Starting my first Pathfinder Campaign on Saturday. (former 3.0 GM for many years).
I want an answer so I can be consistant with rules in the future. I have a player with a Halfling Cavilier riding a Wolf. The Cavilier will have in his arsenal (likely) a longsword and a lance. Since he is riding a wolf and a wolf gets Trip with its attack, this is sure to come up.
The Halfling Cailiver while on Wolfback has his wolf attack, hit and trip. Therefore in the adjacent square is a prone opponent. The way I read RAW, the halfling would be able to strike the prone opponent with the long sword, but not with the lance.
This does not make sense to me from a physics standpoint. So I ask these questions to the community.
1) Do I understand RAW correctly?
2) Is there a house rule you guys use that incorporates more realiy?
In my mind, the lance could reach the adjacent prone opponent, but not the adjacent standing opponent. But then there is the question of the prone opponent that is in the same square as the mounted Halfling. Does the mounted Halfling's longsword (sized for a small PC) reach a prone opponent?
|
This does not make sense to me from a physics standpoint.
Which law of physics does it offend against, in your view? A Small or Medium lance is about 10 feet long. If he holds the lance as designed, the pointy end is a minimum of 6 or 7 feet from the halfling's hand. This is why Pathfinder rules say he can't strike someone with it who is between 0 and 5 feet away.
He could have hit the guy with his lance when he was in range. This would probably prevent the wolf attacking, which he will have to deal with at higher levels by some combination of feats, as I have no doubt has been discussed elsewhere.
This does not make sense to me from a physics standpoint.Which law of physics does it offend against, in your view? The lance is about 10 feet long. If he holds the lance as designed, the pointy end is a minimum of 6 or 7 feet from the halfling's hand. This is why Pathfinder rules say he can't strike someone with it who is between 0 and 5 feet away.
He should have hit the guy with his lance when he was in range. This would probably prevent the wolf attacking, which he will have to deal with at higher levels by some combination of feats, as I have no doubt has been discussed elsewhere.
Well, isn't the small lance only half as long...?
Nonetheless, I guess the comment is build on real world logic. If I am sitting on a horse, and you lie down on the ground, I have a real hard time touching you with a sword.
|
|
This does not make sense to me from a physics standpoint.Which law of physics does it offend against, in your view? The lance is about 10 feet long. If he holds the lance as designed, the pointy end is a minimum of 6 or 7 feet from the halfling's hand. This is why Pathfinder rules say he can't strike someone with it who is between 0 and 5 feet away.
He should have hit the guy with his lance when he was in range. This would probably prevent the wolf attacking, which he will have to deal with at higher levels by some combination of feats, as I have no doubt has been discussed elsewhere.
Well, isn't the small lance only half as long...?
Nonetheless, I guess the comment is build on real world logic. If I am sitting on a horse, and you lie down on the ground, I have a real hard time touching you with a sword.
The Small lance can't be half as long, because it still reaches 10 feet (even though the wielder's arm is shorter). I presume it's lighter with a smaller spearhead to allow a Small creature to control its weight.
The wolf is closer to the ground than a horse, being Medium sized. I agree it's a bit strange that a human on horseback with a 3' sword can hit a prone target.
|
Well, isn't the small lance only half as long...?
Not necessarily. It'll be lighter and thinner, but will still have quite a bit of length.
Nonetheless, I guess the comment is build on real world logic. If I am sitting on a horse, and you lie down on the ground, I have a real hard time touching you with a sword.
This is something that has come up a few times in my game (I've got a couple players who love mounted combat). Since the RAW are strangely silent on the mechanics of attacking a prone enemy from horseback, we've decided to treat mounted characters as if they have the Lunge feat in such cases - allowing them to lean over for reach, and taking a -2 penalty to AC in doing so - unless they are using a long-bladed weapon like a greatsword, or a long-handled weapon like a spear or pike.
The Halfling Cailiver while on Wolfback has his wolf attack, hit and trip. Therefore in the adjacent square is a prone opponent. The way I read RAW, the halfling would be able to strike the prone opponent with the long sword, but not with the lance.
This does not make sense to me from a physics standpoint. So I ask these questions to the community.
1) Do I understand RAW correctly?
2) Is there a house rule you guys use that incorporates more realiy?
1) Yes, that's RAW.
2) There are many house rules for these types of ideas. The -2 rule has been suggested already, or you could use the Improvised Weapons rule where it is -4 to attack. Either would be a fine penalty for "improper/improvisational" weapons usage. Or you could create a scenario where you allow him to use the lance only while the opponent is on the ground.What I never understood was.. everyone knows that weapons have 2 ends. Why would you not just pick up the head of the lance and drop the butt into the heart of the prone opponent?
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
1) Do I understand RAW correctly?
2) Is there a house rule you guys use that incorporates more realiy?
1) Yes, the game uses simplification in some ways to make life easier. So things that make sense in physics don't always make sense in D&D.
2) No, but Short Haft feat will and a halfling worried about these problems probably has this feat.
|
Keep in mind that your PC can't make his mount attack unless the mount has the trick to be able to attack in combat along with the rider and he passes his ride check.
Just a side note...because its not just a "because the wolf exists he gets an attack" type of deal.
As the OP said he's a halfling CAVALIER. Cavalier's mounts are auto trained for combat, which means they can attack. Even with the ride check the halfling probably has at least a +6 to ride at the minimum I'd think and would succeed on a 4 or higher. If he tries he could get a +11 or +12 to ride at first level fairly easily and not even need to check.
A lance scaled down to half-weight would have each dimension reduced to 80% its original size. So ten feet long would become eight feet long. Still perfectly reasonable for a reach weapon.
1) Do I understand RAW correctly?
yup. you can't attack an adjacent opponent with a reach weapon.
