Mounts and dungeons


Rules Questions


Is there a rule that prevent horses from going into dungeons?

Many threads I’ve read seems to assume that you can’t do it but no hard rule is given. This is particularly important for a human cavalier with a horse companion. I would not see a small cavalier or a druid with a large bear being penalised that way.

I can see solutions like Zephyr horse shoes, hosteling armor or feats like dragon style but why should you have to take these in the first place? When needed, squeezing should be ample enough for small passageways in the first place.


There is no rule that states horses are not allowed in dungeons. But I will add a sign saying as much at the next dungeon entrance that I GM. (Because it will be hilarious)

Is it a good idea to take a large mount into a dungeon? It depends on the dungeon. Some have ample room. Some, not so much. Point is that the cavalier does not know at the dungeon entrance. Is there any point to taking a mount that can't be ridden because the ceiling is too low and it's squeezing the whole time and the cavalier has to constantly push his companion to boldly go where no horse has gone before? A horse blocking the parties escape route is a sure way to get a TPK. If the GM is good, he can convey all of this with nothing more than an evil and a offhand "suure, you can take your mount into the dungeon..." *evil grin*


There is no rule that stops you from doing this. Like Avianfoo said, your horse might be squeezing through 5ft passages in many dungeons, especially in adventure path dungeons.

The main thing is that if you're going to be a cavalier, express your concerns with dungeons and things to your GM. depending on the level of realism he's shooting for ,having a horse can be a real pain in the neck. Mount and Animal Companions are class features. No one takes away smite from a paladin because dungeon walls block the divine signal or anything, so it's silly to take away mount and turn your cavalier into a weak fighter who likely wasted 3 feats on Mount related stuff. If your GM doesn't understand this, and is going to tell you there are no horses on the ferry to where you're going, play a different class.


Dungeons may often have passages that your mount will have to squeeze through or places that require climbing to reach.

Squeezing will prevent your mount from charging.

If there is a ladder that requires climbing...your mount will be staying behind without ample use of magic.

One of the balancing factors of the cavalier class is the understanding that you will not be able to make a mounted lance charge everywhere all the time. Depending on the adventure path or the campaign your GM creates this may be more or less prevalent. It is fair to ask in advance how often combat is likely to take place in cramped quarters.

But don't expect your one-trick pony to work all the time.


You'll definitely need the "heel" trick to make sure it will follow you into such an unusual setting.


I’m with Docshock on this one, sorry Claxon. I do expect to charge all the time and don’t believe this to be a balancing factor for the class, judging by summoners and druids running around.

I gave a int headband to the horse, won’t be a problem for the trick, thanks for pointing that possible issue. I took Dragon Style and narrow frame for mount feat. Hopefully should be enough to not hear about it anymore.

Thanks for confirming there is no hard rule for this.


I never said there was a rule against it. My point was that you can't expect it to work all the time.

However, you are taking measure to ensure that it has a better chance of working all the time. There is no need to be sorry, you are essentially telling me I'm right. Your initial post said you didn't see a need to put any resources into making this work, that you should just get to charge all the time. But now you're saying you improving your mounts int, giving him narrow frame, and dragon style. (Of note did you give him improved unarmed strike first? Because he needs that before he can pickup dragon style.)

You spend resources (even your mounts resources) on making it work and it's valid to expect it to work more often.

Still, as a GM I would tell you that it's not going to work all the time. There would be some point where you will get off your horse. It might be minimal, but it would happen. For example, the king of INSERTKINGDOMHERE isn't going to let you inside his palace with your horse.


No worries, I know you did not say there was a rule, was actuallly thanking both of you for the confirmation.

I was hoping to not have to take these steps however, it at least gives me better chance of lowering ressources spent knowing there is no such hard rule. Maybe keeping mout in hosteling armor and pulling it out when needed would be less costly.

For meeting with the King, I'm sure I could make this horse able to talk somehow and give him diplomacy as a class skill so he can be the party face. jk :P


Speaking of steps, that's one area where a horse is going to have trouble: stairs. Short flights up or down aren't much of a problem, but try getting a horse up or down a spiral staircase without magic. Hopefully the druid has reduce animal handy, so you can pick it up and carry it.


