I'm a min-maxer by nature, but I'm also trying to be a little flexible when it comes to adding flavor to my char. Right now I'm trying to choose between a halfling and human bard.
Bards, some would think, would already be gimping my char, so I don't want to do so even more by picking a gimpy race. Having said that, it seems to me, @ first glance, that halflings are such a race.
I've tried to break this down as easily as possible. If you choose a halfling over a human, you have the following tradeoffs:
Even:
- +1 attack, -1 damage
- +1 AC, -1 CMB/CMD
- +2 stealth/acrobat, +4 stealth, -1 entire skill
Advantages:
- +1 CHR (for 4 levels) (meh)
- +2 perception (meh)
- +1 saves
Disadvantages
- -1 FEAT!!!!
- -10 MOVEMENT!!!!
Would someone in their right mind trade a feat and -10 movement for +1 to their saves? I don't get why anyone would ever roll a halfling.
Can anyone explain?
|
What do you want your bard to be? If you're going for melee, yeah, the halfling is going to be disadvantaged. If you're going ranged, however, the lack of movement won't be so bad, and the dex bonus will be helpful to hit as well as defenses without spending a feat. Another thought would be a mount, if you want to try a halfling archer.
I could see a halfling outrider squad leader, given to stirring speeches and shouting out coordinated attack plans. I believe Treantmonk's guide to bards has a ranged build that holds it's own.
|
I agree with Jess, it depends on what you want to do with your Bard. After reading Treantmonk's guides, I get itchy to make one of those classes myself. In the case of his Bard guide, I made a ranged Elf Bard and it seems to work pretty well.
The halfing outrider squad leader is a great RP idea and would definitely not be gimped in combat. But if you want to sing and swing, you would want to be human.
What do you want your bard to be? If you're going for melee, yeah, the halfling is going to be disadvantaged. If you're going ranged, however, the lack of movement won't be so bad, and the dex bonus will be helpful to hit as well as defenses without spending a feat. Another thought would be a mount, if you want to try a halfling archer.
I could see a halfling outrider squad leader, given to stirring speeches and shouting out coordinated attack plans. I believe Treantmonk's guide to bards has a ranged build that holds it's own.
I'm going archer build but, as you know, human's get the same Dex bonus as halflings. And, so you're not gimped in the dmg department, you will have to allocate SOME of that Charisma bonus for a few points in Strength just to get it back up to 10.
Hence, my conclusion that the net effect in stats, for a halfing vs human, is a small bump in Charisma effectiveness once every 4 levels (meaning @ lvl 1, its an odd-numbered Charisma, which is useless, but @ lvl 4 its an even-numbered Charisma, which isn't, etc).
Having to waste a feat (Combat Riding) just to move as fast as a human is still a disadvantage...
Again, I'm not trying to figure out ways to make the halfing bard effective...I'm trying to figure out why making one wouldn't be entirely less effective than a human bard.
I personally base all my characters on a role playing concept. Some people just like playing certain races for their flavor, not their mechanics.
And there is absolutely nothing wrong with that ;)
As long as you acknowledge that you're playing, mechanics-wise, a less effective character as a trade-off...
|
|
Halflings are a ton of fun to play and that movement penalty for being small doesn't come into play too often, especially for a class like a bard. Even if you need to be mobile, you can easily get a riding dog that can go almost anywhere a halfling can go.
We ran a party of 5 halflings in Living Greyhawk through quite a few adventures and it just totally broke almost all of them. No one spoke halfling so we could easily communicate in front of people, we completely ignored a difficult encounter due to our small size, etc.
|
Personally, I like halflings. Nothing says "Screw you, ya goblin!" like a 1st lv halfling with 20 dex, a chainshirt, and masterwork light shield, and Weapon Finesse. And yes, it is possible to have a chainshirt and a masterwork light shield at lv1. If you are using Pathfinder Traits anyway(Rich Parents: Starting gold becomes 900).
And, so you're not gimped in the dmg department, you will have to allocate SOME of that Charisma bonus for a few points in Strength just to get it back up to 10.
By playing a bard, you are already accepting that fact that you're not the primary damage dealer, so an 8 str isn't really going to be that much worse than a 10 str, especially if you use a bow that doesn't normally add str to damage anyway.
By playing a bard, you are already accepting that fact that you're not the primary damage dealer, so an 8 str isn't really going to be that much worse than a 10 str, especially if you use a bow that doesn't normally add str to damage anyway.