2) Is there a house rule you guys use that incorporates more realiy?
i don't consider it unrealistic. the only useful part of the lance is the pointy end. If the pointy end is 10 feet away from you its kind of hard to stab someone at your mounts paws... being prone if anything makes it harder in my mind
What you CAN do is grab ride by attack. On round 1 you charge at your opponent,lance him, move forward 5 feet, keep and then have the wolf bite/trip. On round 2 your wolf bites and trips, you 5 foot step away, and poke the prone opponent with your lance
Just give your wolf the LUNGE feat. That way he can trip from 10 feet away AND you can poke the target with your pointy stick while they are prone. Problem solved.
The -2 AC from Lunge is easily circumvented by your Mounted Combat feat.
Thanks for the insight guys.
Another few questions have come up regarding RAW and the communitiy's experience with them as it relates to mounted combat.
Commentary: It appears that being mounted has several advantages with the RAW. Potentially, height for attack, increased movement, double lance damage. And that's before we even get into feats.
But...
(In the following situation, I'm speaking of a Halfling Cavilier mounted on a wolf)
It seems under RAW it is relatively easy to remove a rider from a mount...especially a halfling from a wolf. If I'm reading RAW correctly here are some methods:
Drag, Grapple (then move), Reposition, Trip.
It appears that all of these would provoke AOO from the halfling, but only from the wolf if the wolf had been ordered to ATTACK or GUARD against the foe. Is this RAW?
And, with RAW, it appears Trip is actually a combat option against a mounted opponent. (I know it doesn't makes sense, but to me neither does a mounted halfling attacking a prone adjacent opponent with a longsword). But that is RAW, right?
Thanks in advance for your thoughts, input and suggestions.
By a strict reading of RAW, yes, you do not provoke against the mount. Nor if you attack the mount, do you provoke on the rider.
However, since a rider is considered part of his rider, they occupy the same space. In my own games, I treat mount and rider as one for purposes of AoO.
|
|
And, with RAW, it appears Trip is actually a combat option against a mounted opponent. (I know it doesn't makes sense, but to me neither does a mounted halfling attacking a prone adjacent opponent with a longsword). But that is RAW, right?
You can't trip someone who is seated, for the same reason you can't trip a snake: they're already in a condition equivalent to prone, although they don't get all the penalties and benefits of it.
And, with RAW, it appears Trip is actually a combat option against a mounted opponent. (I know it doesn't makes sense, but to me neither does a mounted halfling attacking a prone adjacent opponent with a longsword). But that is RAW, right?You can't trip someone who is seated, for the same reason you can't trip a snake: they're already in a condition equivalent to prone, although they don't get all the penalties and benefits of it.
You could trip the mount though and send both to the ground at once, of course, the mount get's a bonus for being four footed (assuming you're not riding a velociraptor of course).
And, with RAW, it appears Trip is actually a combat option against a mounted opponent. (I know it doesn't makes sense, but to me neither does a mounted halfling attacking a prone adjacent opponent with a longsword). But that is RAW, right?You can't trip someone who is seated, for the same reason you can't trip a snake: they're already in a condition equivalent to prone, although they don't get all the penalties and benefits of it.
Really? Rules reference?
|
|
Really? Rules reference?And, with RAW, it appears Trip is actually a combat option against a mounted opponent. (I know it doesn't makes sense, but to me neither does a mounted halfling attacking a prone adjacent opponent with a longsword). But that is RAW, right?You can't trip someone who is seated, for the same reason you can't trip a snake: they're already in a condition equivalent to prone, although they don't get all the penalties and benefits of it.
It's not something that adventurers often do, but p. 195 gives modifiers for kneeling or sitting (earlier discussion). For most purposes, that's different from a mount, though.
It's not something that adventurers often do, but p. 195 gives modifiers for kneeling or sitting (earlier discussion). For most purposes, that's different from a mount, though.Really? Rules reference?And, with RAW, it appears Trip is actually a combat option against a mounted opponent. (I know it doesn't makes sense, but to me neither does a mounted halfling attacking a prone adjacent opponent with a longsword). But that is RAW, right?You can't trip someone who is seated, for the same reason you can't trip a snake: they're already in a condition equivalent to prone, although they don't get all the penalties and benefits of it.
Ok, thanks for your input.
In my opinion, mounted combat could have used a few more sentences to flush out in Pathfinder. I disagree with a lot of things about RAW regarding mounted combat, but I think that it all evens out in the end for the person mounted.
I'll run RAW and when the player complains about being so easily taken off his mount and trys to argue physics, I'll remind him of his awesome physics defying reach as well.
It's not something that adventurers often do, but p. 195 gives modifiers for kneeling or sitting (earlier discussion). For most purposes, that's different from a mount, though.Really? Rules reference?And, with RAW, it appears Trip is actually a combat option against a mounted opponent. (I know it doesn't makes sense, but to me neither does a mounted halfling attacking a prone adjacent opponent with a longsword). But that is RAW, right?You can't trip someone who is seated, for the same reason you can't trip a snake: they're already in a condition equivalent to prone, although they don't get all the penalties and benefits of it.Ok, thanks for your input.
In my opinion, mounted combat could have used a few more sentences to flush out in Pathfinder. I disagree with a lot of things about RAW regarding mounted combat, but I think that it all evens out in the end for the person mounted.
I'll run RAW and when the player complains about being so easily taken off his mount and trys to argue physics, I'll remind him of his awesome physics defying reach as well.
I'm fairly certain that doesn't apply to people sitting on a mount, only on a chair. Mainly because the mount is responsive to their attempts to move.
I don't think the rules take it into account, but, either a mounted combatant uses his FF AC (he can't manuever at his normal dex, he's seated), or, he uses the mount's DEX for his Dex Bonus to AC (the way I usually handle it).