Vital Strike


Rules Questions

151 to 200 of 337 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | next > last >>
Lantern Lodge

Just wanted to make sure :), though I probably should have posted it in a thread other than vital stirke...

Dark Archive

Cheapy wrote:
Jadeite wrote:

It's not broken, why fix it?

Well, see...

It is.

So, which part of the game does it break? Aside from 'martials aren't supposed to have nice things'.


Oh, and Stephen, is it too much to ask that you take this opportunity to also address a related question. Who has to have improved overrun to not provoke an AoO when using the Trample feat? Mount, rider, or both? If both are considered charging, are both considered using the maneuver, etc?

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Slacker2010 wrote:
LazarX wrote:
Gauss wrote:
I, for one, am very happy with the new Mounted Charge faq. It ends the ongoing debate......
You must be new here, or otherwise you know that the only way a messageboard debate ends is when the server dies.
I lol'd at work. Thanks Lazar

All part of the service

Paizo Employee Organized Play Developer

blahpers wrote:


Really, the ruling increases options rather than reducing them.

Again, this is flat out incorrect. The only person who gained an option by this ruling was the Barbarian. Everyone else, particularly Cavaliers, mounted Fighters, and the Sohei, lost options, because they lost action economy, and they lost ways to utilize their actions.

During a mounted charge, Fighters and Cavaliers can no longer use the move actions previously available to draw and drink potions, or swap weapons, making them even more reliant on the rest of the party just to stay in the game.

Feats like Cleave, Vital Strike, Crushing Blow, Death or Glory, Gorgon's Fist, MOunted Skirmisher, Scorpion Style, and Cockatrice Strike can no longer be combined with a mounted charge. Opening Volley cannot be used in a single round in conjunction with a mounted charge.

The Charging Hurler/Raging Hurler combo is now unavailable to mounted charging barbarians, meaning that barbarians who don't take Beast Totems have actually lost options.

Any Combat maneuver that is normally a standard action, like Dirty Trick, can no longer be done as part of a mounted charge, decreasing martial versatility.

The Emissary cavalier archetype can no longer use both aspects of his Mounted Dervish ability together when performing a mounted charge.

Magus' who chose to use the Mount or Phantasmal Steed spells can no longer do mounted charging Spellstrikes unless they want to spend the first turn doing nothing.

Shielded Fighters who choose mounted combat can no longer use Shield Buffet after a mounted charge to "tank up" and lock enemies down.

Two-Handed Fighters cannot use Piledriver as part of a mounted charge.

An Undead Scourge Paladin can no longer use Undead Annihilation as part of a mounted charge.

All Paladins can no longer use Detect Evil in the same round they want to perform a mounted charge.

It is now impossible to make a mounted charge on a mount that isn't combat trained.

Characters without Animal Companions can no longer use the Handle Animal skill during a mounted charge, severely limiting their options (and technically making it impossible since a Charge is a type of attack and they can't both command it to attack (move action) and use the charge action (full round action).

You cannot now use the Ride skill to Spur your mount as part of a mounted charge. Seriously. You cannot spur your mount as part of a mounted charge.

I could go on at some length on how many options were taken away by this ruling, but understand that you are absolutely wrong about this ruling providing more options.


Grimmy wrote:
Cheapy wrote:
Stephen Radney-MacFarland wrote:

In the end we do realize that this allows a mounted barbarian with the Greater Beast Totem rage power to use pounce at the end of a charge, but if she is using a lance, has Spirited Charge, or is using both the multiplier is only applied to the first attack if that attack hits.

Are there any plans to possibly restrict Greater Beast Totem's pounce to be for natural weapons only? It would certainly be more thematic with the totem's spirit.
Yes, this^^

I despise how the standard barbarian is just better than the otehr barbarians, but nerfing yet another martial nice option just after the crane wing issue and at the same time letting the caster´s myriads of broken options unaltered would be bad.

Silver Crusade

Stephen Radney-MacFarland wrote:
... the new FAQ on mounted charge ...

Has the new FAQ been posted?

