D&D 5E Sneak Attack question

[Sword of Spirit]

Can a controlled mount make an opportunity attack? I don't remember being told they lose their reactions, so I would tend to rule that they could. That would make them a threat I'd say.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Can a controlled mount make an opportunity attack?

Ruling: no.

A controlled mount does not think for iself, so cannot use reactions.

 

[MarkB]

Can a controlled mount make an opportunity attack? I don't remember being told they lose their reactions, so I would tend to rule that they could. That would make them a threat I'd say.

They don't lose their reactions, but they don't have free rein (literally) to make use of them, nor do the rules for controlling a mount include the option to direct them to do so. It's putting it too strongly to say that the mount cannot think for itself while controlled, but it certainly can't act on its own behalf.

However, one section where the rules are somewhat lacking is in describing how one goes about deliberately relinquishing control of a mount in order to allow it to act on its own. Can a player say "I take control of my mount" at the start of their turn, then take their full range of actions, then say "I now relinquish control of my mount" and allow it to take reactions and act on its own initiative (both literally and numerically)? Would it require an action or bonus action to make the transition? Or is the decision made at the start of combat, with no option to then amend it?

 

[Paul Farquhar]

It's putting it too strongly to say that the mount cannot think for itself while controlled,

I said does not not not cannot. "Not thinking for yourself" is idiom for not making decisions, and is sometimes applied to people. It is not literally true!

 

[MarkB]

I said does not not not cannot. "Not thinking for yourself" is idiom for not making decisions, and is sometimes applied to people. It is not literally true!

Fair enough.

 

[GMMichael]

Technically yes.

There is a non-technical part to Sneak Attack: "strike subtly and exploit a foe's distraction." Attacking from horseback is not subtle, and it tends to draw attention, instead of distract.

 

[MarkB]

There is a non-technical part to Sneak Attack: "strike subtly and exploit a foe's distraction." Attacking from horseback is not subtle, and it tends to draw attention, instead of distract.

Knowing that the horse may kick you in the balls if you devote too much of your attention to the rider is distracting, though.

 

[Jediking]

By RAW and RAI, yes Sneak Attack would work

That's a smart Rogue and one of the benefits of being mounted

As a hostile creature (controlled by the DM) if it becomes an issue, do what any smaller creature has learned when fighting a bigger opponent - attack low and kill the mount.

 

[TwoSix]

Weird how no one worries about a fighter getting 3 attacks with advantage while mounted.

 

[MarkB]

Weird how no one worries about a fighter getting 3 attacks with advantage while mounted.

I haven't heard that one. How do they do that?