|
| 2 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Mounted player has the Ride-by attack feat:
Benefit: When you are mounted and use the charge action, you may move and attack as if with a standard charge and then move again (continuing the straight line of the charge). Your total movement for the round can't exceed double your mounted speed. You and your mount do not provoke an attack of opportunity from the opponent that you attack.
and the player's mount has pounce:
When a creature with this special attack makes a charge, it can make a full attack (including rake attacks if the creature also has the rake ability)
The way I read this, is that the player uses the full-round action to charge up to an opponent, make a standard attack while the mount gets to perform a full attack, then the player can move again.
Both Rider and Mount are charging. The Rider does not get to make a standard attack.
Regarding if the mount can move after making an attack or not, if the mount cannot make an attack and then move then Ride-By-Attack cannot function.
The mounted combat rules are confusing as written and in some places a strict reading of them contradicts how they are supposed to operate.
i would ask your GM, PFS will probably not run it more one way than any other.
You didn't say the rider would get a standard attack? Hmmmmm
The way I read this, is that the player uses the full-round action to charge up to an opponent, make a while the mount gets to perform a full attack, then the player can move again.
(Bold/size is mine)
Charge and ride-by attack should not go together. As you charge, too when your mount charges I don't think it works.
Both Rider and Mount are charging. The Rider does not get to make a standard attack.
Regarding if the mount can move after making an attack or not, if the mount cannot make an attack and then move then Ride-By-Attack cannot function.
The mounted combat rules are confusing as written and in some places a strict reading of them contradicts how they are supposed to operate.
I don't see how you're getting "The Rider does not get to make a standard attack".
But yes, the mounted combat rules are a complete mess.
Casual Viking, the FAQ states that the rider is also charging (thus using a charge action) so you cannot make a standard (action) attack while charging, not even while mounted.
Prior to the FAQ people argued that you could because the mount was the one doing the charging.
Charging is a full round action leaving only a swift and some free actions. Not standard action left to take.
You can make the one attack that is part of the charge but not any form of attack that is a standard action to make.
Casual Viking, the FAQ states that the rider is also charging (thus using a charge action) so you cannot make a standard (action) attack while charging, not even while mounted.
Prior to the FAQ people argued that you could because the mount was the one doing the charging.
Oh, that. Yes, totally agree.
Both Rider and Mount are charging. The Rider does not get to make a standard attack.
Regarding if the mount can move after making an attack or not, if the mount cannot make an attack and then move then Ride-By-Attack cannot function.
The mounted combat rules are confusing as written and in some places a strict reading of them contradicts how they are supposed to operate.
I don't see how you're getting "The Rider does not get to make a standard attack".
But yes, the mounted combat rules are a complete mess.
Urgh, yes. The mounted combat rules were already messy in 3.5, and then Paizo slapped on several of their signature overly broad patches to fix narrow "problems" with mounted combat that, per usual, broke far more than they solved.
|
|
You didn't say the rider would get a standard attack? Hmmmmm
The way I read this, is that the player uses the full-round action to charge up to an opponent, make a while the mount gets to perform a full attack, then the player can move again.(Bold/size is mine)
allow me to correct the context of the sentence:
Standard melee attack.as per charge rules:
Attacking on a Charge
After moving, you may make a single melee attack. You get a +2 bonus on the attack roll and take a –2 penalty to your AC until the start of your next turn.
The problem with you using the word "standard" is that for many people throughout the years (until the linked FAQ) you could perform a mounted charge, and then perform a standard action such as a standard action attack.
So, when you use the phrase "standard attack" it does not mean "the single melee attack you make at the end of the charge" it means "a standard action attack" which, is incorrect.
While you may have meant it as a single melee attack that is not how others will read it. Just fyi. :)
Word to the GM: Kill the Mount.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Without Spring Attack the mount cannot move, attack and then move again.
Ride By Attack doe not allow your mount to attack, it only allows you the rider to attack and for you both to continue moving afterwards.
You cannot combine charging with spring attack as both are separate full rounds actions.
