Attacking from horseback should...

[Treebore]

If you want a good overview of training warhorses and how difficult it actually is, why a war horse costs so much, and why you would want a war horse over just a everyday horse you can ride:
http://www.classicalfencing.com/horsetraining.php

It will also give some insights to the challenges of being a rider during combat.
_________________
The Ruby Lord, Earl of the Society

Next Con I am attending: http://www.neoncon.com/

My House Rules: http://www.freeyabb.com/phpbb/viewtopic ... llordgames

[Grey]

The more I think about this, the more I am wondering about keeping things simple:

Quote:
You could grant a +2 AC to the mounted character... after all, it's hard to reach the person effectively from the ground. That AC bonus would be ignored if the foot soldiers are armed with "reach" style weapons.

Simple and easy to add

Plus (thinking about Castellan's Guide a bit here) possibly only include AC bonuses for helms/ coifs when a mounted character attacks someone on foot (but keeping the penalty for mounted attacks) - I know that you can hit someone on more than their head from horseback, but the easiest bit to strike is the nearest, and this gives some advantage to mounted attacks, without much change to RAW (also gives a good reason to buy helms, as someone tackling a mounted opponent when they have no head protection is likely to be in for a world of hurt!)

Seems nice and simple to me
Treebore - thanks for the link, looks very interesting, so off to read it in more depth......

[Treebore]

Grey wrote:
Treebore - thanks for the link, looks very interesting, so off to read it in more depth......

No problem, I am no war horse trainer, but from owning and caring for horses for over 3 years now, I can tell you I did not see anything wrong on what I do know, and the rest of his info seems reliable. The only thing I might take exception to is the history of horses, but historians argue such specifics all the time, so I prefer to leave it to them to worry about.

Plus experts don't know everything. I mean "science" didn't know birds dance to music until a few weeks ago. Bird fanciers, myself included, have known this for decades, in my case, and centuries as a hobby. Thanks to You Tube, what was obvious to us for many, many years, is now "known" to science. Go figure.
_________________
The Ruby Lord, Earl of the Society

Next Con I am attending: http://www.neoncon.com/

My House Rules: http://www.freeyabb.com/phpbb/viewtopic ... llordgames

[Eisenmann]

Excellent link, Treebore. Thanks for posting it up.

[Lord Dynel]

gideon_thorne wrote:
So yes, a trained cavalryman can do much on horseback. But, the question is, is any other class besides the knight specifically trained to fight on horseback effectively?

I could see a character of any other class being trained over the course of time, with lessening of the penalties, to do so. But initially?

Indeed. This is my stance on it, too, sir.

Grey wrote:
Plus (thinking about Castellan's Guide a bit here) possibly only include AC bonuses for helms/ coifs when a mounted character attacks someone on foot (but keeping the penalty for mounted attacks) - I know that you can hit someone on more than their head from horseback, but the easiest bit to strike is the nearest, and this gives some advantage to mounted attacks, without much change to RAW (also gives a good reason to buy helms, as someone tackling a mounted opponent when they have no head protection is likely to be in for a world of hurt!)

that's a very good point, too!
_________________
LD's C&C creations - the witch, a half-ogre, skill and 0-level rules

Troll Lord wrote:
Lord D: you understand where I"m coming from.

[Maliki]

CKDad wrote:
When one has the proper training for it, both horse and rider. If not, I suspect one is actually at a terrible disadvantage.

But if you have a culture that fights regularly from horseback (say a horse-based barbarian), easy enough to adapt the knight rules to meet one's needs.

I agree, in order for this to be an advantage, I think both the rider and mount have to know what they are doing. Put me on the back a horse, swinging a sword at people standing, and the only thing I'm hitting is the ground.
_________________
Never throw rocks at a man with a Vorpal Sword!

[Lord Dynel]

Maliki wrote:
I agree, in order for this to be an advantage, I think both the rider and mount have to know what they are doing. Put me on the back a horse, swinging a sword at people standing, and the only thing I'm hitting is the ground.

I'm right there with ya, hoss!
_________________
LD's C&C creations - the witch, a half-ogre, skill and 0-level rules

Troll Lord wrote:
Lord D: you understand where I"m coming from.

[jaguar451]

Or the horse....