Nah, my wife did 13 years equitation school, obstacles jumping and the like, stairs aren't a problem for a trained horse ( even spiral ones ). It’s in fact easy and there is plenty of videos showing that. The issue would be squeezing if the width is too small, but that is covered by squeeze rules and narrow frame. Might be a "trick" to teach but by rules, stairs don't even count as rough terrain.

For a fantasy reference, just watch LOTR helm’s deep charge all the way from the inner keep or that famous brave heart scene when he barges in the room on his horse. That’s what a RPG is about but that would be another thread.

Grand Lodge

It's important to note that Narrow Frame won't allow you to charge through narrow areas. It doesn't remove the move penalty for squeezing--only the attack and AC penalties.


Claxon wrote:


Still, as a GM I would tell you that it's not going to work all the time. There would be some point where you will get off your horse. It might be minimal, but it would happen. For example, the king of INSERTKINGDOMHERE isn't going to let you inside his palace with your horse.
shadowborn wrote:


Speaking of steps, that's one area where a horse is going to have trouble: stairs. Short flights up or down aren't much of a problem, but try getting a horse up or down a spiral staircase without magic.

This is why I recommend you speak with your GM in advance. For example, if Claxon were my GM and told me that the king of INSERTKINGDOMHERE was uncomfortable with my horse, but it was cool that my wizard buddy brought in his spell component sack full of bat feces, I'd be a little put out.

Likewise, if my horse knew a martial-arts fighting style like yours does, and Shadowborn told me a spiral staircase was simply beyond his abilities as a horse (trained by monks or not), I'd think it was a little silly.

This isn't to say Claxon and Shadowborn are wrong. They aren't. It's their game to GM as they see fit. I just mean these as examples of why GM communication is important. It will let you sort out disagreements like these before they come up.


Of course, you could always be a Gnome or Halfling Cavalier and ride a dog/wolf into battle. Dog/wolf would have no trouble with things like stairs, which pretty much any horse would balk at.


DocShock wrote:


This is why I recommend you speak with your GM in advance. For example, if Claxon were my GM and told me that the king of INSERTKINGDOMHERE was uncomfortable with my horse, but it was cool that my wizard buddy brought in his spell component sack full of bat feces, I'd be a little put out.

I'd be put out if you were put out, if I'm being honest.

Because, while I'm not going to take the Wizard's spell component pouch away, I will send him up against things with high spell resistance and things with high saves. I may even throw him up against things that are outright immune to whatever his favorite trick is. Undead, Constructs, etc have a host of immunities that can render whole schools of magic ineffective.

Don't think it's about preventing you from doing your thing, all the time. It's to force you to do other things, some of the time. Because that's challenging. If you as a player get things your way all the time, it will never be a challenge.

But a dismounted cavalier can still use his lance while standing, which has reach, and he still has power attack, and still has his challenge. He might not deal as much damage, but he can still certainly be effective in combat.


Claxon wrote:


I'd be put out if you were put out, if I'm being honest.

Because, while I'm not going to take the Wizard's spell component pouch away, I will send him up against things with high spell resistance and things with high saves. I may even throw him up against things that are outright immune to whatever his favorite trick is. Undead, Constructs, etc have a host of immunities that can render whole schools of magic ineffective.

Don't think it's about preventing you from doing your thing, all the time. It's to force you to do other things, some of the time. Because that's challenging. If you as a player get things your way all the time, it will never be a challenge.

But a dismounted cavalier can still use his lance while standing, which has reach, and he still has power attack, and still has his challenge. He might not deal as much damage, but he can still certainly be effective in combat.

It's true that a dismounted cavalier still has options, but what could you take away from barbarian or ranger that would make them suck as bad as a dismounted cavalier? Is there any reason to play a cavalier over a barbarian or ranger if you know you'll be unmounted frequently? I think horseless-cavalier is probably the worst martial class of them all, so if that's a regular challenge that will be coming my way, I'd rather play another class.