Yeah, but it subtracts from your dmg. 8 STR gives -1 dmg.
|
As you level up, that one damage becomes less and less significant in the grand scheme of things. As a bard, the strength lies in control and support, not damage output. The biggest hindrance I see in having 8 strength is your load limit. I don't like my characters to hit above light load if I can help it.
The advantages are quite a big deal: the saves bonus, the immense stealth advantage (since Stealth is an opposed check that +4 changes an "even" encounter from 50/50 to 70/30 chance to stay hidden), and the higher Charisma (1 or 2, it's useful) to Charisma skills, Save DCs if you choose offensive spells (Sleep, Hideous Laughter, Hypnotism). For a bit of movement (I took Expeditious Retreat with my halfling bard), and one feat.
Think of it as one feat for +2 Charisma, and a +/- trait for +1 to saves/-10 feet move.
The advantages do shrink a bit as you level (except the Stealth advantage I'd say), but the ability to overcome the movement and damage loss (and the ratio of feats) becomes better.
It's pretty fundamental to most editions of D&D that race matters less and less as you level.
By playing a bard, you are already accepting that fact that you're not the primary damage dealer, so an 8 str isn't really going to be that much worse than a 10 str, especially if you use a bow that doesn't normally add str to damage anyway.Yeah, but it subtracts from your dmg. 8 STR gives -1 dmg.
I believe he was talking about a bow, where it doesn't affect damage as long as the bow ISN"T composite.
That said, it really depends on the concept as to why you'd play a halfling over a human. First, a halfling gives you both +2 Dex AND Int, and if you want both of those to be high, thats invaluable. A small PC, as it has been stated, will have an easier time mounting things (because it'd be a medium mount vs a large, which would have trouble in some areas and clutter up combat a bit). Finally, if you were focused on being a controller/spell caster, why not take the +1 to AC and hit that comes from being small? For being a melee bard, you're right, human is superior, a ranged bard I'd say is about equal (maybe slightly in favor of the human if you're focusing on pure damage), and a control/support type favors the halfling.Plus the flavor of a halfling, which bard doesn't want to tell the epic tale of their life as a liberated slave?
I don't get why anyone would ever roll a halfling.
And you never will, if you don't look beyond game mechanic and min-maxing.
|
|
I don't get why anyone would ever roll a halfling.
And you never will, if you don't look beyond game mechanic and min-maxing.
Even us evil mathematically minded optimizers play halflings.
Sure, you'll lose movement. The strength penalty is a negative, as strength would be your tertiary stat, but you get bonuses to your primary (dex) and secondary (cha) stats. The feat loss is a little sad too, but a bonus to saves that stacks with resistance bonuses is very nice, especially early in the game.
with your high dex, a single skill rank in ride is all that's needed to use a riding dog as a shooting platform and later phantom speed as a FLYING platform. The advantages of that can't be underestimated. :) You will have to invest a bit in strength - I would at least make it 12 - but then you'll be using deadly aim soon enough, and arcane strike and point blank shot as are useful as well to add to damage. Rapid shot and many shot, with your song and racial bonuses to hit, will be helpful in increasing your damage. If you really want to be an archer, I think halfling is probably a better choice than human. It's at least equal. You'll have to adopt a slightly different strategy than a human would - but I don't think you'd be unhappy.
Now, if halfling doesn't appeal to you, don't do it. But I don't think the mechanics should hold you back at all.
Here's an easy sample:
Halfling bard:
Str 10 (2 pts)
Int 12 (2 pts)
Wis 7 (-4pts)
Dex 16 (5pts)
Con 14 (5pts)
Cha 18 (10pts)Skills: Acrobatics, Diplomacy, Escape Artist, Perform, Use Magic Device, Stealth, Ride
Adjust to taste.
-James
If only my DM were nice enough to give us 20 pt buy :(
Here is my current 15 pt buy halfling build:
STR 10
DEX 16
CON 12
INT 14
WIS 7
CHA 16
Skills: Acrobatics, Perception, Perform (x2), Stealth, Knowledge (local), Use Magic Device (and 1 more)
Feat: Point-blank Shot
|
|
15 buy can be rough. I generally give my players 25 buy so they feel tough. They are heroes after all! That's not a bad set of stats for 15, plus wouldn't likely have two 16's with a human. Those cost 10 points for the 2nd one. You'd be 10,16,10,10,10,16 with 4 points free of you wanted to dump wisdom.
with your high dex, a single skill rank in ride is all that's needed to use a riding dog as a shooting platform and later phantom speed as a FLYING platform. The advantages of that can't be underestimated. :)
Now THIS is what I'm talking about. Doing a little research, it looks like, with a riding dog, I can:
- Move 40'
- Ride in a dungeon
- Make full-round attacks while moving
- Have him actually attack in a pinch!
