So...
You and your mount can charge, you would get your 1 attack and the lion can get all his attacks via pounce.
But no, your mount can't actually attack when you utilize Ride By Attack.
If your mount charges and stops to attack they stop in front of the target, and doesn't have any more movement.
But honestly, the mounted combat rules are a mess and in need of a revision because there are a ton of conflicts within the rules that cause a lot of problems, this just happens to be one of the things that causes problems.
Just like technically, in a charge you have to stop at the closest square you can attack from. With a lance you have reach and count as occupying all the same squares as your mount. So you technically have 5ft farther reach than your mount, but you must stop when you can attack. So technically your mount could never attack as part of your charge. But there are feats that definitely imply your mount can attack, and in fact to charge you must be able to make an attack....
As I said full of problems and contradictions.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So a rather big question in PF have yet to be dealt with even though it has at least been requested a faq since 2010... Paizo i know you guys got a lot to do, but this is no good.
Yes, but it's honestly not a simple problem.
Mounted combat rules interact with a lot of other moving parts, that's why it eneded up with so many problems.
It interacts with charge rules a lot, and then gets into other problems with pounce.
It get's into problems with two characters moving together (practically simultaneously) which the game doesn't support.
It's get into issues with movement, and how stopping usually finishes a move action and doesn't allow for other movement and interacts with things like Spring Attack but isn't.
I do wish they would put out a revision...but I also appreciate difficulty in rectifying the rules into a working set without contradictions.
Well, it's possible but it's mostly just a long list of exceptions to how the rules work for everything else to make mounted combat rules work. Which is a problem since they have to make the rules for mounted combat fit into the existing book space for the rules of mounted combat.
So the character is riding a lion, with a lance, and probably in armor, and you want to simultaneously charge with the lance, while the lion pounces...leaping off the ground with the rider, lance and armor on his back?
I'm also assuming the rider is a medium sized creature?
Honestly, my ruling as DM would be that the lion cannot pounce with you on his back, too much weight.
Also since the lance has reach, it would strike first possibly keeping the target at bay anyway.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There's nothing in the rules to prohibit a mount with pounce from doing so while also carrying a charging rider. Indeed, the whole point of the Mounted Charge FAQ is that both the rider and the mount are charging. And when a tiger charges, it gets to pounce.
What is likely to arise as an issue is the question of reach that was mentioned upthread. If you charge with a lance the rider's charge attack happens when you are 10 feet away, and the mount cannot legally attack at that point. There are two possible solutions: a) don't use a lance, with the obvious drawback hat you lose the extra damage; b) use Ride By Attack to keep moving one more square after your lance attack hits, at which point your tiger's pounce happens (and you have to stop moving). This latter option is preferable but some GMs won't allow it (I do), so the best thing is to ask your GM for their ruling beforehand and then just work within their interpretation. Playing a mounted character means lots of table variation, but it's really not a big problem when you know the parameters up front.
Keep in mind that lances have reach and most large-sized quadrupeds (like a lion) do not, and since you have to end your movement to attack after a charge only you or your mount get to attack.
|
Keep in mind that lances have reach and most large-sized quadrupeds (like a lion) do not, and since you have to end your movement to attack after a charge only you or your mount get to attack.
Wouldn't you just choose the sqaure you attack from to be one of the ones ten feet away? You are in all of the mounts sqaures. Wouldn't that fix the problem?
There's nothing in the rules to prohibit a mount with pounce from doing so while also carrying a charging rider. Indeed, the whole point of the Mounted Charge FAQ is that both the rider and the mount are charging. And when a tiger charges, it gets to pounce.
You are correct in that the RAW would allow this, but it's pretty ridiculous. I would normally look to the encumbrance rules but....
Here's how the encumbrance on a Lion would work:
Lion has a 21 STR.
Light load - 153 lbs. or less
Medium Load - 154–306 lbs.
heavy Load - 307–460 lbs.
The Lion is a large quadruped so it gets a X3. Which mean light load extends to 459 lbs. (which personally I find ridiculous, put 459 lbs on the back of a Lion he's not going anywhere but it is the RAW).
A human male rider on average is going to be 170 lbs.
You need to add in the weight of:
Lance
Armor
The Lion's Armor
Saddle.
Whatever else the character is carrying.
