Mounted Combat and Reach

[Some Other Guy]

I've tried to find an answer to this on the forums, but can't see to. I have several questions. I understand that if you have a reach weapon while mounted, you can't attack anything adjacent to the mount.

While the mount moves forward, can you make a reach attack during it's move while it moves from 10 ft away to adjacent and then have the mount get it's attack?
If not, what is the purpose of having a lance if your mount can't attack?

[ScubaSteve93]

You could make your attack then have the horse take it's action, but the most common use of mounted combat with a lance is a charge attack. Lances deal double damage during a mounted charge.

[reyyvin]

Some Other Guy wrote:

I've tried to find an answer to this on the forums, but can't see to. I have several questions. I understand that if you have a reach weapon while mounted, you can't attack anything adjacent to the mount.

While the mount moves forward, can you make a reach attack during it's move while it moves from 10 ft away to adjacent and then have the mount get it's attack?
If not, what is the purpose of having a lance if your mount can't attack?

herein lies the main problem with mounted combat: lack of specific definition.

Under Mounted Combat, the prd states that "For simplicity, assume that you share your mount's space during combat."

The problem is that "shared" space isn't exactly defined anywhere. Tiny and smaller creatures have to move into your square to attack, but aren't sharing your square. Some medium and smaller creaturs (Morlocks) can share a single square; the only creatures larger then Medium I've found that shares squares is one with the Swarm type (there may be others, I haven't found them).

A Swarm attacks by moving into another creature's square and sharing it. "A swarm can occupy the same space as a creature of any size." I have yet to find a DM that declares either the Swarm only occupying one square or the PCs it attacks occupying all 4 squares of the swarm's space.

As such, it creates a rules disconnect when a DM says you occupy all squares while "sharing space." Nothing in the rules backs up this interpretation. The rider of a mount maintains its size and occupies 1 square that the mount also occupies, thus sharing its space.

A rider must be at least one size category larger then the mount riden; by the basis of this rule, a medium (or smaller) rider cannot be 'large' and occupy all 4 squares the mount occupies.

Nothing prevents you from stipulating which square you occupy (like a rear one), with your reach extending to the square in front of your mount.

[Magda Luckbender]

As above, the rules on mounted combat are inconsistent.

Here's a relevant post in another thread.

One approach that completely solves the rules problems that surround mounted combat, both with and without reach, is the appropriate use of readied actions. For example, the rider "readies an action to attack with my lance when a good target presents itself". Then the mount begins its charge movement. During the mount's charge movement a good lance target presents itself, so the rider's readied action (a charging lance attack) goes off. The mount then resumes its turn, perhaps finishing its charge with an attack and trample.

Given that this is possible, it's totally reasonable for the GM to hand-wave it and just let you roll attacks for rider and mount. It doesn't enhance the fun to require everyone to learn the finicky wording required to pull it off.

[reyyvin]

Magda Luckbender wrote:

As above, the rules on mounted combat are inconsistent.

Here's a relevant post in another thread.

One approach that completely solves the rules problems that surround mounted combat, both with and without reach, is the appropriate use of readied actions. For example, the rider "readies an action to attack with my lance when a good target presents itself". Then the mount begins its charge movement. During the mount's charge movement a good lance target presents itself, so the rider's readied action (a charging lance attack) goes off. The mount then resumes its turn, perhaps finishing its charge with an attack and trample.

Given that this is possible, it's totally reasonable for the GM to hand-wave it and just let you roll attacks for rider and mount. It doesn't enhance the fun to require everyone to learn the finicky wording required to pull it off.

Unfortunately, this doesn't quite work.

Paizo has recently (a month or 2 ago) issued an errata with mounted charging... to gain the benefits of a charge, the rider must also charge with mount, they call it a "mounted Charge."

http://paizo.com/paizo/faq/v5748nruor1fm#v5748eaic9ru6

This gives you the option of either charging (full round action) or readying an attack (standard action). If you ready an attack, it is just an attack, doing base damage, not 2x (or 3x with Spirited Charge) as if charging.

You also cannot ready a charge.

http://paizo.com/paizo/faq/v5748nruor1fm#v5748eaic9o4q

[CommandoDude]

Frankly, the best damned way in my opinion to handle mounted combat is to ignore Paizo and just houserule the whole damned mechanic. Use whats in the CRB as a baseline and build/modify yourself.

[reyyvin]

CommandoDude wrote:

Frankly, the best damned way in my opinion to handle mounted combat is to ignore Paizo and just houserule the whole damned mechanic. Use whats in the CRB as a baseline and build/modify yourself.

Or use the 3.5 errata (not for PFS, of course)