Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
ShortQuests -- Pocket Sized Adventures! An all-new collection of digest-sized D&D adventures designed for 1-2 game sessions.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Seule" data-source="post: 1091611" data-attributes="member: 407">First, my last post was a little confrontational, and I'm sorry.Actually, in retrospect I probably should have made him a Paladin.  He'd have a bonded mount that he could summon, and his outlook wouldn't be too much different (currently he's LN).  He'd also keep more abilities, like smiting and a few spells.  Currently I still have a fair number of hit points, good BAB, and a couple of feats off a horse, as well as spellcasting.  I'm far from useless without a horse, and indeed I can fight fromt lines or buff and heal, depending on the party composition I'm in.  The usual party I adventure with consists of a Paladin (not mounted speciality), a Fighter (melee), a Wizard (evoker), a Rogue (heavily multiclassed, a bit of everything really), and a Cleric (buffs, noncombat).  We make a good team as I can fill in for most of them in a pinch, and still have my occasional moment to shine.  I've been in parties where I was the only fighter, and although I didn't like it, I can still hold my own, with my own buffing spells.As a note, the Ranger level is simply to enable me to qualify gfor the Windrider PrC from Masters of the Wild, which I'll have next level.  I don't track worth a darn.Actually, I think the character would be quite viable in a homegame, as long as your DM is willing to take your abilities into account.  I know that when I run a campaign, I look at what the characters are good at, and make sure to give them a chance to do it.  Not all the time, mind you, but my character isn't so overspecialized that he's useless off a horse, he's still as good a fighter as your average Ranger, once you count the spells he uses for buffing.In Living Greyhawk, I find that I can use a horse in somewhere between 1/3 to 1/2 of modules, and in those, in perhaps 1/2 of the encounters.  However, although that's 1/4 of encounters or a little less, including sometimes where I can't be mounted for a number of modules in a row, it doesn't really bother me as I know my turn will come, and so do the people I play with.  It's more fun for me to be mounted, but I'm aware that it wouldn't be fun for the others if I always was, as I'd dominate.If I wasn't playing a mounted character in LG, I'd have tried it in a home game by now.  As it is, I'm tempted to try it with a Small Paladin, and see how it goes.  Small characters obviously have the advantage that riding dogs can go almost anywhere.  A mounted character is not a usual character style, and not for everyone as you have to be aware that there will be long stretches where you'll play backup, but I find it rewarding enough.  You have to look at the team picture, it wouldn't work as well if you have a spirit of competition among the group, you might be seen as not pulling your weight, if there's a string of games where you are inside/underground.Actually, I'm kind of happy that not many character choose the role, it makes my character more distinctive.  --Seule, player of Mardal Al'Mullah of Ket</blockquote>

Verification