So this is actually a BIG advantage for a halfling!
Now, if halfling doesn't appeal to you, don't do it. But I don't think the mechanics should hold you back at all.
It definitely does...otherwise I would have started this thread ;) I want to be one...I just want to make sure they don't aren't a lot worse than a human.
That's not a bad set of stats for 15, plus wouldn't likely have two 16's with a human.
Yes..that's why I say, on average, being a halfling gives you a +1 CHA (every four levels) advantage over a human.
|
|
If only my DM were nice enough to give us 20 pt buy :(
Here is my current 15 pt buy halfling build:
STR 10
DEX 16
CON 12
INT 14
WIS 7
CHA 16Skills: Acrobatics, Perception, Perform (x2), Stealth, Knowledge (local), Use Magic Device (and 1 more)
Feat: Point-blank Shot
I would like to ask: What do you want you character to do? what do you want to concentrate on?
Do you want him to be an archer? Do you want him to be a skill monkey? Do you want him to be a caster?
If you answer "yes" to everything, you will spread yourself too thin.
Also, looking at your skill list, don't forget: You get FREE skills based off performances!!! Also, bardic knowledge makes it a good idea to spread 1 point around in as many knowledge scores as possible, and only max what is really important to you.
While I understand the desire to have a visual and audible performance right off the bat to gain access to all bardic abilities, I think your skills are costing you too much. Constitution, while nice, may also be a bit steep, as you're going to be ranged and mobile - and your mount can't take much damage, meaning if you're in melee, it's already very very bad for you.
If you're going to be an archer bard with 15 point buy, I would suggest something like:
Str: 13, Dex: 16, Con: 10, Int: 12, Wis: 7, Cha: 16
Level 4's stat point would probably go to strength to get your bonus up, then boost dexterity. With an intelligence of 12, you'd be getting 8 skill points / lvl (with favored class). The reason I'm not upping the con or taking the HP favored class option is because you should only be taking occasional ranged attacks, and you can't afford to have your mount take much damage. While mounted combat isn't necessary, it will greatly increase the survivability of your mount, as you can use your high dex to help negate attacks against it. Area effects would still be a problem.
or
Str: 12, Dex: 18, Con: 10, Int: 12, Wis: 7, Cha: 16
Lower strength, higher dex. YOu'll lose one damage, but the bonus to hit and defenses may very well be worth it.
or
Str: 13, Dex: 18, Con: 10, Int: 12, Wis: 7, Cha: 15
Again, you have higher strength. YOu're not going to need the 16 charisma for 6th level spells until you're higher level anyway.
Unless you're planning to depend heavily on save dependent spells - a weakness as your spell level is low thus your highest save is almost always going to be lower than other full casters' spells - you don't need to maximise your charisma quite yet. That gives you some good wiggle room in the stats. Bards have lots of buff spells that don't require saves, and utility spells as well. As long as those attack spells you do use are mostly area effect, you'll be able affect some in the area even with lower saves if you really want to go that route.
Even:
- +1 attack, -1 damage
- +1 AC, -1 CMB/CMD
- +2 stealth/acrobat, +4 stealth, -1 entire skill
Actually, this isn't correct.
+1 attack isn't the same budget-wise as +1 damage. Furthermore, +1 AC isn't the same as +1 CMB/CMD. In fact, increasing your Dexterity by 2 points increases your CMD by 1 (and CMB if you take Agile Maneuvers). So those aren't really comparable. Increasing hit by +1 (Weapon Focus) is about the same as increasing damage by +2 (Weapon Specialization). Gaining a size bonus increase to AC is roughly the equivalent of a feat itself. Losing -1 CMB and -1 damage together arguably isn't the equivalent of a feat. . . gaining +1 CMB and +1 damage is less budget-wise than gaining +1 hit.