Whatever else the Lion is carrying.
So if after adding all that up you are under 459 lbs then yes, by the RAW he can pounce without penalty as he would only have a light load.
In comparison a horse would be medium encumbered at 231 lbs.
So we've now reached a reality where a Lion is twice the pack animal that a horse is. (insert cuckoo sounds here).
A Heavy horse by these rules is medium encumbered at 399 lbs. So by following these RAW you are arguing that a Lion can carry more than a Clydesdale.
A male Lion weighs 420 lbs on average. By these rules you would allow a Lion to run and pounce while carrying more than his own weight on his back. Think about this, in effect you are saying that a male Lion could run and pounce with ANOTHER MALE LION ON HIS BACK.
In this case I would discard the quadruped rules. They are clearly designed for animals like horses and camels who aren't pouncing.
here are videoes of men riding Lions. Can this thing pounce? Now put the guy in armor with a lance and all the stuff adventurers carry.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nHPIQ1uldWQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6UoJbb_tGHo
A third video, at about 3:00 a trainer rides a lion as it jumps, note it doesn't jump very far.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=86YphZm05jw
Thanks for clearing things up fellas. Kind of astounded at the damage output I'll be capable of now.
@ Kaliel, yup, in armor and all. But it's a small character (halfling) so with armor and lance I'll be generous and say he comes to about 50 lbs.
@ Abe, as long as the second option is RAW, I'm good to go. We're playing PFS with an already lenient GM.
@ Everyone else, I sincerely hope you all have a good day <3 you've made this disgusting minmaxer's day a little brighter.
Time to write some fluff for this little murder hobo now.
Halfling makes much more sense. I'd still do the math on the weight of armor, load etc, but I might be inclined to allow that.
Although "Lion" does not appear on the list of Small (Halfling/Gnome) beast-rider alternate mount options. So your DM would have to allow (but I can't see raising too much of an objection).
Here's more thought on the subject assuming a halfling rider: I've been thinking of the "pounce" attack as more of a jump landing with claws on target etc.
Technically according to the RAW:
"When a creature with this special attack makes a charge, it can make a full attack (including rake attacks if the creature also has the rake ability)."
A Lion's full attacks are:
bite +7 (1d8+5 plus grab), 2 claws +7 (1d4+5)
It also as the special attacks: pounce, rake (2 claws +7, 1d4+5)
So technically in order to pounce the Lion would need to use both its front claws and its bite.
To do this of course it is taking not just one but both claws off the ground, while attempting to bite (and or possibly grab....and eesh...nevermind rake).
So there's a ton of issues here.
#1. The lance has reach, and would hit before the Lion. Using the lance would also necessitate keeping the foe out of reach of the Lion.
#2. If at any time the Lion raked while the rider was on him, I'd assume the rider and probably the lion was now on the ground as the lion was using his back claws and grappling with his front claws. So I'd prettymuch disallow a rake while riding unless the rider wanted to take damage from having his mount fall on him.
#3. If the Lion grabbed at any point I'd make the rider make ride proficiency checks to stay mounted as essentially his mount would be connected to whatever kicking and screaming thing it grabbed.
#4. When the lion claws, he is taking one foot off the ground and clawing at something, possibly connecting to it. (My cat gets stuck on my couch regularly just by accident).
#5. When the lion claws twice, he's taking two feet off the ground during the round.
In each case of #4 and #5 I'd have the rider make ride checks to stay on the mount.
Standard combat ride check is:
Fight with a combat-trained mount 10
However using a lance (if with shield):
Guide with knees 5
The question is how much I would add to this for the mount taking his paws off the ground in order to attack. Maybe 5 for 1 claw and 10 for 2 claws?
I'd make the rider do checks like this whenever his mount was in combat I think. He'd fall off a lot.
Kaliel - these rules changes would be completely within your discretion in a home game. But they are not supported by the rules as they are currently written by paizo. Are these rules consistent with real life? No, but neither is magic etc.
I'll also add that playing a cavalier or some other mounted character is far from overpowered, especially when compared to what lots of other classes can do. Can mounted characters do a ton of damage when they charge (especially if they have a mount with pounce)? Sure, but having played such a character I can say that it's often not so easy to charge at all. Or you get a charge in once an encounter (maybe) and then find that a lot of your best stuff is now irrelevant as you go toe to toe with whatever bad guys are still standing.
