Mounted Combat

[Burn_Boy]

Okay, I have been wondering about this for a very long time and I'm finally sick of not getting a straight answer from anyone or trying to make up my own house rules about this.

I know how to attack while mounted, it's spelled out in the rules very simply. But what I can't figure out, and neither can anyone else in my group, is how you attack someone who's mounted. What we've been doing is treating them as they are but giving them a minus one to their AC due to them being considered large. I want to know if this is close to the actual rule or, if there is one, where I can find it.

I also apologize if this is the wrong forum to post this in, but we play Pathfinder in my group and I figured this would be the best place to post it.

 

[evilinside]

As I read the rules you should treat it in the same way as if the opponent is on foot. He doesn't increase in size. Mount and rider are not treated as being one being together.

 

[Starbuck_II]

Okay, I have been wondering about this for a very long time and I'm finally sick of not getting a straight answer from anyone or trying to make up my own house rules about this.

I know how to attack while mounted, it's spelled out in the rules very simply. But what I can't figure out, and neither can anyone else in my group, is how you attack someone who's mounted. What we've been doing is treating them as they are but giving them a minus one to their AC due to them being considered large. I want to know if this is close to the actual rule or, if there is one, where I can find it.

I also apologize if this is the wrong forum to post this in, but we play Pathfinder in my group and I figured this would be the best place to post it.

Nope you have it reversed: Mounted people get +1 to hit for higher ground (unless they are fighting other mounted enemies) not -1 for size.

 

[Burn_Boy]

I know, I was talking about attacking someone who is mounted. Like you're on the ground and trying to attack the mounted fighter.

 

[DM-Frost]

There are many ways to handle mounted combat. Personally, as a DM, I usually just treat the mounted party as having height advantage (+1 AC) over all enemy melee combatants that don't have the height advantage themselves (through a mount or another reason). The only issue I see in this is the release of the Cavalier. Using this rule, the cavalier essentially has a constant +1 to his AC.

Overall, I would say that you should either treat them as if they have height-advantage or don't change it at all.

Do make sure, however, that your players define whether they're attacking the rider or the mount. It can change the battle drastically if your fighter decapitates the enemy's horse in a single swing because he wasn't smart enough to choose Mounted Combat as a feat.

 

[Twowolves]

There is no "+1 to AC for higher ground".

You declare you are attacking the mounted foe, and roll to hit. No penalties, no bonuses, no different than attacking any other foe.

However, if YOU are mounted and are attacking a foe standing on the ground, you DO get a +1 to hit for "Attacker on higher ground".

 

[Sunderstone]

You declare you are attacking the mounted foe, and roll to hit. No penalties, no bonuses, no different than attacking any other foe.
However, if YOU are mounted and are attacking a foe standing on the ground, you DO get a +1 to hit for "Attacker on higher ground".

Agree.

I just ran this particular type of encounter from "Burnt Offerings" last friday night (Warchief Ripnugget atop Stickfoot the Giant Gecko). Its been awhile since Ive run any mounted combat and I forgot to give the Warchief his +1 higher ground bonus on the first round (missed a PC by 1 that round too).

 

[Scott DeWar]

Thank you for starting this thread and the input there of. I have recently started a pathfinder game and there is a paladin and that I would need that clerification for when he gets challenged by another mounted warrior.

thank you to all.