get his horse to attack in the same round. Seems a little bit much to me in one round.

Where can I actually look for the rules for mounting in combat, then charging and attacking?

 

[shilsen]

Ok, it appears as though I am stuck in an Arena, and the Paladin I am fighting against has summoned his mount to aid him.

First of all, this was an honorable challenge, from a Fighter with Neutral Good alignment. The paladin calling his mount to help is a very cunning idea, yet i believe it would go against his Paladin code, due to this being labelled as an honorable fight. First of all, am I the only one that thinks like this?

Depends on the individual's code and the framing of the challenge.

Secondly, mounted combat. He has summoned his mount, who is next to him. On his initiative, he has decided to mount the warhorse while drawing his weapon. With a whopping +11 to Ride checks, I don't see much of a problem here. He is not fast mounting, simply mounting as his move action.

He can't draw a weapon for free as part of a move action. He could draw it as part of a regular move, but that's not what he's doing (see table 8-2, PHB pg.141). Does he have Quick Draw?

Secondly, he then orders the mount to charge. Needless to say, he does not have a direct path to charge, as a pillar separates the two warriors. Question is, does he have the ability to charge, should there NOT be an unobstructed path between himself and I? Reason for my query: Move action was to mount and draw weapon. Can the mount then get a charge on the same round? If the pillar was not blocking me, he is wanting to mount, draw his weapon, charge on his steed, disarm me of my bow, and get his horse to attack in the same round. Seems a little bit much to me in one round.

Can't do it. He could do some things while the mount was in the process of charging if he was already mounted, but since it normally acts on his initiative and has to wait for him to mount, no can do.

Where can I actually look for the rules for mounting in combat, then charging and attacking?

Check the PHB under the Ride skill and then pg.154-5 (Charge) and 157 (Mounted Combat) in the combat section.

 

[R-Hero]

Ok, it appears as though I am stuck in an Arena, and the Paladin I am fighting against has summoned his mount to aid him.

First of all, this was an honorable challenge, from a Fighter with Neutral Good alignment. The paladin calling his mount to help is a very cunning idea, yet i believe it would go against his Paladin code, due to this being labelled as an honorable fight. First of all, am I the only one that thinks like this??

A NG fighter vs a LG paladin? Is it a fight to the death? I think I'm missing something. If I was challenged, I would use everything I had. Lawfull good don't mean Lawful Stupid.

Its tacticly sound. A mounted knight has an advantage over one on foot. It is a gift from his god to be used.
Just remind him that the horse is also a target. Jab the magical animal a couple of times and he'll send it on its way or get busy trying to heal the animal leaving him open to attacks..

Secondly, mounted combat. He has summoned his mount, who is next to him. On his initiative, he has decided to mount the warhorse while drawing his weapon. With a whopping +11 to Ride checks, I don't see much of a problem here. He is not fast mounting, simply mounting as his move action.

A player can make two move equivlent actions instead of a double move.
Getting the horse underway will have to wait until next round.

Secondly, he then orders the mount to charge. Needless to say, he does not have a direct path to charge, as a pillar separates the two warriors. Question is, does he have the ability to charge, should there NOT be an unobstructed path between himself and I? Reason for my query: Move action was to mount and draw weapon. Can the mount then get a charge on the same round? If the pillar was not blocking me, he is wanting to mount, draw his weapon, charge on his steed, disarm me of my bow, and get his horse to attack in the same round. Seems a little bit much to me in one round.

If it were up to me, Round 1, mount up and arm himself, Round two to charge and attack once with horse or sunder your bow. You can only get one attack after a full move.
Also can't charge without a straight line.

Where can I actually look for the rules for mounting in combat, then charging and attacking?

Players handbook glossary has most of the defenitions spell out.

 

[Fangor the Fierce]

Well, to further portray the scene, it was an honorable match, sort of in limbo, as it has no bearing on the campaign or characters. It is simply a 'what if' match.

His character has always preached about his kindness and only sees things as either good or evil. No grey areas. He has even wanted to kill my character, when she was forced to flee with some not so good elves. She had to, and instead of continuing the flight, she slew the elves....with some help from two others.

Needless to say, she called him out, saying she wanted an honorable match, to settle their differences. Even when she won initiative in the first round, and instead of sniping at him, she moved into position that he could see her, and called out to him, saying, "It would seem as though we are here to battle. This will be an honorable battle. I will not strike you until you have had a chance to know your enemy!"

She waited until his action, to fire. Honorable fight....in her opinion.