(I usually see these when the PDT account posts the FAQ post to the relevant thread. If it has been posted, I'm guessing that was Sean's gig and that the new system is still shifting over?)

Dark Archive

Joe M. wrote:
Stephen Radney-MacFarland wrote:
... the new FAQ on mounted charge ...

Has the new FAQ been posted?

(I usually see these when the PDT account posts the FAQ post to the relevant thread. If it has been posted, I'm guessing that was Sean's gig and that the new system is still shifting over?)

Mounted Combat: When making a charge while mounted, which creature charges? The rider or the mount?

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. The mounted combat rules are a little unclear on this. Replace the third paragraph under the "Combat while Mounted" section on page 202 with the following text. Note that a "mounted charge" is synonymous with a "charge while mounted."

A mounted charge is a charge made by you and your mount. During a mounted charge, you deal double damage with your first melee attack made with a lance or with any weapon if you have Spirited Charge (or a similar effect), or you deal triple damage with a lance and Spirited Charge.

This change will be reflected in future printings of the Pathfinder RPG Core Rulebook


Ssalarn wrote:
blahpers wrote:


Really, the ruling increases options rather than reducing them.

Again, this is flat out incorrect. The only person who gained an option by this ruling was the Barbarian. Everyone else, particularly Cavaliers, mounted Fighters, and the Sohei, lost options, because they lost action economy, and they lost ways to utilize their actions.

Fighters and Cavaliers can no longer use the move actions previously available to draw and drink potions, or swap weapons, making them even more reliant on the rest of the party just to stay in the game.

Yes, they can. Reread Mr. Radney-MacFarland's posts.

Quote:
Feats like Cleave, Vital Strike, Crushing Blow, Death or Glory, Gorgon's Fist, MOunted Skirmisher, Scorpion Style, and Cockatrice Strike can no longer be combined with a mounted charge.

Sure you can, as long as only the mount charges. The character retains full action economy save that he can't make more than one attack. Now, you can't do it if the character charges, but that was already a limitation. Always has been.

Quote:
Opening Volley cannot be used in a single round by mounted characters. The Charging Hurler/Raging Hurler combo is now unavailable to mounted barbarians, meaning that barbarians who don't take Beast Totems have actually lost options.

See previous.

Quote:
Any Combat maneuver that is normally a standard action, like Dirty Trick, can no longer be done as part of a mounted charge, decreasing martial versatility.

See previous.

Digital Products Assistant

Removed a couple posts. Leave personal attacks out of the conversation please.

Paizo Employee Organized Play Developer

@ Blahpers

I am clearly talking about these things in the context of a mounted charge, which they manifestly cannot do. Whether or not they can do it when they aren't making a mounted charge is entirely irrelevant to my point.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

The big confuzion here iz people seemed to have assumes a clear raw where there wasn't. What we had waa a faq post and an unsubstantieted consensus of opinion on "the old way" however there were never any posts ro clarify that that conclusion was correct.

But people are treating the horrible mess that is the mounted combat section like it was crystal clear with no ambiguity.

They have clarified it and it now.. works in line with normal charging.


Ssalarn wrote:

@ Blahpers

I am clearly talking about these things in the context of a mounted charge, which they manifestly cannot do. Whether or not they can do it when they aren't making a mounted charge is entirely irrelevant to my point.

So you miss out on the +2/-2 charge bonus/penalty. This was always the case even before the ruling, and in the case of drinking a potion would not have applied anyway. The tactics are still more than viable--horse charges, you do your move and standard.


2 people marked this as FAQ candidate.

I feel like there is a lot of info missing from that FAQ. Can a spellcaster cast a spell if their mount charges or not?


Ssalarn wrote:

It is now impossible to make a mounted charge on a mount that isn't combat trained.

Characters without Animal Companions can no longer use the Handle Animal skill during a mounted charge, severely limiting their options (and technically making it impossible since a Charge is a type of attack and they can't both command it to attack (move action) and use the charge action (full round action).

This could use a repost.

Sczarni

1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.
Starfinder Charter Superscriber
Davick wrote:
I feel like there is a lot of info missing from that FAQ. Can a spellcaster cast a spell if their mount charges or not?

No.