As for the Wizard thing, taking away a spell component pouch is way out of line in my opinion. But that means he gets to carry around a festering sack of squid tentacles, bat guano, and bear dung wherever he pleases. In my games, if the wizard gets to bring the horrid stench of rancid calamari and animal leavings, then the other guy gets to bring his horse. Just like there are other ways to challenge a Wizard, there are plenty of ways to challenge a cavalier that don't involve taking away his defining class feature.

Again, I'm not saying your wrong on any count. I'm just offering the advice of discussing no-horse-zone frequency with your GM in advance.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber
DocShock wrote:


It's true that a dismounted cavalier still has options, but what could you take away from barbarian or ranger that would make them suck as bad as a dismounted cavalier?

anything that makes their mode of attack suck... like mirror image, dominate person, or a fancy dinner party.


Edymnion wrote:
Of course, you could always be a Gnome or Halfling Cavalier and ride a dog/wolf into battle. Dog/wolf would have no trouble with things like stairs, which pretty much any horse would balk at.

I see your dog/wolf and raise you...a BOAR!!

While the boar has the same strength as the dog it has a better AC (by 2 points at level 4) and it has Ferocity.
The boar is 4points stronger than the level 7 Medium Wolf giving extra damage during a charge (using Order of the Sword). The boar also has a +1 AC bonus over the level 7 medium wolf.


DocShock wrote:

It's true that a dismounted cavalier still has options, but what could you take away from barbarian or ranger that would make them suck as bad as a dismounted cavalier? Is there any reason to play a cavalier over a barbarian or ranger if you know you'll be unmounted frequently? I think horseless-cavalier is probably the worst martial class of them all, so if that's a regular challenge that will be coming my way, I'd rather play another class.

As for the Wizard thing, taking away a spell component pouch is way out of line in my opinion. But that means he gets to carry around a festering sack of squid tentacles, bat guano, and bear dung wherever he pleases. In my games, if the wizard gets to bring the horrid stench of rancid calamari and animal leavings, then the other guy gets to bring his horse. Just like there are other ways to challenge a Wizard, there are plenty of ways to challenge a cavalier that don't involve taking away his defining class feature.

Again, I'm not saying your wrong on any count. I'm just offering the advice of discussing no-horse-zone frequency with your GM in...

From a barbarian, hit them with will saves that turn them blind or confused, etc. Calm Emotions will end there rage. For Rangers, their favored enemy might not be present.

I mean, do you expect if you play a ranger that every enemy will be your Favored Enemy? Would you grouse if it wasn't?

A dismounted cavalier doesn't suck, he's just not as good as he was while mounted. He's still using one of the best combat styles in the game (two-handed weapon with power attack).

As for the wizards spell component pouch...your concept of festering and what not does not have any actual suport for being noticeable in any way other than the wizard has a fanny pack. Now, if you wanted to say for your games that it has some horrible stench to it, then the king might object to the being in his palace as well.

Not all people need to be affected equally at all times. As long as your not singling anyone out consistently then to me this is a non-issue. Sometimes the cavalier wont have his horse. Sometimes the fireball wizard will face fire immune creatures. Sometimes the barbarian will face teleporting creatures he can't ever reach.

Grand Lodge

You know, when I read "Mounts and Dongeons", I expected, um, something different.


Cav still have his level to damage thing.

As people said, you need heel trick to make horse follow you into wierd places like donjon(it is part of combat training horse animal companions get automatically at level 4, or at level 1 for cav depend on how your GM interpret "always considered combat trained")

Grand Lodge

DarkPhoenixx wrote:

Cav still have his level to damage thing.

As people said, you need heel trick to make horse follow you into wierd places like donjon(it is part of combat training horse animal companions get automatically at level 4, or at level 1 for cav depend on how your GM interpret "always considered combat trained")

How else could it be interpreted other than a cavalier's class mount is always considered combat trained?


Aside from the whole size thing, the thing I find the biggest problem about bringing mounts, specifically a horse into a dungeon is hooves. I remember one game where we literally spent 20 actual minutes in a low level game figuring out how to get a players horse out of a put trap. It was a dc 10 climb to get out (just meant as a minor inconvenience during a fight), but the horse simply couldnt climb out. Mind you, the dm could have handwaved it after the combat, and instead chose to turn it into a problem solving test, but there are lots of such situations in dungeons where not being able to climb is a serious problem.