I don't see where ride by attack says the mount is not given an attack, it simply says make an attack "as if with a standard charge" and then move. the mount getting an attack to me at least is part of the attack of a standard charge.
The wording of the feat refers to you (the mounted PC character). Heck as written the feat doesn't even work because it technically doesn't allow the mount to move after you attack because it only says you.
How often do you imagine a charger stopping mid-charge to attack something and continue to charge?
The wording of the feat refers to you (the mounted PC character). Heck as written the feat doesn't even work because it technically doesn't allow the mount to move after you attack because it only says you.
How often do you imagine a charger stopping mid-charge to attack something and continue to charge?
the bolded is why i imagine it applies to the mount as well.
pounce is fluffed as making all the attacks at once, so there is no stopping.
Making an attack at all means you have to stop in Pathfinder. Otherwise characters wouldn't need spring attack.
It doesn't matter whether you make one attack or 6, you have to stop to make them.
Can we all agree that the way ride by attack is supposed to work is basically the way we all seen every knight joust ever? That's what it's supposed to do, because without it you charge them, hit them with the lance and stop directly in front of them.
i guess. but most jousters don't ride something that has pounce. :P
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
i guess. but most jousters don't ride something that has pounce. :P
Pounce isn't really relevant. Most jousts don't feature the horse making a single attack either.
i guess. but most jousters don't ride something that has pounce. :PPounce isn't really relevant. Most jousts don't feature the horse making a single attack either.
shhhh, i know that, couldn't think of a better way to describe an animal/mount that would actually try to attack things in combat. Horses are frightful creatures, they don't like the noises of combat, so you want to keep moving since that's what the horse wants to do anyway.
War trained mounts were plenty capable of rearing up and hitting people with their hooves or biting them. They just never did it from a full charge without stopping.
War trained mounts were plenty capable of rearing up and hitting people with their hooves or biting them. They just never did it from a full charge without stopping.
that's because even war trained mounts want to keep running, horses like to run, and their natural attack patterns involve tiring out the enemy and rearing to strike with hooves or bites. all of those are still things the horse already knows to do, it still prefers to keep running.
But none of that is really relevant to the fact that Ride By Attack doesn't allow the mount to attack and keep moving. It allows the rider to make an attack while the mount moves.
Again, if we want to be technical the feat doesn't even actually work because the horse has to stop for the rider to make the attack (because of how Pathfinder's rules work, in order to make an attack action your move action must have ended). But the feat only allows the rider to move, attack, and then move.
I think the logical way to run it is that the horse "never stops moving" (which prevents it from making any attacks) and you make your attack while the horse is mid-stride.
But none of that is really relevant to the fact that Ride By Attack doesn't allow the mount to attack and keep moving. It allows the rider to make an attack while the mount moves.
and i'm saying since it seems to implicitly include the mount in the "you", that the mount also gains a standard attack. just like the mount also moves with your character after the attack.
I always understood it to mean you can hit with your lance (a reach weapon) then your mount can close the remaining 5' to carry out its full attack via pounce. Without the feat it'd be one or the other.
Well, I would strongly disagree that the mount is included in "you".
And this is why mounted combat rules really need an overhaul. Because honestly, they're not well written. I think the design team is aware of this, but also doesn't know what to do with them either.
Well, I would strongly disagree that the mount is included in "you".
And this is why mounted combat rules really need an overhaul. Because honestly, they're not well written. I think the design team is aware of this, but also doesn't know what to do with them either.
I have to agree ride-by attack only allows for the rider not the mount to attack and then move again. This strictly written in the rules and is not even RAW VS RAI issue. I wish people would stop twisting the rules or adding to them just because they want something their way.
But none of that is really relevant to the fact that Ride By Attack doesn't allow the mount to attack and keep moving. It allows the rider to make an attack while the mount moves.and i'm saying since it seems to implicitly include the mount in the "you", that the mount also gains a standard attack. just like the mount also moves with your character after the attack.
"you" is referring to the person who took the feat not the mount. And I doubt that a mount could even take the ride-by attack feat because it couldn't even meet the prerequisites much less use it.