Hence why you can't Vital Strike if your mount charges, since you're charging as well.

(which is why a lot of PFS characters are going to be seeking rebuilds)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ssalarn wrote:


Characters without Animal Companions can no longer use the Handle Animal skill during a mounted charge, severely limiting their options (and technically making it impossible since a Charge is a type of attack and they can't both command it to attack (move action) and use the charge action (full round action)....

Well, they can't make a handle animal check during a mounted charge, but how does that affect them? You use the ride skill to control a mount, and it's a free action if the mount is combat trained. So yes, this is a nerf to those characters who wanted to charge on non-combat trained mounts. Otherwise, no change.

Ride Skill Description wrote:


Guide with Knees: You can guide your mount with your knees so you can use both hands in combat. Make your Ride check at the start of your turn. If you fail, you can use only one hand this round because you need to use the other to control your mount. This does not take an action.

...

Control Mount in Battle: As a move action, you can attempt to control a light horse, pony, heavy horse, or other mount not trained for combat riding while in battle. If you fail the Ride check, you can do nothing else in that round. You do not need to roll for horses or ponies trained for combat.

As for the PFS rebuild, Vital Strike on mounted charges has always been a table variation issue and PFS doesn't grant rebuilds for table variation. It was table variation because, if you took the SKR ruling literally, mounted feats like Ride-by-Attack and Spirited Charge ("when you are mounted and using the charge action...") didn't work. If you used those feats as well as Vital Strike, you were taking advantage of ambiguity. The only way I could see an argument for retraining Vital Strike would be if there had been a ruling that Ride-by-attack didn't work. And there wasn't.

That's why James Risner is pointing out that there was most certainly disagreement over whether or not Vital Strike worked on mounted charges.

Paizo Employee Organized Play Developer

Akerlof wrote:
Ssalarn wrote:


Characters without Animal Companions can no longer use the Handle Animal skill during a mounted charge, severely limiting their options (and technically making it impossible since a Charge is a type of attack and they can't both command it to attack (move action) and use the charge action (full round action)....

Well, they can't make a handle animal check during a mounted charge, but how does that affect them? You use the ride skill to control a mount, and it's a free action if the mount is combat trained. So yes, this is a nerf to those characters who wanted to charge on non-combat trained mounts. Otherwise, no change.

No, it is a free action to make the Ride check for you to attack in the same round your mount does. Failing the Ride check means that you cannot attack in a round where your mount does. A mount still needs to be commanded to attack, which uses the Handle Animal skill.

Ride-by Attack and Spirited Charge were only issues for people who didn't read the mounted combat section which stated that the mount used its own actions and draw the in context conclusion that "mounted and taking the charge action" was short-hand for "while mounted and (your mount is) taking the charge action". If you and your mount are both charging most of the mounted combat section of the combat rules is either superfluous or irrelevant.

And again, both Stephen and the FAQ acknowledge that this is a change and that other FAQs and the CRB will need to be amended to reflect it.

Silver Crusade

I think there is still a little misunderstanding.

A mounted charge as used in this FAQ is a charge made by both the rider and mount. In a mounted charge, both are using the same action, a full round action called 'charge'.

However, it is possible to have the mount do a charge action while the rider does something else. This is blahpers' point in his last few posts. This includes something like handle animal as a move action, and an attack action when the mount completes its charge. It includes a spellcaster casting on the back of the charging mount (though charging is definitely violent motion for a concentration check).

Lantern Lodge

3 people marked this as a favorite.

I think there needs to be a distinction made here, between a mounted charge (now also known as charging on a mount) and being on a charging mount.

Things only mounted charges can do:
Get extra damage from lances and spirited charge.
Gain the +2 attack bonus from charging
Use charge specific feats and abilities

Things a character on a charging mount can do:
Cast a spell
Full round attack with a bow/ranged weapon
Use vital strike
Any combination of standard/move actions (including full round actions) besides actually moving.
Anything that can be done on a moving mount.

Now, if it is intended that things that are done on a moving mount should not be able to be done on a charging mount, then this needs further clarification. I personally think the best way to solve this would be to say something like...