She then called him out to the battlefield, saying, "Seems as though your doubts in defeating a woman in combat make you call for help. How 'Honorable' of the 'Kind" one..." (He refers to himself as The Kind. She readies another arrow, but hesitates, readying it should he charge while mounted. She is giving him a chance to fight one on one...

His reply to her as she takes cover not allowing his mount the ability to charge is, "These skirmish tactics are unworthy of a true warrior."

Fitting....

Anyways, I looked at the references to page numbers and such, but still do not see where the move action of him mounting his horse denies his horse a full round of actions. I do see that His move action was to mount his horse. Another move action to draw his weapon, as drawing your weapon freely is only with a regular move, NOT a move equivalent action.

It just seems weird that there are not any clear cut rules on mounting a horse or such and what other actions are left, in the same round.

 

[Lord Pendragon]

Others have mentioned the Mounted Combat rules in question. He'd have to Fast Mount to get underway the round the mount appeared. He could then draw his weapon as a Move Action while the mount charged, and still get a charge attack at the end of it. It's the Move Action to mount that is messing him up.

Regarding the "honorable" battle, I see nothing dishonorable about the paladin calling his mount. A paladin's mount is as much a part of his abilities as a fighter's feats are a part of hers. Unless the fighter is fighting without using any of the superior techniques she's mastered (Greater Weapon Focus, Greater Weapon Specialization, etc. etc.) she has no grounds to call the paladin dishonorable for using his superior techniques, i.e. calling a god-given mount to lay down the smack.

As it is he'll be at a serious disadvantage, since he won't be able to Smite you.

 

[iwatt]

Regarding the "honorable" battle, I see nothing dishonorable about the paladin calling his mount. A paladin's mount is as much a part of his abilities as a fighter's feats are a part of hers. Unless the fighter is fighting without using any of the superior techniques she's mastered (Greater Weapon Focus, Greater Weapon Specialization, etc. etc.) she has no grounds to call the paladin dishonorable for using his superior techniques, i.e. calling a god-given mount to lay down the smack.

As it is he'll be at a serious disadvantage, since he won't be able to Smite you.

This was a challenge, for honor. Showing up for a duel mounted seems kinda unfair, to say the least. You don't find Galahad charging down unhorsed opponents in duels. Although not necessary, most DMs assume a straight Arturian Code of Conduct, in which Chivalry and respect for your opponents is a bif part. Maybe some people don't play with that basis, but in my experience, msot people stick to a typical code of honor. (i.e. don't strike at unarmed foes, once you have defeated a enemy, you don't have to kill him, etc...)

On the other hand, the other character is showing up with a bow, which certainly gives her a strong edge as well (guessing it id her weapon of choice).

But from the description Fangor gives (and of course it's biased ) the NG fighter is acting with more chivalry than the LG paladin.

Basically, this is why you have to have seconds at your duels They're in charge of the pesky little details like setting the rules of engagement.

Anyhow, what I see here is typical of the DnD ruleset. DnD does not reward you for talking to your enemies. It is ALL about striking first and striking hardest. Coupled with the fact that it has become a tactical minis game (which I really enjoy by the way), I've started to notice that people are becoming obsessed with efficiency in combat. It's all about using the right spell, getting in the right flanking position for the +2 and SA dice, ganging up on enemies in the most efficient order possible, etc.. I guess it's hard to disengage onself from the ruleset once COMBAT MODE ENGAGED starts flashing on our HUD.

 

[Sledge]

most people stick to a typical code of honor. (i.e. don't strike at unarmed foes...)

What if your opponent is a monk?
Seriously though the event should have begun with the paladin mounted already in all fairness. After all did his opponent have to string his bow? In a game between two paladins they can agree to start mounted, but for the paladin to give up his mount, while his fully capable opponent gives up nothing is just stupid, not honourable. The only problem this paladin seems to have is humility.

Truth be told, honourable combat is an impossibility. Either one person is better and has an advantage, or the results are mere chance. The closest you can come to in D&D is to have the two opponents set up rules that both can agree on. The actual to be gained is then in applying more restrictions to yourself. I.E. "I can fight you with only one sword." "Then I shall only wear leather armour."

Anyone familiar with BattleTech can find this sort of fighting in the Clan bidding system.

