Mounted Combat vs CMB

[GMJay]

Alright, so I ran into a question in my campaign the other night. The PCs were fighting a mounted opponent while they were on foot. One of the characters has a net and the appropriate feats to let him use it as a Trip weapon. So, he rolls to trip the horse and I call a Mounted Combat check to let the horse’s rider negate the hit. This is where it boiled to an argument.

The text of Mounted Combat states:
“Once per round when your mount is hit in combat, you may attempt a Ride check (as an immediate action) to negate the hit. The hit is negated if your Ride check result is greater than the opponent's attack roll.”

The argument went around two main points. The first was what constituted a mount being “hit in combat.” I feel that a combat maneuver that is striking the target, such as a trip, would constitute a “hit in combat”. The other point was that it states that I would roll against “the opponent’s attack roll”. As the Trip maneuver is a substitution for a standard attack, it strikes me that it is still an attack roll. Though it is technically a Combat Maneuver roll, I'm not sure how this should go. Also, it does state that it "negates the hit", but I'm not sure if this is applicable to a combat maneuver.

So, what are the collective thoughts on this? Cause I need some help clarifying.

[cp]

GMJay wrote:

Alright, so I ran into a question in my campaign the other night. The PCs were fighting a mounted opponent while they were on foot. One of the characters has a net and the appropriate feats to let him use it as a Trip weapon. So, he rolls to trip the horse and I call a Mounted Combat check to let the horse’s rider negate the hit. This is where it boiled to an argument.

The text of Mounted Combat states:
“Once per round when your mount is hit in combat, you may attempt a Ride check (as an immediate action) to negate the hit. The hit is negated if your Ride check result is greater than the opponent's attack roll.”

The argument went around two main points. The first was what constituted a mount being “hit in combat.” I feel that a combat maneuver that is striking the target, such as a trip, would constitute a “hit in combat”. The other point was that it states that I would roll against “the opponent’s attack roll”. As the Trip maneuver is a substitution for a standard attack, it strikes me that it is still an attack roll. Though it is technically a Combat Maneuver roll, I'm not sure how this should go. Also, it does state that it "negates the hit", but I'm not sure if this is applicable to a combat maneuver.

So, what are the collective thoughts on this? Cause I need some help clarifying.

The trip maneuver is still an attack roll. And the rider can still make a ride maneuver to counter it.

[Sir Morgan of Devil's Perch]

Patfinder RPG page 199 wrote:

When you attempt to perform a combat maneuver, make an attack roll and add your CMB in place of your normal attack bonus. Add any bonuses you currently have on attack rolls due to spells, feats, and other effects. These bonuses must be applicable to the weapon or attack used to perform the maneuver. The DC of this maneuver is your target’s Combat Maneuver Defense. Combat maneuvers are attack rolls, so you must roll for concealment and take any other penalties that would normally apply to an attack roll.

Seems pretty cut and dried to me.