If your on a charging mount, but are not using the charge action yourself, you still take the -2 penalty to AC. You do not gain the +2 bonus to melee attack rolls, nor are you able to use charge specific feats and abilities.


DesolateHarmony wrote:

I think there is still a little misunderstanding.

A mounted charge as used in this FAQ is a charge made by both the rider and mount. In a mounted charge, both are using the same action, a full round action called 'charge'.

However, it is possible to have the mount do a charge action while the rider does something else. This is blahpers' point in his last few posts. This includes something like handle animal as a move action, and an attack action when the mount completes its charge. It includes a spellcaster casting on the back of the charging mount (though charging is definitely violent motion for a concentration check).

Exactly this.

Paizo Employee Organized Play Developer

DesolateHarmony wrote:

I think there is still a little misunderstanding.

A mounted charge as used in this FAQ is a charge made by both the rider and mount. In a mounted charge, both are using the same action, a full round action called 'charge'.

However, it is possible to have the mount do a charge action while the rider does something else. This is blahpers' point in his last few posts. This includes something like handle animal as a move action, and an attack action when the mount completes its charge. It includes a spellcaster casting on the back of the charging mount (though charging is definitely violent motion for a concentration check).

I know what Blahpers is saying, and I'm saying it's irrelevant. The new ruling cuts out all the benefits of being able to increase your action economy while maintaining your damage, and it hurts people who really didn't need to be hurt while buffing or just ignoring builds that were already extremely potent. Casters, archers, and anyone with access to Pounce get to maintain two separate pools of actions, but god forbid you should pick up a lance when you want to fight on horse-back.

Fighters and Cavaliers, instead of being the best "mounted knight" figures, are no distant runner-ups. And that's infuriating.

It's equally infuriating that the mounted charge has now been limited to only characters with animal companions. Dragoons (as the most ridiculous example) cannot use the mounted charge option now without access to splat-book feats.


Ssalarn wrote:
DesolateHarmony wrote:

I think there is still a little misunderstanding.

A mounted charge as used in this FAQ is a charge made by both the rider and mount. In a mounted charge, both are using the same action, a full round action called 'charge'.

However, it is possible to have the mount do a charge action while the rider does something else. This is blahpers' point in his last few posts. This includes something like handle animal as a move action, and an attack action when the mount completes its charge. It includes a spellcaster casting on the back of the charging mount (though charging is definitely violent motion for a concentration check).

I know what Blahpers is saying, and I'm saying it's irrelevant. The new ruling cuts out all the benefits of being able to increase your action economy while maintaining your damage, and it hurts people who really didn't need to be hurt while buffing or just ignoring builds that were already extremely potent. Casters, archers, and anyone with access to Pounce get to maintain two separate pools of actions, but god forbid you should pick up a lance when you want to fight on horse-back.

Fighters and Cavaliers, instead of being the best "mounted knight" figures, are no distant runner-ups. And that's infuriating.

It's equally infuriating that the mounted charge has now been limited to only characters with animal companions. Dragoons (as the most ridiculous example) cannot use the mounted charge option now without access to splat-book feats.

Incorrect. It is a free action to direct your mount to attack and a free action to guide it, so long as the mount is combat-trained. You can charge just fine using a standard combat-trained horse.

Paizo Employee Organized Play Developer

No, it is a free action to make the Ride check for you to attack when your mount does. Failing that check means that you cannot make an attack in the same round as your mount. Per RAW you still have to make a Handle Animal check to actually command your mount to attack. Nothing in the Ride rules supercedes that, and it's why Fighters and Cavaliers both have Handle Animal and Ride.


Ssalarn wrote:


No, it is a free action to make the Ride check for you to attack in the same round your mount does. Failing the Ride check means that you cannot attack in a round where your mount does. A mount still needs to be commanded to attack, which uses the Handle Animal skill.

The problem with that is? Granting that's the case, what does that mean? You can no longer perform a mounted charge at level 1 hitting something with a lance for 2x damage _and_ have your CR3 Lion pounce or your CR4 Bison trample. How's that a bad thing?