Gauss wrote:
I see your dog/wolf and raise you...a BOAR!!

Your boar, and a halfing on a pteradon more (gotta love Eberron).

Grand Lodge

Kolokotroni wrote:
Aside from the whole size thing, the thing I find the biggest problem about bringing mounts, specifically a horse into a dungeon is hooves. I remember one game where we literally spent 20 actual minutes in a low level game figuring out how to get a players horse out of a put trap. It was a dc 10 climb to get out (just meant as a minor inconvenience during a fight), but the horse simply couldnt climb out. Mind you, the dm could have handwaved it after the combat, and instead chose to turn it into a problem solving test, but there are lots of such situations in dungeons where not being able to climb is a serious problem.

A single rope would have solved that problem.


Claxon wrote:


As long as your not singling anyone out consistently then to me this is a non-issue.

This is the core of the issue, and exactly what I was advising Kletus to try to avoid. It's really easy for GMs to unintentionally single out the Cavalier class if the player has to ask him for permission to bring a horse everywhere. As a guy who played with that type of GM in my first pathfinder campaign a few years back, I can tell you it's extremely frustrating.

Claxon wrote:


From a barbarian, hit them with will saves that turn them blind or confused, etc. Calm Emotions will end there rage. For Rangers, their favored enemy might not be present.

I mean, do you expect if you play a ranger that every enemy will be your Favored Enemy? Would you grouse if it wasn't?

Casting debuffs on a martial class is different than asking the barbarian to leave his rage in the stables. Those spells have saves which you might or might not make, and the enemy caster has to spend precious actions casting them. But what hope does a Cavalier have against a sign the GM posted that says "No Horses Allowed"?. And Confuse will still ruin a cavalier's night just as much as a barbarian's, so, all other things being equal, I still think barbarian beats unmounted-cavalier. You listed plenty of ways to challenge a barbarian, so why not use those against your Cavalier instead of getting rid of the horse? Aren't teleporting enemies just as obnoxious to the Cavalier?

And no, I wouldn't grouse if I was fighting outsiders with my giant-focused ranger. But I'd grouse if you told me to leave my Combat Style Feats tied to the post outside. The philosophy at my table is that mounts are treated as a class feature, just like rage, just like combat style, just like spell casting. If that's not your philosophy, great, I'm not trying to change the way your table runs. But the OP thinks along the same lines I do, and if his GM thinks along the same lines you do, it will invariably result in the same argument we're having. It is therefore my opinion that he should discuss these issues with his GM in advance.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Well, to me it has more to do with a lack of communication between player and DM than any intentional malice. Remember, never attribute to personal malice what you can attribute to stupidity.

As a player wanting to be a Cavalier, they should have asked how much of the game was expected to take place out in the open vs. in confined spaces. As a DM that likely knew there would be a lot of dungeon delving, they should have pointed out "You know horses don't work well in dungeons, right?".

Any character that is a one trick pony needs to make sure that their trick is something that will actually come up. I mean, you don't build an Intimidate focused character in an undead campaign, for example.


claudekennilol wrote:
Kolokotroni wrote:
Aside from the whole size thing, the thing I find the biggest problem about bringing mounts, specifically a horse into a dungeon is hooves. I remember one game where we literally spent 20 actual minutes in a low level game figuring out how to get a players horse out of a put trap. It was a dc 10 climb to get out (just meant as a minor inconvenience during a fight), but the horse simply couldnt climb out. Mind you, the dm could have handwaved it after the combat, and instead chose to turn it into a problem solving test, but there are lots of such situations in dungeons where not being able to climb is a serious problem.
A single rope would have solved that problem.

Funny thing, no one in the party was very strong, all were small sized. We had rope. It didnt help. No one could lift the horse.

