Osmin
|
tl;dr
- Halfling Fighter (Eldritch Guardian) with a mauler flying fox familiar and the (only listing the relevant ones) feats Mounted Combat, Ride-By Attack, Spirited Charge, Power Attack, Risky Striker, Steadfast Slayer and Lunge.
Halfling fighter pops a potion of Reduce Person in the first round to further abuse Risky Striker/Steadfast Slayer.
Turn would go as follows;
- They charge. Halfling Fighter, using a lance, declares his intent to use Lunge to extend his reach so as to qualify for Steadfast Slayer, which only works if you're the only creature currently threatening your intended target. This takes him outside of his mount's natural 5' reach despite being tiny, as he is stacking a reach weapon with Lunge.
Now, from there I'm lost, so I'm just gonna spitball a bit and see what's right.
- Would the mount then be able to declare its use of Lunge as well (shared feats) and attack? If not, would ride-by attack enable it to continue a further 5' and attack, and if this is the case, would it have to stop there after the attack or would it be able to continue on past the target?
- Would the mount qualify for Steadfast Slayer if it used Lunge? I'm guessing not, as the rider would still be threatening (I think.)
- Due to the shitfest that is mounted rules, what charging feats that the owner has would the flying fox be able to use due to shared feats?
| Chess Pwn |
congrats on touching mounted combat and be warned, there is no set rule for how this works. So ask the GM/decide whatever you want.
But on one other rule point. If you go tiny your reach is 0ft and doubling that with a reach weapon is still 0ft. So with lunge you're only getting 5ft reach, not 10ft.
| SlimGauge |
- Would the mount then be able to declare its use of Lunge as well (shared feats) and attack?
By what method are you sharing feats with your familiar ?
SKILLS are shared, but the familiar has its own feats.EDIT: found it, it's specific to Eldrich Guardian, called "Share Training (Ex)". Only works on COMBAT feats.
Osmin
|
Osmin wrote:- Would the mount then be able to declare its use of Lunge as well (shared feats) and attack?By what method are you sharing feats with your familiar ?
SKILLS are shared, but the familiar has its own feats.
At 2nd level, when the familiar can see and hear its master, it can use any combat feat possessed by the eldritch guardian.
congrats on touching mounted combat and be warned, there is no set rule for how this works. So ask the GM/decide whatever you want.
But on one other rule point. If you go tiny your reach is 0ft and doubling that with a reach weapon is still 0ft. So with lunge you're only getting 5ft reach, not 10ft.
Ouch. I can't seem to find a FAQ for this either, which is ridiculous considering I specifically recall coming across at least one bestiary entry (can't remember which) where a tiny creature with a reach weapon had 5' reach (This actually spurred the idea in the first place.)
| Chess Pwn |
There are a few tiny creatures that say specifically they have 5ft reach with an attack. Like a tiny dragon has 5ft reach with a tail attack. One twig creature has 5ft reach with a spear. AND the tooth fairies have 5ft reach with their pliers. But nothing that says a 0ft reach tiny creature gets 5ft reach with a reach weapon. link to thread discussing this
| Brain in a Jar |
| Scott Wilhelm |
congrats on touching mounted combat and be warned, there is no set rule for how this works. So ask the GM/decide whatever you want.
But on one other rule point. If you go tiny your reach is 0ft and doubling that with a reach weapon is still 0ft. So with lunge you're only getting 5ft reach, not 10ft.
If what you are saying is true, there's no reason why the halfling should not just stay Size Small. Mauler Familiars grow to size Medium in their Battle Form.
Osmin
|
Chess Pwn wrote:If what you are saying is true, there's no reason why the halfling should not just stay Size Small. Mauler Familiars grow to size Medium in their Battle Form.congrats on touching mounted combat and be warned, there is no set rule for how this works. So ask the GM/decide whatever you want.
But on one other rule point. If you go tiny your reach is 0ft and doubling that with a reach weapon is still 0ft. So with lunge you're only getting 5ft reach, not 10ft.
Two reasons, actually; this build is focused on being an absolute nuke and being small, rather than tiny, would both decrease the damage boost from Steadfast Slayer and prevent me from using Risky Striker on medium sized creatures.
| Scott Wilhelm |
Okay, lets address whether what Chess Pwn says is true.
is 0ft and doubling that with a reach weapon is still 0ft.
I don't think that it is simply the case that Reach Weapons Double a creature's reach.
Reach: You use a reach weapon to strike opponents 10 feet away, but you can't use it against an adjacent foe.
I'd be surprised if it were truly the intent that pixie-fairies are not allowed to use pixie-sized Long Spears. And a brief look at the RAW suggests this is not the case.
But perhaps there is other RAW.
Per RAW, it seems that Armies of Giants also are effectively prohibited from using Long Spears to increase their Reach, and that is just as silly.
Diego Rossi
|
Okay, lets address whether what Chess Pwn says is true.
Chess Pwn wrote:is 0ft and doubling that with a reach weapon is still 0ft.I don't think that it is simply the case that Reach Weapons Double a creature's reach.
Core Rulebook, Weapons, Reach wrote:Reach: You use a reach weapon to strike opponents 10 feet away, but you can't use it against an adjacent foe.I'd be surprised if it were truly the intent that pixie-fairies are not allowed to use pixie-sized Long Spears. And a brief look at the RAW suggests this is not the case.
But perhaps there is other RAW.
Per RAW, it seems that Armies of Giants also are effectively prohibited from using Long Spears to increase their Reach, and that is just as silly.
Same page, a bit before that:
Reach Weapons: Glaives, guisarmes, lances, longspears, ranseurs, and whips are reach weapons. A reach weapon is a melee weapon that allows its wielder to strike at targets that aren't adjacent to him. Most reach weapons double the wielder's natural reach, meaning that a typical Small or Medium wielder of such a weapon can attack a creature 10 feet away, but not a creature in an adjacent square. A typical Large character wielding a reach weapon of the appropriate size can attack a creature 15 or 20 feet away, but not adjacent creatures or creatures up to 10 feet away.
| Scott Wilhelm |
Scott Wilhelm wrote:Okay, lets address whether what Chess Pwn says is true.
Chess Pwn wrote:is 0ft and doubling that with a reach weapon is still 0ft.I don't think that it is simply the case that Reach Weapons Double a creature's reach.
Core Rulebook, Weapons, Reach wrote:Reach: You use a reach weapon to strike opponents 10 feet away, but you can't use it against an adjacent foe.I'd be surprised if it were truly the intent that pixie-fairies are not allowed to use pixie-sized Long Spears. And a brief look at the RAW suggests this is not the case.
But perhaps there is other RAW.
Per RAW, it seems that Armies of Giants also are effectively prohibited from using Long Spears to increase their Reach, and that is just as silly.
Same page, a bit before that:
PRD wrote:Reach Weapons: Glaives, guisarmes, lances, longspears, ranseurs, and whips are reach weapons. A reach weapon is a melee weapon that allows its wielder to strike at targets that aren't adjacent to him. Most reach weapons double the wielder's natural reach, meaning that a typical Small or Medium wielder of such a weapon can attack a creature 10 feet away, but not a creature in an adjacent square. A typical Large character wielding a reach weapon of the appropriate size can attack a creature 15 or 20 feet away, but not adjacent creatures or creatures up to 10 feet away.
Okay, so RAW is not as silly as I thought: it says that it is not completely pointless for Size L,H, and G creatures to use Reach Weapons. Can you find where it says it is completely pointless for a Tiny Creature to use Reach Weapons? I found where it says 10'. You found where
targets that aren't adjacent to him
You are supporting my main point.