Beyond the first couple levels, mounted combat on a non-AC non-cohort is just hoping the mount doesn't accidentally get killed before you get a chance to charge.

Using Leadership to gain a cohort for a mount is unaffected because you don't use handle animal on an intelligent cohort anyway.

Sczarni

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Starfinder Charter Superscriber

If blahpers interpretation is correct, then that definitely needs to be spelled out in the FAQ, as I don't read it like that currently.

And didn't Stephen say something about not needing to resort back to forum posts for official rulings...?

Paizo Employee Organized Play Developer

Akerlof wrote:


The problem with that is? Granting that's the case, what does that mean? You can no longer perform a mounted charge at level 1 hitting something with a lance for 2x damage _and_ have your CR3 Lion pounce or your CR4 Bison trample. How's that a bad thing?

Because it's not affecting people with lions and bison, it's screwing over people who don't get animal companions, and not for 1 or 2 levels, but for the entire game. A Dragoon, Sohei, or Roughrider can never make a mounted charge.

And considering that Spirited Charge has 2 feat pre-reqs and a skill pre-req, your example is a fallacious straw-man because there is no combination of characters who get those three feats and an animal companion at 1st level.

So yeah, lots of legitimate builds are hosed to prevent something that wasn't possible anyways in your example. Cool.


2 people marked this as FAQ candidate.
DesolateHarmony wrote:

I think there is still a little misunderstanding.

A mounted charge as used in this FAQ is a charge made by both the rider and mount. In a mounted charge, both are using the same action, a full round action called 'charge'.

However, it is possible to have the mount do a charge action while the rider does something else. This is blahpers' point in his last few posts. This includes something like handle animal as a move action, and an attack action when the mount completes its charge. It includes a spellcaster casting on the back of the charging mount (though charging is definitely violent motion for a concentration check).

Right, so if I read the FAQ right, it sounds like you can't charge with an animal that requires a move action to direct. Is that the case?

Paizo Employee Organized Play Developer

Nefreet wrote:

If blahpers interpretation is correct, then that definitely needs to be spelled out in the FAQ, as I don't read it like that currently.

And didn't Stephen say something about not needing to resort back to forum posts for official rulings...?

This is a good point. The FAQ does not say what Stephen said it was going to say and is even more limiting than initially presented. Since Stephen himself has made it clear that things they say in posts don't count as official, currently a charge on a mount is a charge for everyone.


1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.
Akerlof wrote:
Ssalarn wrote:


No, it is a free action to make the Ride check for you to attack in the same round your mount does. Failing the Ride check means that you cannot attack in a round where your mount does. A mount still needs to be commanded to attack, which uses the Handle Animal skill.
The problem with that is? Granting that's the case, what does that mean? You can no longer perform a mounted charge at level 1 hitting something with a lance for 2x damage _and_ have your CR3 Lion pounce or your CR4 Bison trample. How's that a bad thing?

What Ssalarn is trying to say (if I understand his interpretation correctly) is that someone on a horse can't perform a mounted charge at all. The reason being that both rider and mount must perform the charge action to do so, while the rider must also spend a move action on a Handle Animal check. Since that's not possible, the rider can never charge along with his horse.

That's probably not intended. I'm guessing that the Ride skill is supposed to supercede the Handle Animal skill when riding a mount in combat.


Are wrote:


That's probably not intended. I'm guessing that the Ride skill is supposed to supercede the Handle Animal skill when riding a mount in combat.

This-100% this.

PRD on Ride skill wrote:
Fight with a Combat-Trained Mount: If you direct your war-trained mount to attack in battle, you can still make your own attack or attacks normally. This usage is a free action.

This use of the Ride skill is what you need to do to get your mount to attack or charge. Well, charge you may still need to guide with your knees, but that's also like a DC 5 check to do.

Liberty's Edge

Are wrote:


What Ssalarn is trying to say (if I understand his interpretation correctly) is that someone on a horse can't perform a mounted charge at all. The reason being that both rider and mount must perform the charge action to do so, while the rider must also spend a move action on a Handle Animal check. Since that's not possible, the rider can never charge along with his horse.