Grand Lodge

Kolokotroni wrote:
claudekennilol wrote:
Kolokotroni wrote:
Aside from the whole size thing, the thing I find the biggest problem about bringing mounts, specifically a horse into a dungeon is hooves. I remember one game where we literally spent 20 actual minutes in a low level game figuring out how to get a players horse out of a put trap. It was a dc 10 climb to get out (just meant as a minor inconvenience during a fight), but the horse simply couldnt climb out. Mind you, the dm could have handwaved it after the combat, and instead chose to turn it into a problem solving test, but there are lots of such situations in dungeons where not being able to climb is a serious problem.
A single rope would have solved that problem.
Funny thing, no one in the party was very strong, all were small sized. We had rope. It didnt help. No one could lift the horse.

You can drag 5x your maximum load. Step on top of the horse ('cause it's only a 10' pit and it's a horse) tie then rope around the horse. Then drag, don't lift. Between all of you small sized, if four of you have dead average strength you can drag a total of 1500 lbs. If there were less of you, someone had to have had a higher str than 10. Horses top out at 1500 lbs. And if your entire party was large, what were you doing with a full size (large) horse? And if it was a medium mount, you would have actually had way less trouble.


claudekennilol wrote:
Kolokotroni wrote:
claudekennilol wrote:
Kolokotroni wrote:
Aside from the whole size thing, the thing I find the biggest problem about bringing mounts, specifically a horse into a dungeon is hooves. I remember one game where we literally spent 20 actual minutes in a low level game figuring out how to get a players horse out of a put trap. It was a dc 10 climb to get out (just meant as a minor inconvenience during a fight), but the horse simply couldnt climb out. Mind you, the dm could have handwaved it after the combat, and instead chose to turn it into a problem solving test, but there are lots of such situations in dungeons where not being able to climb is a serious problem.
A single rope would have solved that problem.
Funny thing, no one in the party was very strong, all were small sized. We had rope. It didnt help. No one could lift the horse.
You can drag 5x your maximum load. Step on top of the horse ('cause it's only a 10' pit and it's a horse) tie then rope around the horse. Then drag, don't lift. Between all of you small sized, if four of you have dead average strength you can drag a total of 1500 lbs. If there were less of you, someone had to have had a higher str than 10. Horses top out at 1500 lbs. And if your entire party was large, what were you doing with a full size (large) horse? And if it was a medium mount, you would have actually had way less trouble.

In this particular case, the person who had the horse had (with the dms permission) decided to go with a horse despite being a halfling. Was based on some character he had read of in a book? Not really sure. And the dm ruled (not unreasonably I think) that it wasnt push/drag weight, but lift off ground weight that mattered when pulling something up with a rope (so only 2x maximum load). It was a party of 4, all small sized 3 characters had a negative strength, and one had slightly above average. All were dex based or casters. Ended up with like 600ish in lift capacity I think?

Obviously this was pretty uniquely inconvenient, but the problem is still relavent. Even if you could tie a rope to it and haul it up, that loss of independant mobility can be a serious problem in certain encounters.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Gotta agree with the DM's ruling there.

Unless you had a block and tackle, pulling the horse isn't going to do much good when its in a pit.

Grand Lodge

The description of donkey or mule implies that horses are unwilling to enter dungeons. Whether you call this rule or fluff, it is the basis for horses and dungeons not mixing other than the logistics of a large critter. In some styles of game, I can see this going directly to "horses won't go into dungeons." Blame it on Bill the Pony.

Grand Lodge

Kolokotroni wrote:

In this particular case, the person who had the horse had (with the dms permission) decided to go with a horse despite being a halfling. Was based on some character he had read of in a book? Not really sure. And the dm ruled (not unreasonably I think) that it wasnt push/drag weight, but lift off ground weight that mattered when pulling something up with a rope (so only 2x maximum load). It was a party of 4, all small sized 3 characters had a negative strength, and one had slightly above average. All were dex based or casters. Ended up with like 600ish in lift capacity I think?

Obviously this was pretty uniquely inconvenient, but the problem is still relavent. Even if you could tie a rope to it and haul it up, that loss of independant mobility can be a serious problem in certain encounters.

I guess you're right, it's been too long since I've taken physics. When dragging the ground is supporting most of the weight, the lift vs drag is probably they're way of abstracting the force of the ground minus the friction.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Mounts and dungeons All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.