Players Riding Players


Pathfinder Society Roleplaying Guild

Dark Archive

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

So, my question is simple, can a player ride another player and attack while riding said player? Someone said they had seen a ruling saying now, but couldn't show me said ruling.

The reason I ask this is due to the Vine Leshy's change shape ability and the leshykineticist archetype. Basically I want to know if I can have a leshy become a vine, 'ride' another pathfinder, and throw blasts while riding.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Tales Subscriber

Players aren't Mounts, so they can't really "ride" one another. At that point, it's more a case of being "carried".

Whereas mounted combat is a thing, though rarely used, in PFS- with saddles and other abilities that make combat easier to handle with Ride checks.
Player-Carrying-Player wouldn't benefit from those same abilities, and it goes into a grey area of GM discretion and the possibility of Ride vs CMD or some such.

Remember- mounts are animals specifically trained for someone to ride them into combat. Players, not so much. It sounds like a cool idea, of having a sentient vine that can blast things on your arm- but then comes the questions of how does it hinder the player?

Shadow Lodge ***** ⦵⦵

This is a furniture stores worth of table variation.

The first major thing you absolutely need to not let happen is to let player 1 move player 2 so player 1 can full attack in ways they ordinarily couldn't. (raw aside, you can't cheat the mount action economy to do that with a swift dismount either)

Other than that you need to not let the two cheese the initiative system

A vine leshy tossing full action fireballs while riding another player has some pretty big advantages, but nothing huge. I mean, if you're full attacking at range usually the rest of the party is in between you and the thing. How often does an archer/kineticist have to move? I'd borrow a line from the mount rules so that you have to make all the attacks halway through movement

Dark Archive

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Selvaxri wrote:

Players aren't Mounts, so they can't really "ride" one another. At that point, it's more a case of being "carried".

Where does it say that Players can't be mounts? The Core Book just says this:

Core Rulebook Page 103 wrote:
If you attempt to ride a creature that is ill suited as a mount, you take a –5 penalty on your Ride checks.
Core Rulebook Page 104 wrote:
If you are riding bareback, you take a –5 penalty on Ride checks.

Grand Lodge ***** ⦵⦵ Venture-Captain, Online—PbP aka Hmm

13 people marked this as a favorite.

Your players must be more acrobatic then the ones we have at Dreamers. I can't imagine my guys riding each other, and besides we have such low ceilings. I think I'd disallow players riding players just for safety reasons, to prevent them from bonking their heads.

Hmm

Silver Crusade ***** Venture-Agent, Canada—Ontario—Toronto aka pauljathome

What BNW said.

Mounted combat with a PC and a well defined mount is ALREADY a huge mess of unclear rules interactions masquerading as a system. It totally doesn't make sense in all sorts of "edge" cases.

Add PCs riding PCs and the whole thing becomes a nightmare. Sometimes players want to do it because it is cool and funny, sometimes they're looking for some serious cheese.

There are good RAW arguments for disallowing it (more than good enough for me to instantly squash it at PFS tables I GM) but, basically, its just way too complicated, confusing and potentially broken to be a good idea.

My personal rule is that I allow characters to ride each other out of combat (at one point in an AP it got REALLY silly with us having Gargantuan all the way to tiny creatures riding one on top of another :-))but as soon as initiative is rolled everybody needs to dismount.

[Aside]IMO the best RAW argument against it is that
1) All PCs need to roll and act on their own initiative
2) Mounts and riders act on the same initiative
therefore PCs can not be mounted on PCs
[/Aside]

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Tales Subscriber

I don't think Paizo ever intended on players being mounts. if you think about the various mounts Cavaliers and Paladins, and other archetypes can get- are mostly quadrupeds with basic intelligence- beasts of burden that aren't hindered by it's handler, when ridden into combat.

Ask yourself- If you're a vine, are you really "riding" an ally, or are you just wrapped around their waist or arm? More over, what's your dexterity/flexibility/cognisense while in your vine form?

As a vine, wrapped around an ally, i'd say you were more engaged in a "friendly/allowed" grapple- but even then, comes the hindrance of being grappled

Also, if you claim to "ride" an ally, i wouldn't be surprised if a GM starts making you do RIDE check when you try to do what you want to do.

As NorseWolf said, this is a possible cheesing situation: allowing a race with slower movement a "Free ride" on an ally to get full-attacks at no consequence of positioning.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Hilary Moon Murphy wrote:

Your players must be more acrobatic then the ones we have at Dreamers. I can't imagine my guys riding each other, and besides we have such low ceilings. I think I'd disallow players riding players just for safety reasons, to prevent them from bonking their heads.

