Riding a Horse

[daxos232]

When a character is riding a horse, how should CAs be handled? Can the rider use all the CAs of his mount for movement and all of their own for attacking and parrying? I would assume so, but the Players Handbook doesn't mention anything concerning this.

 

[soltakss]

Presumably, if the mount has to be commanded then you should use the rider's CAs, but if the mount is very well trained or is intelligent then it should use its own CAs. Unicorns and awakened beasts should defintely use their own CAs.

 

[Mongoose Pete]

When a character is riding a horse, how should CAs be handled? Can the rider use all the CAs of his mount for movement and all of their own for attacking and parrying? I would assume so, but the Players Handbook doesn't mention anything concerning this.

As soltakss says.

 

[Deleriad]

my house rules are:
If the rider is controlling the mount then they act as a single unit using the rider's CAs and initiative. One caveat is that if you have a rider with 4 CAs but a mount with just one CA then logic dictates that only one CA can be spent on something the mount does.

If working as a pair (i.e. knight on dragon) then each uses its CAs and Initiative separately however I rule that they both must spend 1 CA each coordinating so that, in effect, they have one fewer CA each. I also rule in this case that the rider's skill is no longer limited to their ride skill.

 

[Vagni]

That makes a lot of sense - duly added to my house rules as well!

Live long and pasta! :wink:

 

[Jujitsudave]

I think common sense may be in order when dealing with it. Mounts should be a great boon on the battlefield as they have been throughout history, so it isn't an unreasonable tactic to allow a 3 CA rider to use one to make the horse charge forward on it's own volition and the remaining 2 CAs to attack 2 different guys that turn. Of course By the time the enemy can strike back, the horse may be out of range.

The rider should use a CA when controlling the horse, but the training level of the horse would determine it's own abilities independent of the rider after it has been commanded. That facilitates the need to invest in an intelligent warhorse rather than a just any riding animal.

 

[Vagni]

That makes sense too, a trained warhorse would be easier to 'let loose' in combat. As you say, it's often a case by case basis for some rules anyway - often better to make something up on the spot and keep the game flow rather than spend 10 minutes searching the rule book (Unless, of course the PC is likely to take a serious pounding or die... best check then! ).

So, maybe spend 1CA to get the horse charging then just let it get on with it...

 

[daxos232]

Thanks for the suggestions. Deleriad, your way sounds the best to me for my groups style of play. In your opinion do you think warhorses would fall under that idea you mentioned in your second paragrapgh? The horse is well trained enough to understand the simplest commands given by the rider through the use of his legs, allowing the rider to focus on other things. the rider would still be limited to his Ride skill, as the warhorse is not self aware.

 

[Deleriad]

Thanks for the suggestions. Deleriad, your way sounds the best to me for my groups style of play. In your opinion do you think warhorses would fall under that idea you mentioned in your second paragrapgh? The horse is well trained enough to understand the simplest commands given by the rider through the use of his legs, allowing the rider to focus on other things. the rider would still be limited to his Ride skill, as the warhorse is not self aware.

I think that's sort of up to you. Personally I would treat that as a unique bond between a single horse and single rider but that's partly to make the ability 'special.'