Using 2-Handed Melee Weapons While Mounted(?)

[Camarath]

Camarath: while I cannot argue with your use of semantics to support your point, because they are sound, I will argue against your point on the grounds that this defeats the purpose of Mounted Combat.

If forced to take a move action every round to Control a Mount in Battle, a mounted character could never:
-Move further than the speed of the mount.
-Attack and move in the same round.
-Run, as running is a full round action.
-Maneuver around the battlefield better than a footsoldier with a move of 30'. (because he can take a double move for 60')

I believe that your mounts actions do not count agianst your actions in a round.

-Charge, as charge is a full round action.

From the SRD

If your mount charges, you also take the AC penalty associated with a charge. If you make an attack at the end of the charge, you receive the bonus gained from the charge. When charging on horseback, you deal double damage with a lance (see Charge).

Thus when mounted you don't charge your mount charges (i.e. the Charge is its action) and you gain the bonuses and penalties of charging.

By forcing any character who uses both hands to do something while mounted to spend a MEA to Control the Mount in Battle renders mounts useless.

Put it this way:
You propose that any character who uses both hands for something else needs must make a CtMiB check, even if he auto succeeds.

I think that all charaters need to spend a move action to Control a Mount in Battle regardless of how they use thier hands or whether or not they are automatically successful.

Mounted Archery requires the use of both hands.

The rules state that a mounted archer may make a full attack, albeit at a penalty, even while double moving.

Therefore, the full-attacking, double-move mount controlling, mounted archer does not have to spend a MEA to control the mount in battle. So even though your interpretation of

is semantically possible, other rules show it to be incorrect.

I think the Mounted Archery rules make it clear that your mount's action do not count agianst your actions in a round since you can prefrom a Full Attack while your mount moves (and Attack while your mount takes a Double Move). As far as I can see the rules do not say that you can control your mount while making a Full Attack or that you need to do so.

My view is if you spend a move action to Control Mount in Battle you get to control your mounts actions and if you do not spend the move action your mount controls its own actions.

 

[Zaruthustran]

It was not uncommon. The rules don´t say anything about penalties for two handed melee weapons while mounted.

But: Feel free to houserule this aberration of a knight movie with twohanders who weighed 15 kg.

Yep. This is the Rules forum. The questions "can you also use a 2-handed melee weapon while mounted? (Or, for that matter, can you use two melee weapons, one in each hand, against the same opponent, while mounted?)" have been answered, according to the rules: yes, yes you can.

-z

 

[The Hanged Man]

I think that all charaters need to spend a move action to Control a Mount in Battle regardless of how they use thier hands or whether or not they are automatically successful.

I think the Mounted Archery rules make it clear that your mount's action do not count agianst your actions in a round since you can prefrom a Full Attack while your mount moves (and Attack while your mount takes a Double Move). As far as I can see the rules do not say that you can control your mount while making a Full Attack or that you need to do so.

My view is if you spend a move action to Control Mount in Battle you get to control your mounts actions and if you do not spend the move action your mount controls its own actions.

I don't think that's right for trained warhorses. The rule for "Control Mount in Battle" requires a move action and a Ride check only for mounts untrained for battle, and so doesn't apply to trained mounts at all. Neither part of that sentence applies to trained mounts. For trained mounts, it says only that no roll is required, not that a move action is still needed to control a mount in battle.

Also, there's another aspect to the Ride skill.

Fight with Warhorse: If you direct your war-trained mount to attack in battle, you can still make your own attack or attacks normally. This usage is a free action.

Thus, to fight with a warhorse in battle is a free action. This applies to attacks, not movement, but this is the only mention of what action is required to direct a warhorse, and it specifies a free action.

Besides, what does it mean when a trained mount "controls its own actions?" In what way would that be different from the trained mount simply doing what the rider wants?

 

[Endur]

Actually, the rules don't say whether you can weild a two handed weapon while mounted. So the answer is up to GM discretion.

Likewise, the rules don't say whether you can weild a two-handed weapon while climbing, swimming, flying, or standing on your head.

A GM is necessary to interpret the rules.

Yep. This is the Rules forum. The questions "can you also use a 2-handed melee weapon while mounted? (Or, for that matter, can you use two melee weapons, one in each hand, against the same opponent, while mounted?)" have been answered, according to the rules: yes, yes you can.

-z

 

[Camarath]

Besides, what does it mean when a trained mount "controls its own actions?" In what way would that be different from the trained mount simply doing what the rider wants?

The mount might for example move in a way that its rider might not desire such as through threatened spaces instead of around them.

Thus, to fight with a warhorse in battle is a free action. This applies to attacks, not movement, but this is the only mention of what action is required to direct a warhorse, and it specifies a free action.

You can direct your war-trained mount to Attack as a free action. That Ride skill usage does not say anything about controling your mounts movement and other non-attack actions.

I don't think that's right for trained warhorses. The rule for "Control Mount in Battle" requires a move action and a Ride check only for mounts untrained for battle, and so doesn't apply to trained mounts at all. Neither part of that sentence applies to trained mounts. For trained mounts, it says only that no roll is required, not that a move action is still needed to control a mount in battle.

It does not say that the move action is not needed to control a Warhorse just that the roll is not needed. It does not actually say anything at all about what type of action or if any action at all is needed to control a Warhorse in combat. I assumed that since it is not stated that you do not need to "Control Mount in Battle" when riding a Warhorse that you still needed to preform an action to do so. And since the base "Control Mount in Battle" action is a move action I thought that using that action on a Warhorse would still be a move action.

However you are probably right and they meant for riding a Warhorse in battle to the same a riding one outisde of battle. I do find it odd to state that a "roll" is not needed when what is meant is that the action is not needed.

 

[Camarath]

Actually, the rules don't say whether you can weild a two handed weapon while mounted. So the answer is up to GM discretion.

Likewise, the rules don't say whether you can weild a two-handed weapon while climbing, swimming, flying, or standing on your head.

The rules do say that you can "use both hands in combat" while mounted. Normally in combat you can wield two-handed weapons if you can use both your hands to do so and I see no rule or reason why you could not do so here.

As for climbing the rules state "You need both hands free to climb" thus preventing the use of a two-handed weapon while climbing.