Hmm

I'm 6'5" and over 300 pounds. I may not be able to use a player as a mount, but I'll bet some of our players could use me as one.


As far as PCs riding PCs, I have seen a pair of half-orc bloodragers carry a pair of ratfolk in a certain scenario involving limited equipment and a race so that the party would have better average move speed, but they set down the rats when combat started IIRC.

Dark Archive *

Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I think it's time to pull forth a rule from a different roleplay setup.

"No Stunts".

...I really don't want to have to do first aid on two of my players because they tried to do this at a table. Or call the paramedics, etc.

As far as characters riding characters? If the character being ridden gets a backpack 'harness' and has their rider done up like 'Blaster' of 'Master-Blaster', and they spent the appropriate feats to be able to ride? I don't see too much problem with that?

Shadow Lodge ***** ⦵⦵

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Paul Jackson wrote:

[Aside]IMO the best RAW argument against it is that

1) All PCs need to roll and act on their own initiative
2) Mounts and riders act on the same initiative
therefore PCs can not be mounted on PCs
[/Aside]

All creatures need to roll their own initiative

Mounts and riders act on the same initiative
Therefore no one can ride anyone.

The mount acting on your init thing is a specific exception to the normal rule. The only way it doesn't work is if you rule that players can't ride other players, which means using it as justification to say that players can't ride other players is a mite circular.

I don't think you can apply any hard and fast rules to this. The circumstances range from there's no way this shouldn't work...

"the cavaliers mount died, the cavalier is built around his mount, the druid will turn into a horse and only do horsie things for the rest of the night so the cavalier can be useful"

To some Golda grade cheese that definitely shouldn't.

"My gnomes gonna ride on the barbarian using mounted combat feats to be his armor class cause all he's got is a Loincloth , then swift action hop off and circling mongoose the bad guys"

Silver Crusade ***** Venture-Agent, Canada—Ontario—Toronto aka pauljathome

1 person marked this as a favorite.
BigNorseWolf wrote:


"the cavaliers mount died, the cavalier is built around his mount, the druid will turn into a horse and only do horsie things for the rest of the night so the cavalier can be useful"

To some Golda grade cheese that definitely shouldn't.

"My gnomes gonna ride on the barbarian using mounted combat feats to be his armor class cause all he's got is a Loincloth , then swift action hop off and circling mongoose the bad guys"

You're absolutely right. I'd allow the first and forbid the second (with some very pointed eyebrow raising) without a seconds hesitation even in PFS.

The Exchange ***** Venture-Lieutenant, Texas—Dallas & Ft. Worth aka Belafon

3 people marked this as a favorite.

There was a thread about a year and a half ago, so I’ll just quote myself.

Kevin Willis wrote:

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.

Grand Lodge ***** Regional Venture-Coordinator, Great Lakes aka TwilightKnight

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Game rules do not govern the actions of your players, only their characters. So, if one of your players wants to run around the game store with another player mounted on their back, who are we to tell them no. LoL

Silver Crusade ***** Venture-Captain, Germany—Aschaffenburg-Würzburg

I would argue no, not to limit shenanigans.

**

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Thanks for all the thoughts here that ...

1) Give me good ideas if folks want to have one of their characters ride another

2) Convince it's up to the store about whether or not players riding players should be allowed

Scarab Sages *****

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Even though it isnt written anywhere I would say by inference or to quote my favorite Venture Lieutenant "metaphorically" bipedals arent supposed to be mounts.

Silver Crusade ***** ⦵⦵⦵ RPG Superstar 2013 Top 8 aka GreySector

GM Eddv wrote:
Even though it isnt written anywhere I would say by inference or to quote my favorite Venture Lieutenant "metaphorically" bipedals arent supposed to be mounts.

LOL.

Shadow Lodge ***** Venture-Agent, Texas—Dallas & Ft. Worth aka Azothath

It is possible and normal looking for players to ride another player("steed") IF the steed is a humanoid polymorphed into a horse(or mount). Magic is a loophole. In PFS Mounts have a defined role but it could be an active animal if the rider doesn't have another animal. A ring of eloquence or Beastspeak makes this more amusing.

Community / Forums / Organized Play / Pathfinder Society Roleplaying Guild / Players Riding Players All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.