I have to agree ride-by attack only allows for the rider not the mount to attack and then move again. This strictly written in the rules and is not even RAW VS RAI issue. I wish people would stop twisting the rules or adding to them just because they want something their way.Well, I would strongly disagree that the mount is included in "you".
And this is why mounted combat rules really need an overhaul. Because honestly, they're not well written. I think the design team is aware of this, but also doesn't know what to do with them either.
because i've totally ever even tried to make a mounted character.
the feat doesn't work if the "you" doesn't include the mount, unless you use your movement after the attack to dismount.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I have to agree ride-by attack only allows for the rider not the mount to attack and then move again. This strictly written in the rules and is not even RAW VS RAI issue. I wish people would stop twisting the rules or adding to them just because they want something their way.Well, I would strongly disagree that the mount is included in "you".
And this is why mounted combat rules really need an overhaul. Because honestly, they're not well written. I think the design team is aware of this, but also doesn't know what to do with them either.
because i've totally ever even tried to make a mounted character.
the feat doesn't work if the "you" doesn't include the mount, unless you use your movement after the attack to dismount.
Mounted Combat Rules Section.
Your mount acts on your initiative count as you direct it. You move at its speed, but the mount uses its action to move.
Ride-by-Attack feat
When you are mounted and use the charge action, you may move and attack as if with a standard charge and then move again (continuing the straight line of the charge). Your total movement for the round can't exceed double your mounted speed. You and your mount do not provoke an attack of opportunity from the opponent that you attack.
Based on this two things the feat does work. "You" does not include the mount, but the person who has the feat. "You" move at its speed, as long as the mount does not attack it can keep on going after "you" have made the attack during the charge utilizing the benefits of the ride-by attack feat. Should the mount attack, the benefits gained from having the ride-by attack become null and useless. I don't see what is so hard to understand about this.
I have to agree ride-by attack only allows for the rider not the mount to attack and then move again. This strictly written in the rules and is not even RAW VS RAI issue. I wish people would stop twisting the rules or adding to them just because they want something their way.Well, I would strongly disagree that the mount is included in "you".
And this is why mounted combat rules really need an overhaul. Because honestly, they're not well written. I think the design team is aware of this, but also doesn't know what to do with them either.
because i've totally ever even tried to make a mounted character.
the feat doesn't work if the "you" doesn't include the mount, unless you use your movement after the attack to dismount.
Mounted Combat Rules Section.
Your mount acts on your initiative count as you direct it. You move at its speed, but the mount uses its action to move.
Ride-by-Attack feat
When you are mounted and use the charge action, you may move and attack as if with a standard charge and then move again (continuing the straight line of the charge). Your total movement for the round can't exceed double your mounted speed. You and your mount do not provoke an attack of opportunity from the opponent that you attack.
Based on this two things the feat does work. "You" does not include the mount, but the person who has the feat. "You" move at its speed, as long as the mount does not attack it can keep on going after "you" have made the attack during the charge utilizing the benefits of the ride-by attack feat. Should the mount attack, the benefits gained from having the ride-by attack become null and useless. I don't see what is so hard to understand about this.
specifically because of the part you didn't bold in ride by attack,
"you may move and attack as if with a standard charge and then move again (continuing the straight line of the charge)."
a standard charge allows your mount to attack. I don't don't see what's so hard to understand about this.
seems to me you move to the target, do your normal charge actions and then keep going in a straight line.
I have to agree ride-by attack only allows for the rider not the mount to attack and then move again. This strictly written in the rules and is not even RAW VS RAI issue. I wish people would stop twisting the rules or adding to them just because they want something their way.Well, I would strongly disagree that the mount is included in "you".
And this is why mounted combat rules really need an overhaul. Because honestly, they're not well written. I think the design team is aware of this, but also doesn't know what to do with them either.
because i've totally ever even tried to make a mounted character.
the feat doesn't work if the "you" doesn't include the mount, unless you use your movement after the attack to dismount.
Mounted Combat Rules Section.
Your mount acts on your initiative count as you direct it. You move at its speed, but the mount uses its action to move.