+2 climb, +2 acrobatics, and +4 to stealth isn't comparable to gaining 1 skill rank per level. It's actually closer to gaining the extra ranks as if you increased your Intelligence bonus by +2. They're two separate concepts. If you use climb, acrobatics, and stealth -- you're going to be better than an equivalently stated human. A +2/+2 feat is more powerful in Pathfinder (you get more bonus if you have 10 ranks) -- as is a Skill Focus +3 feat is more powerful. So both of them together is probably worth just a bit less than 2 feats.
Adding or subtracting a skill has typically been regarded as less than a feat in 3.5. I would argue in PF -- with the abundance of skill consolidation, each skill point means more. Thus, I think gaining a skill would be the equivalent of a feat now. Toughness is roughly equivalent to favored class hp bonus (it's better in the first 3 levels). The skill bonus humans have is roughly equivalent to the favored class skill bonus, so it's probably featworthy too.
So, here's the math:
+1 attack (1 feat)
+1 AC (1 feat)
+2 acrobatics/+2 climb (80% of a feat)
+4 stealth (better than Skill Focus initially, worse in the long-run -- I'd say that's about as good as a feat)
TOTAL: 3.8
-1 damage and -1 CMB (slightly less than a feat, I'd say 80%)
-1 skill (about 1 feat)
TOTAL: 1.8
NET DIFFERENCE: 2 FEATS
Overall, in the things you said were "equal", you gain 2 feats. Yes, if you had planned on buffing Strength and playing a fighter, things would be different -- you'd actually have to factor in losing the Strength buff you'd have as a human. But a bard doesn't typically focus on Strength. And also, if you don't care about stealth, acrobatics, or climbing, then yes, you're doing worse.
Advantages:
- +1 CHR (for 4 levels) (meh)
- +2 perception (meh)
- +1 saves
+2 to a single save is the equivalent of a feat. Adding a lower number to more saves is actually slightly better than a feat. You're increasing saves by a total of 3 points instead of 2. The bonus isn't as high as the one save, but you affect 2 more saves. Thus, it's slightly better than a normal feat -- I'd say 120%.
+2 to perception is a nice skill bonus -- in 3.5 that would have given you +2 search, +2 spot, and +2 listen. It's less than a feat -- I'd say 40% -- but it's still considerable.
I'm not sure what +1 CHR is, but +2 on saves versus fear is about 40% of a feat considering it stacks with the +1 to all saves.
So all that stuff together is worth about 2 feats.
Disadvantages
- -1 FEAT!!!!
- -10 MOVEMENT!!!!
This is actually worth 3 feats. Each Fleet feat increases movement by 5 ft.
So if you subtract the advantages from the disadvantages -- guess what -- you get 1 more feat playing halfling over playing human!
However, if you don't want to use stealth, climb, or acrobatics, you're down a feat and then some. Plus, if you're focusing on Strength-oriented classes: barbarian, ranger, fighter, paladin -- then you're also down in comparison. If you play to the race's strengths, you're doing better than a typical human.
|
|
It looks like you can only make a full round attack if the mount does not move more than 5 feet. Always wondered that and just checked.
Now THIS is what I'm talking about. Doing a little research, it looks like, with a riding dog, I can:
- Move 40'
- Ride in a dungeon
- Make full-round attacks while moving
- Have him actually attack in a pinch!So this is actually a BIG advantage for a halfling!
EDIT: Looks like you can make full RANGED attacks but only a single MELEE attack when the mount moves.
I would like to ask: What do you want you character to do? what do you want to concentrate on?
Skill-monkey/archer.
Also, looking at your skill list, don't forget: You get FREE skills based off performances!!! Also, bardic knowledge makes it a good idea to spread 1 point around in as many knowledge scores as possible, and only max what is really important to you.
[/QUOTE}That's exactly what I'm doing. The 2 x Perform is for 2 of those performance skill things.
While I understand the desire to have a visual and audible performance right off the bat to gain access to all bardic abilities, I think your skills are costing you too much.
I'm not quite sure what you mean by this. Why would I need a skill to do "visual and audible" performance? Are you saying the bardic performances require these as pre-reqs? I don't see them used any where as skill modifiers.
Constitution, while nice, may also be a bit steep, as you're going to be ranged and mobile - and your mount can't take much damage, meaning if you're in melee, it's already very very bad for you.
Good point. I guess I should learn to play him as a squish, even if he does get medium armor and d8...