In other words, as a GM I try to let all the players have fun with their characters. Mounted characters already operate within a *lot* of rules constraints limiting what they can do, and those rules are inconsistent (as discussed upthread) and lead to tons of table variation already, without needing (imho) to add a bunch of house-ruled limitations on what they can do.
Three last thoughts: 1) if you are really worried that a mounted pouncing tiger will be OP, strictly enforce the rules for charging. As written, you'll find that a lot of times the player just has no legal charge available (at least until they get Wheeling Charge). You can also refuse to allow the interpretation of Ride By Attack that I mentioned upthread, which means that they rider has to trade his lance for a non-reach weapon if he wants to also get the tiger's pounce (unless he finds a way to give his mount reach). 2) The tiger's 5 attacks on a pounce can be devastating. But as you get higher levels you'll find that the tiger will miss a lot due to its lower BAB, and also that its 5 attacks will be hampered by DR so that not that much damage actually gets through. There are solutions to these problems, but they are expensive ones, which means that the rider has less gold for his magical lance or whatever. 3) As the GM, if you really feel like a rider and tiger are riding havoc through your game, hit the mount with a Will save effect and watch as the mount rides away in fear, carrying the rider with him.
Kaliel - these rules changes would be completely within your discretion in a home game. But they are not supported by the rules as they are currently written by paizo. Are these rules consistent with real life? No, but neither is magic etc.
I'll also add that playing a cavalier or some other mounted character is far from overpowered, especially when compared to what lots of other classes can do. Can mounted characters do a ton of damage when they charge (especially if they have a mount with pounce)? Sure, but having played such a character I can say that it's often not so easy to charge at all. Or you get a charge in once an encounter (maybe) and then find that a lot of your best stuff is now irrelevant as you go toe to toe with whatever bad guys are still standing.
In other words, as a GM I try to let all the players have fun with their characters. Mounted characters already operate within a *lot* of rules constraints limiting what they can do, and those rules are inconsistent (as discussed upthread) and lead to tons of table variation already, without needing (imho) to add a bunch of house-ruled limitations on what they can do.
Three last thoughts: 1) if you are really worried that a mounted pouncing tiger will be OP, strictly enforce the rules for charging. As written, you'll find that a lot of times the player just has no legal charge available (at least until they get Wheeling Charge). You can also refuse to allow the interpretation of Ride By Attack that I mentioned upthread, which means that they rider has to trade his lance for a non-reach weapon if he wants to also get the tiger's pounce (unless he finds a way to give his mount reach). 2) The tiger's 5 attacks on a pounce can be devastating. But as you get higher levels you'll find that the tiger will miss a lot due to its lower BAB, and also that its 5 attacks will be hampered by DR so that not that much damage actually gets through. There are solutions to these problems, but they are expensive ones, which means that the rider has less gold...
Just offering my opinion on the subject, I've stated that the RAW says one thing, but that thing defies common sense.
There's no way in hell a Lion should have better carrying capacity than a large warhorse. There's times when a DM has to weigh the RAW against common sense, and I feel this would be one of those times.
However I don't feel I'm out of bounds with the ride checks, these would jibe with the RAW. If your lion is grabbing, raking taking all 4 paws off the ground and biting, you as a rider should have to make ride checks to stay on.
Having a Lion mount could be plenty of fun, but letting that Lion mount jump on people rake, claw, grab etc all while you just sit happily upon him without ride checks is a little ridic IMO.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Keep in mind that lances have reach and most large-sized quadrupeds (like a lion) do not, and since you have to end your movement to attack after a charge only you or your mount get to attack.Wouldn't you just choose the sqaure you attack from to be one of the ones ten feet away? You are in all of the mounts sqaures. Wouldn't that fix the problem?
You are in all of the squares, which means you can't attack any square adjacent to any of the squares you occupy.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
@ Kaliel Windstorm - All your calculations were based off of lions as you know them. In the world of Golarion, The lion is not only the size of the Clydesdale, but also slightly stronger than the Clydesdale.
In our world, No one would try to put a saddle on a lion and attempt to ride it.
In Golarion, while not common (due to the difficulty of commoners training them) Lion Mounts are well known and symbols of prestige.