log in or register to remove this ad

 

5E Rogue’s Aim+Mount

TrueBagelMan

Explorer
Cunning Action: Aim
2nd-level rogue feature (enhances Cunning Action)
You gain an additional way to use your Cunning Action: carefully aiming your next attack. As a bonus action, you give yourself advantage on your next attack roll on the current turn. You can use this bonus action only if you haven’t moved during this turn, and after you use the bonus action, your speed is 0 until the end of the current turn.


Now if I ride a donkey, can I move and attack still? You can use this bonus action only if you haven’t moved during this turn, part of the wording makes it seem like you can’t move before taking Aim, but after you use the bonus action, your speed is 0 until the end of the current turn. part makes it seem like the mount should be able to move since it’s you that can’t move, the mount still can. Did I read this right or did I create a loophole that isn’t there to begin with?
 

log in or register to remove this ad


The donkey can move, taking you with it. But the donkey moves on the donkey's turn, not your turn.

And the donkey goes where the donkey wants to go (which is probably running away from any fighting). You cannot control a mount if you are busy aiming.
 


Step 1: Mind control the donkey.
Same problem, really. you are still contolling it, irrespective of if you are using reigns or telepathy. The rules are a little woolly, but "you use your move to control your mount" is a reasonable interpretation. In which case, an effect that reduces your move to zero prevents you controlling your mount. So if it moves it is on it's own turn of it's own volition.
 

Same problem, really. you are still contolling it, irrespective of if you are using reigns or telepathy. The rules are a little woolly, but "you use your move to control your mount" is a reasonable interpretation. In which case, an effect that reduces your move to zero prevents you controlling your mount. So if it moves it is on it's own turn of it's own volition.
I don't see how reducing a character's move to zero prevents control. Controlling a mount seems more like an action or bonus action than movement. It still undermines the donkey sniper, however.

Mostly, I was just joking about. Sorry if that wasn't clear.
 


I don't see how reducing a character's move to zero prevents control. Controlling a mount seems more like an action or bonus action than movement. It still undermines the donkey sniper, however.

Mostly, I was just joking about. Sorry if that wasn't clear.
As per PHB rules, controlling a mount does not require an action or bonus action. Using your move prevents shenanigans where you add your character's move to your mount's move.
 

Pauln6

Explorer
The question is, why does the rogue's speed need to be zero? Answer because aiming requires a steady hand and concentration to be effective. So how steady is your hand riding on a donkey? Put the donkey on roller skates in a dwarven temple with a floor made of solid, smooth gold, and you're probably ok.
 

Fenris-77

Small God of the Dozens
Supporter
The question is, why does the rogue's speed need to be zero? Answer because aiming requires a steady hand and concentration to be effective. So how steady is your hand riding on a donkey? Put the donkey on roller skates in a dwarven temple with a floor made of solid, smooth gold, and you're probably ok.
If your first response to finding a whole floor made of solid, smooth gold is to put roller skates on a donkey, you, sir, are a better man than I.
 
Last edited:

Eis

Explorer
If your first response to finding a whole floor made a solid, smooth gold is to put roller skates on a donkey, you, sir, are a better man than I.
oh no, not FIRST response.....this was a result of lots and lots of careful testing
 


Oofta

Title? I don't need no stinkin' title.
There are no rules for controlling a mount, it does not cost the PC any actions or movement. So by strict reading of the rules you could do this. Move, have the mount stop, fire, and continue moving would be technically legal.

In a home game I'd say you have disadvantage if the mount uses it's dash action ... but the mounted combat rules aren't particularly robust.
 

Pauln6

Explorer
There are no rules for controlling a mount, it does not cost the PC any actions or movement. So by strict reading of the rules you could do this. Move, have the mount stop, fire, and continue moving would be technically legal.

In a home game I'd say you have disadvantage if the mount uses it's dash action ... but the mounted combat rules aren't particularly robust.
I sort of feel that being able to aim from a moving vehicle or moving mount should be the stuff of a feat. Maybe an add on to the mounted combat feat?
 

Fenris-77

Small God of the Dozens
Supporter
I sort of feel that being able to aim from a moving vehicle or moving mount should be the stuff of a feat. Maybe an add on to the mounted combat feat?
If horse archery were easy everyone would be doing it. Never mind firing from the deck of a ship at sea. This does point at a soft spot in the rules, which really do lack detail for mounted combat. I think that's by design though. I'm pretty sure Animal Handling is supposed to cover those applications when it becomes necessary.

That said, I would rule that riding a moving mount is movement, regardless of who's feet are moving. A Feat would be a good way to buff that, for sure.
 

Oofta

Title? I don't need no stinkin' title.
I sort of feel that being able to aim from a moving vehicle or moving mount should be the stuff of a feat. Maybe an add on to the mounted combat feat?
I don't disagree and that would be a good way to do it. Just saying that by the rules there is no problem with it.
 

Pauln6

Explorer
I don't disagree and that would be a good way to do it. Just saying that by the rules there is no problem with it.
Yeah I've never been a fan of using RAW where it's clear that they violate the spirit of RAI. Admittedly, it isn't always as obvious as this one.
 

jgsugden

Hero
I'd allow aiming so long as you're not being pushed around in an uncontrolled fashion by the thing you're on that is moving. Riding a horse, donkey, etc... likely too much movement. Being on a ship, a flying carpet, a gliding animal... I'd likely allow.
 

Oofta

Title? I don't need no stinkin' title.
Yeah I've never been a fan of using RAW where it's clear that they violate the spirit of RAI. Admittedly, it isn't always as obvious as this one.
I'd probably give disadvantage to someone moving and doing ranged attacks, particularly if the mount is taking the dash action.

I just like to point out when things are house rules sometimes.
 

Pauln6

Explorer
I'd probably give disadvantage to someone moving and doing ranged attacks, particularly if the mount is taking the dash action.

I just like to point out when things are house rules sometimes.
I suppose it would not be unbalanced because with disadvantage, the Rogue is just making a normal attack with no sneak attack.
 

Most Liked Threads

Advertisement2

Advertisement4

Top