|
I can't find rulings 100% on this, which leads me to believe it isn't kosher, so I thought I would get all of your guys input.
- Two PCs were were having one PC mount the other. A halfling cavalier mounting a dwarf barbarian. They said the Dwarf barbarian had an exotic riding saddle and the handling was within the Dwarf's weight restriction. From what I can see, this is bunk. two PCs can't share the same square (unless they are ratfolk), but the ride rules & familiars carrying their familiars breaks that, so not sure.
- One of those same characters, at early level 3 had a mithral breastplate. He said he had a cert that gave them 3500gc - has anyone heard of a cert like this?
|
I can't find rulings 100% on this, which leads me to believe it isn't kosher, so I thought I would get all of your guys input.
- Two PCs were were having one PC mount the other. A halfling cavalier mounting a dwarf barbarian. They said the Dwarf barbarian had an exotic riding saddle and the handling was within the Dwarf's weight restriction. From what I can see, this is bunk. two PCs can't share the same square (unless they are ratfolk), but the ride rules & familiars carrying their familiars breaks that, so not sure.
- One of those same characters, at early level 3 had a mithral breastplate. He said he had a cert that gave them 3500gc - has anyone heard of a cert like this?
Mounted creatures are assumed to share the square of the creature they mounted. I imagine a dwarf would be considered an unusual steed but seeing as humans can ride on other humans shoulders in real life it's not very far fetched in a fantasy game.
And yes several modules give out that much gold and can be played by second level characters.
|
1. I see this every now and then. It's really not how the mount rules are intended to work but as long as the player are doing it for fun and whimsy I usually allow it. Basically my rule of thumb is that if they are less effective than they would be as individual characters I'll let it go. This means the "carrier" can't be attacking with weapons and they can't be using any feats that are meant to be used by mounted characters (ride-by, spirited charge etc.)
But any GM is well within her rights to not allow them to do this at all. It's pretty obvious that the mount rules weren't written with humanoids in mind (you can't even take the mount evolution on a bipedal eidolon). If you choose to make characters like this you have to be willing to accept that not everyone will be OK with it.
2. Yes, there are several 3XP module/AP chronicles that characters from level 2-4 can get that give over 3500 GP.
Regional Venture-Coordinator, Central Europe
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Regarding point 2 there exists a player boon (expedition manager) that allows you to trade a certain amount of pp for a single item. The maximum amount you can get is an item worth 3500 gp or less for 6 pp. But this item does not have any resale value. Mithril breastplate costs 4200 gp, so it could not be acquired with that item.
Edit
Interesting: a 2-4 module gives you 3711 gp. Maybe it is just me being cynic und not trusting players at all regardless of what they tell me, but the fact that he told you 3500gp and not 3700 makes me really think he has used that player boon and applied it wrong.
|
|
Basically my rule of thumb is that if they are less effective than they would be as individual characters I'll let it go. This means the "carrier" can't be attacking with weapons and they can't be using any feats that are meant to be used by mounted characters (ride-by, spirited charge etc.)
Yeah, that would normally be my take on it. Don't mind if it is being done fun, but when it is munchkining and ruining the fun of everyone at the table (which this was) I'm not a fan.
I like your compromise, no attacking, feats, etc.
|
It sounds to me like the player was misunderstanding the Boon as well, but since none of us were there to see it I would leave that part be.
Riding other PCs in a combat fashion has never been specifically allowed in any sourcebook that I am aware of, and it's easy to believe it's not intended as well, so if a GM wants to disallow it at their table they are within their rights to.
