In 5.5, the mounted combat rules say your mount can't take actions other then dash, disengage, or dodge, but an uncontrolled mount can act freely. As a paladin with faithful steed, can you just use the mount as a summon and not ride it?
If the only way it can use it's attack action is to be uncontrolled, then why not just let it do it's thing seperate from me instead of just carrying me unpredictability around the battlefield?
There is nothing stopping you from not riding your summoned mount. In fact, due to the wording of the spell specifically saying that it is a controlled mount while ridden, the only way to use its abilities is to not ride it.
Combat. The steed is an ally to you and your allies. In combat, it shares your Initiative count, and it functions as a controlled mount while you ride it (as defined in the rules on mounted combat). If you have the Incapacitated condition, the steed takes its turn immediately after yours and acts independently, focusing on protecting you.
An interesting thought...Find Steed says that it acts as a controlled mount while you ride it...not while ridden. I suppose you could argue that if an ally rode the horse it could still act as an uncontrolled mount.
As a DM is there 0 chance I’d allow an ally to ride it and consider is uncontrolled. Zero.
To the OP, the mount is really about giving you a lot of mobility. (Besides the advantage against medium and smaller enemies. It’s faster than you, so it can get places quicker, that’s obvious. But, it can disengage. You ride up, attack the enemy, the mount disengages and rides away. You don’t draw an opportunity attack because the mount took disengage, and you aren’t using any of your movement to leave the area. Usually, the paladin wants to wants to stay in melee and tank, of course. And in those cases, dismounting might make some sense — though it isn’t exactly the sturdiest thing, and I’d think you would prefer to use your spell slots on thing other than constantly re-summoning it. But, either way, the mount does allow for some hit-and-run tactics.
Thinking on this some more, I suppose there's an interpretation where your mount can only attack if you're incapacitated and it's trying to defend you.
As a DM is there 0 chance I’d allow an ally to ride it and consider is uncontrolled. Zero. . .
As a DM, if someone really was trying to parse the words, I suppose I might allow it to be uncontrolled.
However, they will get exactly what it says on the tin. It is uncontrolled. It moves on its Initiative, does what it wants to, and doesn't care at all about the PC (who is not the caster) sitting on its back. None of the Mounted Combat feat will come into effect. Trying to use it like an actually Paladin can (e.g. ride up, PC makes multiple attacks, mount disengages and moves away) doesn't work because it operates on its Initiative and the 'rider' would have to Ready an action (and thus only get a single attack).
I would allow the Caster to give it some general orders (e.g. attack those goblins) for free through their telepathic bond, but trying to issue more complex instructions (e.g. attack that specific goblin, then disengage and move to that specific spot) is going to take a Bonus Action (and the reason the Caster doesn't have to do that normally is because they are riding it and able to steer it through bit and bridle and their knees).
As a DM is there 0 chance I’d allow an ally to ride it and consider is uncontrolled. Zero. . .
As a DM, if someone really was trying to parse the words, I suppose I might allow it to be uncontrolled.
However, they will get exactly what it says on the tin. It is uncontrolled. It moves on its Initiative, does what it wants to, and doesn't care at all about the PC (who is not the caster) sitting on its back. None of the Mounted Combat feat will come into effect. Trying to use it like an actually Paladin can (e.g. ride up, PC makes multiple attacks, mount disengages and moves away) doesn't work because it operates on its Initiative and the 'rider' would have to Ready an action (and thus only get a single attack).
I would allow the Caster to give it some general orders (e.g. attack those goblins) for free through their telepathic bond, but trying to issue more complex instructions (e.g. attack that specific goblin, then disengage and move to that specific spot) is going to take a Bonus Action (and the reason the Caster doesn't have to do that normally is because they are riding it and able to steer it through bit and bridle and their knees).
I think I would have it do what it says in the spell's description if you are riding it and are Incapacitated - it focuses on protecting you. I would have it ignore all orders, even from the caster, and have it just do what it thinks is best to protect its summoner. For the rider on its back that is not the summoner, it would likely be more liability than asset.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
In 5.5, the mounted combat rules say your mount can't take actions other then dash, disengage, or dodge, but an uncontrolled mount can act freely. As a paladin with faithful steed, can you just use the mount as a summon and not ride it?
If the only way it can use it's attack action is to be uncontrolled, then why not just let it do it's thing seperate from me instead of just carrying me unpredictability around the battlefield?
There is nothing stopping you from not riding your summoned mount. In fact, due to the wording of the spell specifically saying that it is a controlled mount while ridden, the only way to use its abilities is to not ride it.
An interesting thought...Find Steed says that it acts as a controlled mount while you ride it...not while ridden. I suppose you could argue that if an ally rode the horse it could still act as an uncontrolled mount.
Good catch!
As a DM is there 0 chance I’d allow an ally to ride it and consider is uncontrolled. Zero.
To the OP, the mount is really about giving you a lot of mobility. (Besides the advantage against medium and smaller enemies. It’s faster than you, so it can get places quicker, that’s obvious. But, it can disengage. You ride up, attack the enemy, the mount disengages and rides away. You don’t draw an opportunity attack because the mount took disengage, and you aren’t using any of your movement to leave the area.
Usually, the paladin wants to wants to stay in melee and tank, of course. And in those cases, dismounting might make some sense — though it isn’t exactly the sturdiest thing, and I’d think you would prefer to use your spell slots on thing other than constantly re-summoning it. But, either way, the mount does allow for some hit-and-run tactics.
5.5 paladin gets a free casting of it, so i figured i should figure out what I'm using it for even if I'm not spending my spell slots on it.
Thinking on this some more, I suppose there's an interpretation where your mount can only attack if you're incapacitated and it's trying to defend you.
As a DM, if someone really was trying to parse the words, I suppose I might allow it to be uncontrolled.
However, they will get exactly what it says on the tin. It is uncontrolled. It moves on its Initiative, does what it wants to, and doesn't care at all about the PC (who is not the caster) sitting on its back. None of the Mounted Combat feat will come into effect. Trying to use it like an actually Paladin can (e.g. ride up, PC makes multiple attacks, mount disengages and moves away) doesn't work because it operates on its Initiative and the 'rider' would have to Ready an action (and thus only get a single attack).
I would allow the Caster to give it some general orders (e.g. attack those goblins) for free through their telepathic bond, but trying to issue more complex instructions (e.g. attack that specific goblin, then disengage and move to that specific spot) is going to take a Bonus Action (and the reason the Caster doesn't have to do that normally is because they are riding it and able to steer it through bit and bridle and their knees).
I think I would have it do what it says in the spell's description if you are riding it and are Incapacitated - it focuses on protecting you. I would have it ignore all orders, even from the caster, and have it just do what it thinks is best to protect its summoner. For the rider on its back that is not the summoner, it would likely be more liability than asset.