That's probably not intended. I'm guessing that the Ride skill is supposed to supercede the Handle Animal skill when riding a mount in combat.

That would be incorrect.

Ride Skill wrote:
Fight with a Combat-Trained Mount: If you direct your war-trained mount to attack in battle, you can still make your own attack or attacks normally. This usage is a free action.

So, you can still charge and both the mount and rider may still get an attack.

EDIT: Ninja'd.


Are wrote:
Akerlof wrote:
Ssalarn wrote:


No, it is a free action to make the Ride check for you to attack in the same round your mount does. Failing the Ride check means that you cannot attack in a round where your mount does. A mount still needs to be commanded to attack, which uses the Handle Animal skill.
The problem with that is? Granting that's the case, what does that mean? You can no longer perform a mounted charge at level 1 hitting something with a lance for 2x damage _and_ have your CR3 Lion pounce or your CR4 Bison trample. How's that a bad thing?

What Ssalarn is trying to say (if I understand his interpretation correctly) is that someone on a horse can't perform a mounted charge at all. The reason being that both rider and mount must perform the charge action to do so, while the rider must also spend a move action on a Handle Animal check. Since that's not possible, the rider can never charge along with his horse.

That's probably not intended. I'm guessing that the Ride skill is supposed to supercede the Handle Animal skill when riding a mount in combat.

This is exactly how I read it. Handle Animal allows you to command animals in general. Ride allows you to give specific commands to mounts.

Let's look at the appropriate sections under Ride:

Quote:
Guide with Knees: You can guide your mount with your knees so you can use both hands in combat. Make your Ride check at the start of your turn. If you fail, you can use only one hand this round because you need to use the other to control your mount. This does not take an action.
Quote:
Fight with a Combat-Trained Mount: If you direct your war-trained mount to attack in battle, you can still make your own attack or attacks normally. This usage is a free action.
Quote:
Control Mount in Battle: As a move action, you can attempt to control a light horse, pony, heavy horse, or other mount not trained for combat riding while in battle. If you fail the Ride check, you can do nothing else in that round. You do not need to roll for horses or ponies trained for combat.

The first section tells me that it's a free action to guide your mount. What "guide" means is somewhat ambiguous.

The second section tells me that it's a free action to "fight with" your mount. What that means is also ambiguous.

The third section tells me that you do not need to roll or use an action to "control" a combat-trained mount "in battle". What "control" means is, yup, ambiguous.

So what's a GM to do? Well, let's take the restrictive view that you have to use Handle Animal to direct your mount to do anything. Note that there is no trick to tell an animal to move to an arbitrary location. You can direct it to attack or come to you, but just plain old movement is not possible. So, can a mounted combatant direct his mount to walk three squares forward and two steps left? Of course he can, or you wouldn't even be able to move around on a mount.

Thus, we now know that there are instances in which you can command an animal that do not require the Handle Animal skill. Presumably, movement is included as part of "guide" and "control" in the first and third sections above. What else does it include? That's up to interpretation, but just because you're directing the mount doesn't mean a Handle Animal skill is required. After all, there's no Handle Animal trick called "Charge" either, so by the most restrictive reading even an animal companion couldn't be directed to charge, only attack. This would be patently absurd.

Taking the sections together along with the existence of mounted combat at all, it seems clear enough to me that being able to control, guide, and fight with a mount would include the ability to charge with it. YMMV.

I agree that this is ambiguous, so I suggest a specific FAQ asking whether a character on a combat-trained horse can perform a mounted charge given the fact that using Handle Animal is a move action. In the meantime, play it with common sense.

Paizo Employee Organized Play Developer

Sniggevert wrote:
Are wrote:


That's probably not intended. I'm guessing that the Ride skill is supposed to supercede the Handle Animal skill when riding a mount in combat.

This-100% this.

PRD on Ride skill wrote:
Fight with a Combat-Trained Mount: If you direct your war-trained mount to attack in battle, you can still make your own attack or attacks normally. This usage is a free action.
This use of the Ride skill is what you need to do to get your mount to attack or charge. Well, charge you may still need to guide with your knees, but that's also like a DC 5 check to do.