If you're going to be an archer bard with 15 point buy, I would suggest something like:
Str: 12, Dex: 18, Con: 10, Int: 12, Wis: 7, Cha: 16
Lower...Yeah, this was my original stat allocation, until I messed around with lowering the DEX a bit to make me more balanced. I'll have to think about this.
Thanks for all your feedback so far. Very helpful!
Dump the Cha down to 12 and get your three points back for either Wis or Con, IMO...
By level 8 you'll have enough Cha to cast those level 6 spells you want anyways and there are plenty of good things to spend your spells known on that DON'T allow save throws that the lack on that side shouldn't hurt much.
just my 2 cp.
Dump the Cha down to 12 and get your three points back for either Wis or Con, IMO...
By level 8 you'll have enough Cha to cast those level 6 spells you want anyways and there are plenty of good things to spend your spells known on that DON'T allow save throws that the lack on that side shouldn't hurt much.
You need a lvl 16 CHA to cast lvl 6 spells. I'm not too worried about that now, but 14 CHA is, imho, mininum so that you only need a +2 item, or a few levels of stat boosting, to beef it up.
Actually, the stats Jess posted are actually not legit 15 pt buys. My current build is now:
Str: 12, Dex: 18, Con: 10, Int: 12, Wis: 7, Cha: 14
Also, tons of my skills are also CHA-based as well.
Also, the best early levels spells require saves (charm person, grease, glitterdust, etc). In fact, I don't see many good ones that don't...
just an offering a thought... Grease and Glitterdust are good because they are useful even if the save throw is made, and there are several good buff spells available to the bard at low level too... truthfully at low level I tend to look at the bard spells as supplements more than something to do in their own right... after all combats don't usually last that long and you'll be effective at low level simply by using the bow or singing (which at low level takes a standard action to start).
But a 14 isn't a bad choice either by any means of course...
However if you go with the halfling it isn't really a 14... it's the 12 I suggested starting with.
However it comes down to race.
With:
Str 14 Dex 16 Con 12 Int 12 Wis 7 Cha 12
Before Halfling racial adjustments you would end up with:
Str 12 Dex 18 Con 12 Int 12 Wis 7 Cha 14
However this is only if you play a halfling.
Something else to consider for halflings... they get 3/4 the carrying capacity but their equipment only weights 1/2 of what it would for a human... meaning they actually get a net increase in what they can carry before being encumbered.
That generally only matters at lower levels but it *could* apply for much longer depending on how strict your DM is on encumbrance.
|
|
Dump the Cha down to 12 and get your three points back for either Wis or Con, IMO...
By level 8 you'll have enough Cha to cast those level 6 spells you want anyways and there are plenty of good things to spend your spells known on that DON'T allow save throws that the lack on that side shouldn't hurt much.
You need a lvl 16 CHA to cast lvl 6 spells. I'm not too worried about that now, but 14 CHA is, imho, mininum so that you only need a +2 item, or a few levels of stat boosting, to beef it up.
Actually, the stats Jess posted are actually not legit 15 pt buys. My current build is now:
Str: 12, Dex: 18, Con: 10, Int: 12, Wis: 7, Cha: 14
Also, tons of my skills are also CHA-based as well.
Also, the best early levels spells require saves (charm person, grease, glitterdust, etc). In fact, I don't see many good ones that don't...
My apologies for the stat miscalculation! :)
I don't get why anyone would ever roll a halfling.
Can anyone explain?
Sure, they want to play a halfling
I would roleplay a halfing if it was a class did was not reliant in any way on doing melee damage. So halfing wizard or sorcerer. In general I don't like halfings and see them as really poor choices in terms of power gaming.
I would roleplay a halfing if it was a class did was not reliant in any way on doing melee damage. So halfing wizard or sorcerer. In general I don't like halfings and see them as really poor choices in terms of power gaming.
Halflings as poor power gaming choices? Since when?
Dex is very important for winning initiative, which is what a lot of min-maxers are about at high level, and a flat bonus to all saves that stacks with a cloak of resistance is loverly. Finally that one extra feat? For humans? Not nearly as good in Pathfinder since it raises your total feats to 11 instead of 10, as opposed to 3.5 where it was indispensable because you got 8 instead of 7. Plus one of the human racial abilities is replicated by the favored class option. Finally the high dex, size bonus etc. gives you a +2 bonus to hit and AC, and to your touch AC, which is good for any class. High-level halfling thieves or monks could be missed by rays, harm spells, you name it. Maybe even the wizard halfling with some deflection could do some good. Finally -10 movement speed isn't so bad when you're riding a mount, or a party member using an exotic saddle. Maybe even grab mounted combat, specialize in ride, and save your "Blaster"'s bacon once a round with a successful ride check.