Ride-by-Attack feat
When you are mounted and use the charge action, you may move and attack as if with a standard charge and then move again (continuing the straight line of the charge). Your total movement for the round can't exceed double your mounted speed. You and your mount do not provoke an attack of opportunity from the opponent that you attack.
Based on this two things the feat does work. "You" does not include the mount, but the person who has the feat. "You" move at its speed, as long as the mount does not attack it can keep on going after "you" have made the attack during the charge utilizing the benefits of the ride-by attack feat. Should the mount attack, the benefits gained from having the ride-by attack become null and useless. I don't see what is so hard to understand about this.
specifically because of the part you didn't bold in ride by attack,
"you may move and attack as if with a standard charge and then move again (continuing the straight line of the...
Ok, lets establish what you were trying to argue. You argued that ride-by attack does not work. One of the basis' of your argument is the wording of the word "you" and how it should include the mount in it to work.
Alright I will not argue, during a regular mounted charge both the mount and rider can attack(as long as both can attack from the same square). But after the attack is made no more movement is allowed. Plain vanilla charge.
Ok this is where feats come in. Feats can alter the mechanics of certain things. Prime examples of this are cleave and ride-by attack. This is where a specific rule trumps a general rule.
I have already established what "you" covers in my earlier posts. The ride-by attack does just what it says. It allows the rider to move and attack just like a standard charge, but lets the mount(because you are using the mount's speed to move) and rider move again afterwards. But only if just the rider attacks, if the mount attacks, the conditions for the feat are not meant, and therefore becomes null and void. This is a specific rule that trumps a general rule. I am sorry if you cannot not accept this, but this just how the rule reads.
Let me put it to you in another way. Should the mount attack regular charge rules take over/kick in. Only when you meet the specific conditions for ride-by attack, does it take effect. Doing anything less or more than what the feat says or alters, then regular rules will kick in.
But only if just the rider attacks, if the mount attacks, the conditions for the feat are not meant
citation needed
But only if just the rider attacks, if the mount attacks, the conditions for the feat are not meantcitation needed
explained in the above post.
Let me put it to you in another way. Should the mount attack regular charge rules take over/kick in. Only when you meet the specific conditions for ride-by attack, does it take effect. Doing anything less or more than what the feat says or alters, then regular rules will kick in.
But only if just the rider attacks, if the mount attacks, the conditions for the feat are not meantcitation neededexplained in the above post.
Let me put it to you in another way. Should the mount attack regular charge rules take over/kick in. Only when you meet the specific conditions for ride-by attack, does it take effect. Doing anything less or more than what the feat says or alters, then regular rules will kick in.
the only difference the feat does is let you continue moving after the normal standard charge attack.
your explanation wasn't clear to me where his mount doesn't qualify for an attack.
But only if just the rider attacks, if the mount attacks, the conditions for the feat are not meantcitation neededexplained in the above post.
Let me put it to you in another way. Should the mount attack regular charge rules take over/kick in. Only when you meet the specific conditions for ride-by attack, does it take effect. Doing anything less or more than what the feat says or alters, then regular rules will kick in.
the only difference the feat does is let you continue moving after the normal standard charge attack.
your explanation wasn't clear to me where his mount doesn't qualify for an attack.
Show me where in the ride-by attack feat it says his mount does get an attack. If you quote the regular charge rules to me then regular charge rules apply. Keep that in mind.
Show me where in the ride-by attack feat it says his mount does get an attack. If you quote the regular charge rules to me then regular charge rules apply. Keep that in mind.But only if just the rider attacks, if the mount attacks, the conditions for the feat are not meantcitation neededexplained in the above post.
Let me put it to you in another way. Should the mount attack regular charge rules take over/kick in. Only when you meet the specific conditions for ride-by attack, does it take effect. Doing anything less or more than what the feat says or alters, then regular rules will kick in.
the only difference the feat does is let you continue moving after the normal standard charge attack.
your explanation wasn't clear to me where his mount doesn't qualify for an attack.