 

[taliesin15]

What I'm missing here is a sense of the size of the battlefield--the business about the pillar is only relevant if we're talking about a relatively small enclosed space--but what's really bothering me is having the mount charge in the 2nd Round?! Leaving aside the issue of whether the mount even can Charge when six seconds earlier it was standing still, I mean, how big is the arena? If the Mount is Charging full blast and the space is something on the order of 50' radius, the issue of it slowing down before hitting the opposite wall would come up...one thinks of Defensive Backs in Arena Football, here, not usually used to having to slow down near the edges or at least brace themselves before smacking into the wall; then there's also the hockey metaphor, if its an enclosed space, can the Paladin's Mount Bull Rush yr character smearing her on the walls? That's the only advantage I would see for the mouted Paladin *if* this arena is small

 

[Lord Pendragon]

This was a challenge, for honor. Showing up for a duel mounted seems kinda unfair, to say the least.

I disagree. A paladin+mount is assumed to be balanced against a fighter+feats. They are assumed to be equally effective. Why, then, is it unfair for the paladin to use his mount, when he needs to do so to come close to equalling the fighter?

You don't find Galahad charging down unhorsed opponents in duels.

You don't find Arthur setting aside Excalibur because it'd give him an unfair advantage, either. Honorable means not using dirty tricks. It doesn't mean "you give up your strongest abilities while I keep all of mine."

Although not necessary, most DMs assume a straight Arturian Code of Conduct, in which Chivalry and respect for your opponents is a bif part. Maybe some people don't play with that basis, but in my experience, msot people stick to a typical code of honor. (i.e. don't strike at unarmed foes, once you have defeated a enemy, you don't have to kill him, etc...)

None of that has any bearing on a paladin calling his mount. And as was already mentioned by others, "unarmed" is subjective.

But from the description Fangor gives (and of course it's biased ) the NG fighter is acting with more chivalry than the LG paladin.

I disagree. The fighter is doing nothing but baiting the paladin, which may not be dishonorable, but is certainly discourteous.

Leaving aside the issue of whether the mount even can Charge when six seconds earlier it was standing still, I mean,

Of course it can. You must move at least 10' in a charge, but there's no requirement that you have to have moved in the round prior to a charge.

If the Mount is Charging full blast and the space is something on the order of 50' radius, the issue of it slowing down before hitting the opposite wall would come up...one thinks of Defensive Backs in Arena Football, here, not usually used to having to slow down near the edges or at least brace themselves before smacking into the wall;

?? A Charge, as defined by D&D, ends in the first space from which you can make an attack. There is no need to slow down. You charge, you stop, you attack.

That's the only advantage I would see for the mouted Paladin *if* this arena is small

A mounted paladin:

* Can inflict double damage if using a lance in a charge.
* Gains a +1 higher ground bonus to his attack rolls.
* Gains +1 attack per charge (his mount's attack), more per full attack.
* Gains a +4 cover bonus to AC, with a good Ride Check.
* Has a 40' move (instead of 20' in full plate) regardless of whether he charges.

There are more benefits, depending on what feats the paladin may have taken. It is without a doubt a powerful advantage. It's also one which I don't believe a paladin is required to set aside to fight an honorable duel.

 

[Fangor the Fierce]

Well, thanks for the replies. Plenty to think about now. As for some clarifications:

The arena is somewhat small, roughly hexagon is shape, one massive pillar centered, then four more in the NW, SE, SW, NE areas. THere are four platforms, 5x5, that raise into the arena. This is where the fighters enter from, as they are raised into the arena. The platforms are on the north, south, east and west areas of the arena, whereas the pillars grant complete cover from the other platforms. It was designed so that the first round of combat would not allow free shots or spells.

Secondly, the NG fighter feats are: Combat Reflexes, Two Weapon Fighting, Improved Initiative, Power Attack, Cleave and Great Cleave, and Exotic Weapon Proficiency bastard sword. So she is not even using ANY (besides Improved Initiative) of her feats by wielding the bow.

Another thing to mention: The Paladin has a +1 Light Crossbow that he is electing not to use. He instead, is deciding to stay mounted, with his longsword.

Next: He is using his mount to attack, thus electing to duel as two on one combat. Hardly seems worthy of a Paladin that agreed to an honorable match.

As for the goading of the Paladin, yes, the Fighter elected to start goading him, once she saw he was bringing in help to the duel. After all, it's now two on one, from the fighters perspective.

For the mount charging, I would agree that it can charge in this confined space, as it allows plenty of room for it. The arena is pretty spacious, with about 150+ feet from edge to edge. I see no problem there, IF he had done a fast mount. But he did not do so. Plus, he is wanting the pillar to not affect his charge rout, agreeing that it provides cover, but that he can still charge. Seriously not seeing his logic there at all.

The fighter pulled out the bow, even though it is not her specialty. Her specialty is the close combat that she is waiting for him to decide on.