That rule allows you to attack. Read it.

"If you direct your war-trained mount to attack in battle, you can still make your own attack or attacks normally. This usage is a free action"

This allows you, the rider, to attack if you've commanded your mount to attack in battle. You command your mount to attack by using the Handle Animal skill. There is no Ride check that allows you to command your animal to attack. That's why every class that has the Ride skill also has Handle Animal.

As I noted earlier, this also causes other ridiculous incongruencies, like preventing you from spurring your mount in the same round you perform a mounted charge.


blahpers wrote:
FrodoOf9Fingers wrote:

Hmmm....

Is there a way to allow a mount to charge without it's rider to charge? I'm assuming this is still allowed via the new ruling... Or would any charge made by the mount be considered a mounted charge, forcing the character to charge along with the mount?

I speak on behalf the awesome archer/tiger rider concept :) (Tiger just goes around ravaging people as the archer picks off the important targets).

The ruling only states that when you charge on horseback, both you and the mount are charging. It doesn't preclude the mount charging alone.

That's very interesting. I admit, I assumed the much more restrictive reading, which is why I regarded it as unjust. This seems like a good time for a reminder about lances:

CRB wrote:


Lance

Benefit: A lance deals double damage when used from the back of a charging mount. While mounted, you can wield a lance with one hand.

The rider does not need to be considered charging in order to gain the double damage benefit of the lance, nor does he need to be charging to gain triple from Spirited Charge. Only the mount does, unless the lance wording has been FAQed to reflect something else. I don't think so though. Only the mount needs to be charging. If I'm wielding a lance on a charging mount, I assume I also get this bonus on an AoO I perform during this charge. I also assume I can combine with Vital Strike, if blapher's reading is in fact correct. All the rider loses from my previous reading of mounted charge is +2/-2 associated with the charge. If the rider essentially gets to choose whether he's also charging when the mount charges, things get more interesting/complicated.


blahpers wrote:
Quote:
Control Mount in Battle: As a move action, you can attempt to control a light horse, pony, heavy horse, or other mount not trained for combat riding while in battle. If you fail the Ride check, you can do nothing else in that round. You do not need to roll for horses or ponies trained for combat.
The third section tells me that you do not need to roll or use an action to "control" a combat-trained mount "in battle". What "control" means is, yup, ambiguous.

No, you misread it. It states a mount not trained for combat.


2 people marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite.

Ssalarn is correct that you need to handle animal your mount in order to make it attack, the ride skill does not supersede that.

He is also correct that this ruling means that dragoons can never charge unless they blow two of their feats on feats from splatbooks to get an animal companion horse (animal ally / nature soul)

Silver Crusade

Even if you need to take a move action to direct your mount to attack using the attack trick and handle animal, why can't you take that move action in the previous round to the Mounted Charge?

Edit: I see the word 'never' there, and find it out of place.


CWheezy wrote:

Ssalarn is correct that you need to handle animal your mount in order to make it attack, the ride skill does not supersede that.

He is right. I suppose it would be easy to fix the ride skill to allow the intent.

CWheezy wrote:
He is also correct that this ruling means that dragoons can never charge unless they blow two of their feats on feats from splatbooks to get an animal companion horse (animal ally / nature soul)

Well, they want to do it anyways, but I get hte point.


DesolateHarmony wrote:

Even if you need to take a move action to direct your mount to attack using the attack trick and handle animal, why can't you take that move action in the previous round to the Mounted Charge?

Edit: I see the word 'never' there, and find it out of place.

Needing two rounds to charge is pretty atrocious.

Silver Crusade

thebigragu wrote:
blahpers wrote:
FrodoOf9Fingers wrote:

Hmmm....

Is there a way to allow a mount to charge without it's rider to charge? I'm assuming this is still allowed via the new ruling... Or would any charge made by the mount be considered a mounted charge, forcing the character to charge along with the mount?

I speak on behalf the awesome archer/tiger rider concept :) (Tiger just goes around ravaging people as the archer picks off the important targets).

The ruling only states that when you charge on horseback, both you and the mount are charging. It doesn't preclude the mount charging alone.

