Mounted Attack Questions

[warden]

Hi,

I had a couple of questions about mounted attacks...

1) The +2 to damage if your mount doesn't move, is this implying that your mount is also attacking your opponent? I ask because I would think that moving while fighting should increase the damage in some way, if going fast enough, because you have more force that you can apply to your swing with the horse's movement.

2) Is your Armor Penalty or Encumbrance penalty negated or reduced when fighting on horseback? I think it should, as your horse is helping bear your weight.

Thanks...

[hedgewizard]

Haven't read enough of the rules to delve into 1.

I think as regards 2; you use the horses movement as your own; so the bulk of your armor is negated.

However, as the armor penalty relates to reducing your Combat Defense, my interpretation is I see that as impacting your agility/awareness. Wearing armor on a horse makes you no less agile or aware as wearing it on foot.

[warden]

Haven't read enough of the rules to delve into 1.

I think as regards 2; you use the horses movement as your own; so the bulk of your armor is negated.

However, as the armor penalty relates to reducing your Combat Defense, my interpretation is I see that as impacting your agility/awareness. Wearing armor on a horse makes you no less agile or aware as wearing it on foot.

I thought movement applied to how fast you went, I was thinking in terms of Agility tests to determine who goes first during the round.

I also see armor as both slowing you down and reducing your agility, as well as the weight slowing you down. I'd personally suggest having the penalty if mounted however to account for the fact the mount is helping you bear the weight. Just my two cents...

[Talassa]

1) The +2 to damage if your mount doesn't move, is this implying that your mount is also attacking your opponent? I ask because I would think that moving while fighting should increase the damage in some way, if going fast enough, because you have more force that you can apply to your swing with the horse's movement.

I was curious on that count, too. That bonus doesn't seem to make an awful amount of sense.

I suspect that the “+2 damage” follows the same rational as the use of an Off-hand weapon. In any case it isn’t an intuitive solution, nor is an easy one to describe in play.

It would be nice if one of the developers/designers come here and shed some light on the issue.

On the other hand, the rules for mounted combat (the rider using its animal handling value as bonus dice to fighting), and the advanced rules for TRAMPLE are very intuitive and easy to explain.

2) Is your Armor Penalty or Encumbrance penalty negated or reduced when fighting on horseback? I think it should, as your horse is helping bear your weight.

When you are fighting on horseback, you use the mounts movement, thus effectively negating bulk penalties to movement.

I think that the Armour Penalty to Combat Defence and Agility is NOT negated, which I believe that is realistic and makes perfect sense.

[jkiley]

The +2 to damage if your mount doesn't move, is this implying that your mount is also attacking your opponent? I ask because I would think that moving while fighting should increase the damage in some way, if going fast enough, because you have more force that you can apply to your swing with the horse's movement.

If you want to go quickly enough to add to your damage while on your horse, use the Charge action, which does provide bonus damage. Just use the horse's movement for the charge instead of your character's movement.

Is your Armor Penalty or Encumbrance penalty negated or reduced when fighting on horseback? I think it should, as your horse is helping bear your weight.

As others have said, the bulk of the armor doesn't affect the horse's movement. The penalty to your combat defense still applies.

jk