Page 1 of 1

Mounted Combat

Posted: Wed Nov 15, 2017 6:36 pm
by Revturkey
Hi all, please forgive me if this is an old topic or if I am being stoopid and not reading/looking at the book correctly...

It’s not a massive deal but...I am a bit confused by Mounted Combat in C&C. On page 34 of the PHB it mentions (see mounted combat) in the Knight description..but where is that? Is it the Horsemanship ability? What about other characters on horses?

It says: A riding horse is not trained for combat, and a knight has some difficulty fighting from a riding horse (see mounted combat).

It then says: HORSEMANSHIP (DEXTERITY): Knights are trained in mounted combat and are familiar with all types of horses, from mounts used for riding to heavy war horses. Without the need for an attribute check, knights can saddle, mount, ride and dismount; perform simple leaps and obstacle maneuvers (no more than 3 feet in height and move around small items such as barrels); fight from a mount during combat (melee and ranged) without penalty; control the mount in combat; guide a mount with the knees; and stay in the saddle when a mount rears or bolts.

These two statements seem to contradict each other...

Do I just make something up myself using the Siege mechanics or have I missed a section of the rules?

Any help would be appreciated, thanks.

:)

Re: Mounted Combat

Posted: Wed Nov 15, 2017 6:58 pm
by Go0gleplex
You seem to be taking the second statement partialy out of context. There is no contradiction that I see. Riding horses are not trained for combat so they are harder to control if such an event occurs. The Knight's Horsemanship negates the penalties that would apply if another person without such skill would attempt mounted combat with a riding horse. I do not have my PHB in front of me but if mounted combat is not in the knight desc it may be in the combat options towards the latter part of the book.

Re: Mounted Combat

Posted: Wed Nov 15, 2017 7:32 pm
by Revturkey
Hi thanks for your reply. It’s just that it says ‘fights without penalty’ in the second part but says ‘has some difficulty’ in the first part. I can’t find any rules for mounted combat and yet it references them. Maybe I just fumbled my perception check lol.

Re: Mounted Combat

Posted: Wed Nov 15, 2017 8:15 pm
by Go0gleplex
Revturkey wrote:Hi thanks for your reply. It’s just that it says ‘fights without penalty’ in the second part but says ‘has some difficulty’ in the first part. I can’t find any rules for mounted combat and yet it references them. Maybe I just fumbled my perception check lol.
Okay...home now and after looking through the PHB the mounted combat stuff looks to be part of the Horsemanship Ability. All the little tricks the Knight can have the horse do that others cannot. Generally, when a character attempts a non-class skill/ability they do not get the benefits of their class level or prime I think it is. (did not look that up) Which is probably what the use of penalty is implying.

Re: Mounted Combat

Posted: Wed Nov 15, 2017 8:29 pm
by Revturkey
Hi thanks for looking, I thought I was going mad looking for the ‘mounted combat’ section...it’s a bit confusing to have it rolled into the class ability though and reference it directly before. When it mentions penalties but doesn’t give any that also threw me off. I guess it just means to say that characters other than Knights need to make rolls to do the stuff the Knight does without having to. Not to worry, I’ll make something up when needed. Thanks again.

Re: Mounted Combat

Posted: Wed Nov 15, 2017 10:43 pm
by Treebore
The ability also negates penalties listed in the tables for modifiers to combat. Those are in the CK section of the book in the Combat section. Pretty sure its in the same table for being invisible, prone, etc... Meaning it negates penalties that apply to being mounted. Note Horsemanship only applies to HORSES. IF its a Knight who was trained upon Griffins from the beginning, the CK could rule that it applies to that, but in most cases, it only applies to riding horse, nothing else.

Re: Mounted Combat

Posted: Wed Nov 15, 2017 10:54 pm
by serleran
Making it count for horses only generally destroys any chance of a smaller-than-man knight considering they won't be on a "horse." I suppose they could, but it'll be more a "pony."

The Castle Keeper can make it anyway they want, for sure, and the intent is probably to enforce human/elf stereotypes, but then I can't have my goblin knights on hell hounds.

Re: Mounted Combat

Posted: Thu Nov 16, 2017 8:11 am
by Revturkey
Hi all, that’s great, thanks for your help.

Re: Mounted Combat

Posted: Fri Nov 17, 2017 12:53 pm
by Captain_K
Fighting from horseback (or any creature) is teamwork. You and the creature likely had training apart and together to be a unit without penalty. Change either side and there should be a penalty relative to each's ability on their own. That should be the skeleton to which you give detail. The knight on a partner creature does his tricks. Can't do them on a creature that won't work with him due to no training together or doubly bad, no training and not together.

A horse is a herbivore and a herd animal. Not to be trifled with but needs serious training to be a war animal. If you mount is more violent or more intelligent or carnivorous, these things will make the creature training totally different and the team training rather unique.

This works in many ways, have fun with it. All the things like unicorns, Pegasus, Griffons and even dragons are all the stuff of fantasy as mounts. But The Knights of the Claw should be equally famous, you know them that small den of Gnomish Paladins and their giant badger mounts. Or Fin the Lucky, former halfling thief turned Knight who rides a giant wolverine! He stole that idea from his uncle the druid and his animal friend/mount a giant wolverine named fluffy.

This would make a great Domesday article!