When you are mounted and use the charge action, you may move and attack as if with a standard charge and then move again (continuing the straight line of the charge).
when YOU charge your mount does too(Claxon provided the FAQ earlier), so you get a standard attack as if making a standard charge, which means both of you attack, and then can move which you already stated, means they both move.
Show me where in the ride-by attack feat it says his mount does get an attack. If you quote the regular charge rules to me then regular charge rules apply. Keep that in mind.But only if just the rider attacks, if the mount attacks, the conditions for the feat are not meantcitation neededexplained in the above post.
Let me put it to you in another way. Should the mount attack regular charge rules take over/kick in. Only when you meet the specific conditions for ride-by attack, does it take effect. Doing anything less or more than what the feat says or alters, then regular rules will kick in.
the only difference the feat does is let you continue moving after the normal standard charge attack.
your explanation wasn't clear to me where his mount doesn't qualify for an attack.
When you are mounted and use the charge action, you may move and attack as if with a standard charge and then move again (continuing the straight line of the charge).when YOU charge your mount does too(Claxon provided the FAQ earlier), so you get a standard attack as if making a standard charge, which means both of you attack, and then can move which you already stated, means they both move.
From official FAQ
Both charge in unison, suffer the same penalty to AC, the gaining the same bonus to the attack rolls and following all other rules for the charge.
This faq was made to clear up some misconceptions about mounted charging. If both rider and mount are charging they are subject to the charging rules, even a mounted charge. A charge is a special full round action, doesn't even give the regular 5ft step. You get a single melee attack at the end of the charge. You don't even get a standard action in a charge, that is why feats like vital strike can't be used in charge. Before this faq only the mount was considered charging(although the rider got the benefits and penalties of the charge). The rider used the mounts speed to move during the charge, therefore giving him a standard action to use. This faq put a stop to the rider getting a standard action during a mounted charge by making it to where both were considered charging. So regular charge rules apply even when stating this faq. This does not affect or alter the things I have stated or referenced.
Please don't go quoting the faqs before giving them a thorough read.
when YOU charge your mount does too(Claxon provided the FAQ earlier), so you get a standard attack as if making a standard charge, which means both of you attack, and then can move which you already stated, means they both move.
Potentially, but the mount isn't required to be able to get an attack (nor the rider if the mount is taking the attack) in order to make that charge. And the feat, being part of the rider's skill set, modifies when he can take his attack on a charge (from the very end of it to nearly any point along it). But I don't really see it modifying the mount's ability to do the same since it's not part of the mount's abilities.
Well, I would strongly disagree that the mount is included in "you".
And this is why mounted combat rules really need an overhaul. Because honestly, they're not well written. I think the design team is aware of this, but also doesn't know what to do with them either.
I think it's not so much that they have no idea what to do as it is that they know it'd take a major rewrite to fix mounted combat, and Paizo really hates the idea of making any substantial changes to the CRB. After all, changing the text might change the pagination, and everyone knows the universe would explode if so much as a single line of text was shifted to another page.
After all, making sure every single reference to a CRB page number in a five-year-old splatbook is accurate is far more important than having coherent rules.
i'm just going to walk away, and hide the thread, this doesn't require a FAQ or any more arguing on the subject. good days to you fine sirs, but i take my leave of this thread.
|
Well, I think most everybody can agree that the mounted combat rules need an overhaul. Most telling is usually when you have a disagreement about a rule, 2 sides are formed, and then the debate goes on about which side is right. With mounted combat there are a bunch of pieces that everyone seems to think work differently. For the record here is how I've always interpreted the mounted combat rules to work (or not work technically).
Ride-by-attack doesn't work because it doesn't specify that the mount gets to move, it only says you. This is pretty silly, and, as most people I know tend to agree, this actually means you and your mount, as you use your mounts movement in combat. So basically Ride-by-attack allows you to move after you have come to a stop after your charge, as you always do when you charge. Nothing in Ride-by-attack says it alters the way charging works, it merely states that after a charge you can move again, as long as you don't exceed twice your mounts movement for the turn. So Already here we're stretching things, but intent seems plain, charge then move afterwards.
