unwilling/hostile mounted combat help


log in or register to remove this ad

Note that this is a 3.5e thread. I spotted the "mounts must be willing rule" in the 5e PHB when I read through it recently. :)

Oops! But the thought still counts. I would definitely apply at least a -5 penalty to any checks for going bareback, and another -2 or more for no bridle. Or possibly the reverse. And if the animal is wild, unbroken, then effectively he's trying to break the animal on the spot. That's a pretty astonishing thing to do without magic.
 

Oops! But the thought still counts. I would definitely apply at least a -5 penalty to any checks for going bareback, and another -2 or more for no bridle. Or possibly the reverse. And if the animal is wild, unbroken, then effectively he's trying to break the animal on the spot. That's a pretty astonishing thing to do without magic.

3.5 already applies a -5 for riding bareback. I would be wary about stacking penalties for no bridle. One of the basic ride checks lets you guide a mount with your knees.
 

It is a game, so I know reality only loosely applies, but the idea that an unbroken animal can be controlled that way (knees only) is laughable. A well trained animal with a skilled rider? No problem. An untrained, unwilling predator? Sorry. No. Magic would be needed. So yes, I would apply multiple penalties.
 


It is a game, so I know reality only loosely applies, but the idea that an unbroken animal can be controlled that way (knees only) is laughable. A well trained animal with a skilled rider? No problem. An untrained, unwilling predator? Sorry. No. Magic would be needed. So yes, I would apply multiple penalties.

Bear in mind the possibility of Epic skill uses. What you describe is probably no more difficult than swimming up a waterfall.

But, yeah, I would be setting a massive DC and/or significant penalties, such that it's out of reach of low-level PCs.
 

Remove ads

Top