Also two words: Master thrower.
Your problem is that you're not thinking about how to optimize the halfling correctly.
Even us evil mathematically minded optimizers play halflings.
I'm not condemning optimising. I do it, too.
But if a player cares for nothing except getting the optimal character, a lot of things will be forever beyond their ken. Can't be helped.
|
I'm going archer build but, as you know, human's get the same Dex bonus as halflings. And, so you're not gimped in the dmg department, you will have to allocate SOME of that Charisma bonus for a few points in Strength just to get it back up to 10.
Hence, my conclusion that the net effect in stats, for a halfing vs human, is a small bump in Charisma effectiveness once every 4 levels (meaning @ lvl 1, its an odd-numbered Charisma, which is useless, but @ lvl 4 its an even-numbered Charisma, which isn't, etc).
Using point buy, getting strength from 10 to 12 costs a lot less than getting either dex to 16+ or cha to 16+, depending on where the human puts his bonus.
Consider human vs halfling with 15 point buy:
Human
Str: 10, Dex: 18, Con: 12, Int: 12, Wis: 7, Cha: 14
Halfling
Str: 10, Dex: 18, Con: 12, Int: 12, Wis: 7, Cha: 15
My only point being that getting str to 10, and cha/dex to 16+ is a lot cheaper in point buy as a halfling than a human.
Sure, they want to play a halflingI don't get why anyone would ever roll a halfling.
Can anyone explain?
*sigh*
really? Was the extra unhelpful helping of snark necessary? It gets old.
Not really. All I was saying was that people want to play certain things even if they are not the most powerful, ya know
- Move 40'
- Ride in a dungeon
- Make full-round attacks while moving
- Have him actually attack in a pinch!So this is actually a BIG advantage for a halfling!
I've been putting together a mounted halfling archer, so these rules have been bouncing around in my head. To correct one of your points, your mount can DOUBLE move while you get a full ranged attack.
Move 80' (or 100' with the right mount) with a full round of attacks for a -2 hit penalty with the Mounted Archery feat. Or your mount could run, terrain permitting, for 160' (200') of movement and a -4 hit penalty. Crazy good.
Finally, and this can't be overstated, only the halfling (and gnome) can really pull off mounted combat in many games. The most common criticism for mounted combat is that large mounts can't follow you into a dungeon or other typical adventure locales. A small hafling riding a medium mount has no such problems. That's something which is hard to put a value on.
Cerc.
What dungeon has 5 foot corridors? Also: Squeezing.
-That Crazy Kaiser
What dungeon has 5 foot corridors? Also: Squeezing.
-That Crazy Kaiser
What do you do when your second level party has to climb a 30 foot cliff? A medium character riding a horse can't bring his mount. If the mount is a riding dog, the fighter can probably hold onto it while climbing. If that fails, rope and a basket will almost certainly get the mount past the obstacle.
There's also the occasional dungeon with a 2.5 foot corridor that's only 5 feet high. (Entrance to the kobold lair?)
What dungeon has 5 foot corridors? Also: Squeezing.
-That Crazy Kaiser
What do you do when your second level party has to climb a 30 foot cliff? A medium character riding a horse can't bring his mount. If the mount is a riding dog, the fighter can probably hold onto it while climbing. If that fails, rope and a basket will almost certainly get the mount past the obstacle.
There's also the occasional dungeon with a 2.5 foot corridor that's only 5 feet high. (Entrance to the kobold lair?)
When your second level party has to climb a cliff, you also leave the wizard and druid behind.
Dude, kobolds will have trouble squeezing into that. I know they're not the brightest, but typically you like to breathe a little in places where you live.
I didn't say dungeons have 5' corridors, but they are frequently 10'. Most will recognize the jeopardy of a party bringing 10'x10' mounts into 10' corridors where combat or traps could occur. If your corridors are devoid of action and merely serve to shuttle you to the next room, then you could probably disregard my point.
That's why you get off the horse and lead it. Why would you ride your horse in the dungeon prior to combat? That's like "I walk around the pit with my sword drawn". It's not necessary.
Plus there's the paladin's mount which can just explode into existence. or the mount spell.