Mounted Pouncing Confusion

[Claxon]

I could say the same for your assumptions as well.

And honestly, balance really isn't much of a consideration here. You can get the same number of attacks whether mounted or not with pounce, that is completely build dependent. It's establish that only the first hit benefits from charge via FAQ so we know mounted pouncing is possible, the only the FAQ doesn't directly address is whether or not it requires Mounted Skirmisher. Requiring 1 extra feat really doesn't take this from unbalanced to balanced.

You say clumsy patchwork, I say logical flow of how rules work assuming 1 specific rule takes priority.

We are never going to agree here, and neither side his incontrovertible evidence. Best to just put this one to bed or make an FAQ.

[glass]

On the original question: RAW is ambiguous. "Specific beats general" does not apply because you cannot "only one attack when mounted" and "full attack when charging" equally specific, so it is not clear whether the latter overrides the former or not. OTOH, the FAQ strongly hints at the latter. Still not a slam dunk, but good enough for me.

On the ability to make a mounted charge at all: The problem for the people arguing it is impossible is the "this is a free action" bit. Either the free action is the making your mount charge, in which case happy days. Or the free action refers to "making you attack or attacks normally" in which case who needs pounce?

_
glass.

[Michael Sayre]

Claxon wrote:

And honestly, balance really isn't much of a consideration here. You can get the same number of attacks whether mounted or not with pounce, that is completely build dependent.

Except that's not accurate. With a lance and Spirited Charge, you're getting effectively 3 attacks for 1 on your first attack, so mounted charging will always be capable of delivering more damage and more attacks than unmounted charging. Similarly, you're stacking the extra damage from any attacks the mount itself makes, and there are several ways to leverage the mount's strength modifier to your own damage. So balance is, and should be, a consideration, especially since everyone in this thread knows damn well that Paizo's FAQ and errata policies are overwhelmingly conservative.

Anyways, obviously this is a very FAQ-worthy discussion, but it's come up numerous times and thus far Paizo has been extremely reluctant to address mounted combat rules, and the two times they have they've contradicted (or more generously, amended) their previous rulings because the mounted combat rules are a hot, hot mess and no one wants to take the time to give them the in-depth attention they need.

[Claxon]

Ssalarn wrote:

Anyways, obviously this is a very FAQ-worthy discussion, but it's come up numerous times and thus far Paizo has been extremely reluctant to address mounted combat rules, and the two times they have they've contradicted (or more generously, amended) their previous rulings because the mounted combat rules are a hot, hot mess and no one wants to take the time to give them the in-depth attention they need.

I agree with this 100%

[CWheezy]

I think mounted combat is pretty good but it has enough downsides to make it fine. Targeting your mount with a will save is pretty nasty.