Of course I type this now after I was just contemplating two Ratfolk Sohei/Rogues with Undersized Mount and Trick Riding...
|
PCs riding PCs is definitely not covered in the rules. It most certainly should NOT be allowed if the PCs are gaining any kind of rules advantage from it
In a Campaign Mode Adventure Path the GM allowed it but only when NOT in combat. It was mostly done for the amusement factor of (at one point) having a Tiny creature riding a Small creature that was riding a Medium creature that was riding a Large creature that was riding a Huge Creature. All but the huge were PCs (which was an animal companion) :-)
|
|
In a Campaign Mode Adventure Path the GM allowed it but only when NOT in combat. It was mostly done for the amusement factor of (at one point) having a Tiny creature riding a Small creature that was riding a Medium creature that was riding a Large creature that was riding a Huge Creature. All but the huge were PCs (which was an animal companion) :-)
It's the Bremen Town Musicians!
|
|
PCs riding PCs is definitely not covered in the rules. It most certainly should NOT be allowed if the PCs are gaining any kind of rules advantage from it
Its not really disallowed either. It's really up to each individual DM how they want to handle it. If that particular dm wanted to allow it they're within their rights.
|
|
PCs riding PCs is definitely not covered in the rules. It most certainly should NOT be allowed if the PCs are gaining any kind of rules advantage from itIts not really disallowed either. It's really up to each individual DM how they want to handle it. If that particular dm wanted to allow it they're within their rights.
Fair enough.
Wouldn't be the hosiest thing I saw at Gryphcon :-)
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 8
|
Ran a table similar to this at a PaizoCon long past. It was silly, but not overpowered. The mounted player didn't have the Mounted Combat feat or any real build towards making the combo powerful, however. The mounting happened rather organically. As the table was getting set up, one PC said "I should buy a mount and a lance for this scenario and actually do damage," and the other PC said "you could ride me, I have the Monkey Style feats!"
My various rulings at the time, as I recall.
1. The mount PC there had Monkey Style & Moves so they could be on all fours.
2. The mount moved on the riders initiative.
3. He attacked with Improved Unarmed Strike to avoid a question about what limbs were free to attack with.
I'd agree that you'd expect table variation in general with riding another PC. And that's not a great basis for hinging one, let alone two, characters around.
-------------
If a PC has an item, feature, or other ability that seems off, you are 100% within your rights as a GM to ask them politely to provide the source for it. If the player says he has a cert that let him purchase this item before his WBL allows for it, you can ask him to provide that document. If he doesn't have it with him, he cannot use it.
Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento
|
As long as the other PC is following the rules for mount though it seems like it would be fine. General consensus when this comes up in the rules forum is it works, and if you know how rare it is to see the rules forum agree on anything, that is impressive.
And it certainly shows up over and over again in fantasy tropes. (Master blaster anyone?) I would definitely impose the -5 penalty for inappropriate mount though, even with an exotic saddle. And all the violent movement penalties for things like ranged attacks and casting.
|
I don't know; using the Mounted Combat to stop an attack on another PC, if that PC is also acting independently, seems kind of cheesy.
If the PCs are acting independently(as in have their own initiatives and control their own actions) then there is no "mount", as that violates what is written in the mounted combat section. I also feel using the Mounted Combat feat chain would not work with two PCs.
Ultimately though, there is so much grey area here that is comes down to GM discretion.
And it certainly shows up over and over again in fantasy tropes. (Master blaster anyone?) I would definitely impose the -5 penalty for inappropriate mount though, even with an exotic saddle. And all the violent movement penalties for things like ranged attacks and casting.
I'm not sure that one Mad Max movie counts as either "over and over again" or as fantasy. Encumbrance however on such tricks I watch with a fine tooth hawk, because unlike what the PC in question was doing, Master was not also hauling a PC's load of gear and loot with him as well. Nor did they ever enter combat in that configuration.
|
|
I don't know; using the Mounted Combat to stop an attack on another PC, if that PC is also acting independently, seems kind of cheesy.If the PCs are acting independently(as in have their own initiatives and control their own actions) then there is no "mount", as that violates what is written in the mounted combat section. I also feel using the Mounted Combat feat chain would not work with two PCs.
On the other hand, master can have a +12 initiative and use that to help the -1 Blaster go faster. Blaster has to MOVE as master directs , but can attack given the limitations of his movement anyway.