Now as for being able to get an attack along with your mount, that's where things get tricky. As it's a normal charge for both you and your mount, you both get to make an attack, as long as you make the DC 10 ride check to fight with a combat-trained mount, as outlined in the ride skill, and you and your mount have the same reach. But you don't have the same reach, you have a lance, and they have hooves. All of a sudden you run into a problem with how the charge action works.
So, following the rules for charging, you must move to the first square you can attack from. Considering both you and your mount are charging, and that you use the mounts movement in combat, that means that you must move past the first point you can attack, with your 10' reach, and into the first spot that the mount can attack, so 5' away. From here you and your mount can attack (though are not required to), but not before because the charge rules specify that you can only attack after moving. Considering you've got a reach weapon, you're probably not hitting, unless the target is large and you can target a square 10' away.
So a character mounted on a horse usually can't charge using a lance unless through magic or feats the horse gains a reach of 10'. This is also silly, but how everything works according to the book. The logical answer to this is to allow the mount to stop at the riders attack distance, and thus not being able to attack, but nowhere does it say that you can do this. This is a pure homebrew fix to the problem of having a weapon that has a special characteristic that only works on a mounted charge, that you can't perform with the majority of mounts.
So yes, you can charge and have both you and your mount attack. Anything after that is kind of making stuff up. You can probably move away after, as ride-by-attack should give your mount the ability to move, not that it says that.
Hope this isn't for PFS. I've personally stopped playing my cavalier since from one game to the next I never really new how the mounted combat rules were going to be run, and I too was working towards a pouncing mount.
Well, I think most everybody can agree that the mounted combat rules need an overhaul. Most telling is usually when you have a disagreement about a rule, 2 sides are formed, and then the debate goes on about which side is right. With mounted combat there are a bunch of pieces that everyone seems to think work differently. For the record here is how I've always interpreted the mounted combat rules to work (or not work technically).
Ride-by-attack doesn't work because it doesn't specify that the mount gets to move, it only says you. This is pretty silly, and, as most people I know tend to agree, this actually means you and your mount, as you use your mounts movement in combat. So basically Ride-by-attack allows you to move after you have come to a stop after your charge, as you always do when you charge. Nothing in Ride-by-attack says it alters the way charging works, it merely states that after a charge you can move again, as long as you don't exceed twice your mounts movement for the turn. So Already here we're stretching things, but intent seems plain, charge then move afterwards.
Now as for being able to get an attack along with your mount, that's where things get tricky. As it's a normal charge for both you and your mount, you both get to make an attack, as long as you make the DC 10 ride check to fight with a combat-trained mount, as outlined in the ride skill, and you and your mount have the same reach. But you don't have the same reach, you have a lance, and they have hooves. All of a sudden you run into a problem with how the charge action works.
So, following the rules for charging, you must move to the first square you can attack from. Considering both you and your mount are charging, and that you use the mounts movement in combat, that means that you must move past the first point you can attack, with your 10' reach, and into the first spot that the mount can attack, so 5' away. From here you and your mount can attack (though are not required to), but not before because the charge rules...
Yeah, I won't disagree mounted combat rules really do need to have more specific wording when it comes to a few things. As for the my posts earlier that was strictly arguing over whether your mount gets an attack in when trying to utilize the benefits of the ride-by attack feat a mounted character has. Heck in my opinion how would you even fully utilize the benefits from ride-by attack to even keep moving because you would have to go through the enemy's square to keep moving considering the mechanics of a charge. I think that is covered in the overrun rules. The only other option is to take another feat called wheeling charge, and trying to argue how that works is really a headache. As for the whole reach and pounce issues when it comes to mounted combat, that's a horse of a different color.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Well, SKR had some great posts about how you don't have to charge directly at your opponent with ride-by-attack that fixed a lot of things. Then he came back and said that he was wrong and that's not how charging works, and now we do need wheeling charge or overrun to use ride-by-attack, unless you can get in the perfect charging lane that allows you to move right beside the target and keep moving.
Personally I would pay good money for a Player Companion or Campaign setting book that re-wrote/fixed/explained all the things don't work with mounted combat. I wouldn't even be mad I'm paying them to fix a product I already bought.