That's very interesting. I admit, I assumed the much more restrictive reading, which is why I regarded it as unjust. This seems like a good time for a reminder about lances:

CRB wrote:


Lance

Benefit: A lance deals double damage when used from the back of a charging mount. While mounted, you can wield a lance with one hand.

The rider does not need to be considered charging in order to gain the double damage benefit of the lance, nor does he need to be charging to gain triple from Spirited Charge. Only the mount does, unless the lance wording has been FAQed to reflect something else. I don't think so though. Only the mount needs to be charging. If I'm wielding a lance on a charging mount, I assume I also get this bonus on an AoO I perform during this charge. I also assume I can combine with Vital Strike, if blapher's reading is in fact correct. All the rider loses from my previous reading of mounted charge is +2/-2 associated with the charge. If the rider essentially gets to choose whether he's also charging when the mount charges, things get more interesting/complicated.

This is specifically what the FAQ under discussion addresses.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Ssalarn wrote:
Sniggevert wrote:
Are wrote:


That's probably not intended. I'm guessing that the Ride skill is supposed to supercede the Handle Animal skill when riding a mount in combat.

This-100% this.

PRD on Ride skill wrote:
Fight with a Combat-Trained Mount: If you direct your war-trained mount to attack in battle, you can still make your own attack or attacks normally. This usage is a free action.
This use of the Ride skill is what you need to do to get your mount to attack or charge. Well, charge you may still need to guide with your knees, but that's also like a DC 5 check to do.

That rule allows you to attack. Read it.

"If you direct your war-trained mount to attack in battle, you can still make your own attack or attacks normally. This usage is a free action"

This allows you, the rider, to attack if you've commanded your mount to attack in battle. You command your mount to attack by using the Handle Animal skill.

Then what was the free action spent doing?

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Rikkan wrote:
blahpers wrote:
Quote:
Control Mount in Battle: As a move action, you can attempt to control a light horse, pony, heavy horse, or other mount not trained for combat riding while in battle. If you fail the Ride check, you can do nothing else in that round. You do not need to roll for horses or ponies trained for combat.
The third section tells me that you do not need to roll or use an action to "control" a combat-trained mount "in battle". What "control" means is, yup, ambiguous.
No, you misread it. It states a mount not trained for combat.

You either misread his post or missed the last sentence of the rule he cited.

A mount NOT trained for combat needs a move action to blah blah blah. A mount that IS trained for combat needs no roll.

Paizo Employee Organized Play Developer

Allowing you to attack. If you are on the back of a rearing animal lashing out with hoofs and claws, you have to make a ride check if you also want to try and make an attack. You fail the Ride check, you can't attack. That's all that use of the ride skill does. You still need to command the mount to attack in the first place, and that requires Handle Animal.

Silver Crusade

Alexandros Satorum wrote:
DesolateHarmony wrote:

Even if you need to take a move action to direct your mount to attack using the attack trick and handle animal, why can't you take that move action in the previous round to the Mounted Charge?

Edit: I see the word 'never' there, and find it out of place.

Needing two rounds to charge is pretty atrocious.

'pretty atrocious' and 'never can' are very different things.

I, however, am firmly in the camp that you use the ride skill to get your mount to charge.


Jiggy wrote:

You either misread his post or missed the last sentence of the rule he cited.

A mount NOT trained for combat needs a move action to blah blah blah. A mount that IS trained for combat needs no roll.

Yeah, I messed up. Sorry. Let me grab some coffee.

Paizo Employee Organized Play Developer

DesolateHarmony wrote:
Alexandros Satorum wrote:
DesolateHarmony wrote:

Even if you need to take a move action to direct your mount to attack using the attack trick and handle animal, why can't you take that move action in the previous round to the Mounted Charge?

Edit: I see the word 'never' there, and find it out of place.

Needing two rounds to charge is pretty atrocious.

'pretty atrocious' and 'never can' are very different things.

I, however, am firmly in the camp that you use the ride skill to get your mount to charge.

And that's a wonderful houserule but not what the rules actually say.

151 to 200 of 337 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Vital Strike All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.