So I'm theory crafting for a bards future levels & thinking about magical secrets. I already am planning on getting find greater steed at 10th because who doesn't want to fly around on the back of a griffon? But then it got me thinking. See, there are a tonne of guides for good magical secrets spells, and likewise for spells that work with the find steed spells' ability for mount and caster to share spell effects. However rarely are these combined.
So then it dawned on me, far as I can tell, Tenser's transformation should qualify as a spell that targets only you? Which means you can give your mount 50 temp HP, Con & Strength saves, Extra attack, and 2d12 force damage on its attacks (they unfortunately won't benefit from the advantage on weapon attacks but that's a minor nerf to a crazy combo).
This won't come online till 14th level but it sounds hella dope. It won't be the best in every scenario, you do give up spellcasting (Although the potential damage output makes up for it imo) but you still get to use your bardic inspiration so it's not too bad. Sounds like a fun way to basically turn your bard into a high damage front line flyer, like a Narzugon or Deva, for 10 minutes.
What do people think / are there any cool combos you can think of along these lines?
I'd say it would work. Like you mention, it takes 14 levels to pull of but good damn, is it a sweet move. A transformed Pegasus would probably be the best bet. And remember , you have to stay on the mount for it to work but except for that, go crazy. :)
It could work, but there’s still the mounted combat rules to deal with. If you are controlling it, it can only dash, dodge or disengage. If you’re not controlling, it can attack, but you’re just along for the ride, better hope it has the same ideas as you about where to go. The hp and saves will be good either way, but the attacks can be tricky.
“Targets only you” is a loaded phrase that different folks read differently. Arguably, the new version of the spell Booming Blade targets only you (and then immediately grants an ability to target an enemy with an attack as a spell effect), so a character with that spell on an “independent mount” steed might be able to empower the steed to make a BB attack after the Paladin makes their own on their own turn.
Maybe. “Target” in 5E probably (or, definitely) is used in a broader sense than just the range of a spell, but it’s not consistent.
You have to stay on the mount for it to work but except for that, go crazy. :)
I don't think you do? To cast the spell for sure, but for the duration of the spell as written I believe it still affects the mount after you dismount. I wouldn't be terribly upset if a DM ruled differently though, it fits with the theme of you and your mount being one unit.
It could work, but there’s still the mounted combat rules to deal with. If you are controlling it, it can only dash, dodge or disengage. If you’re not controlling, it can attack, but you’re just along for the ride, better hope it has the same ideas as you about where to go. The hp and saves will be good either way, but the attacks can be tricky.
This is largely a non-issue for the find steed spells. To take advantage of the offensive buffs you'll ofcourse want to let it act "independently", but with the telepathy & increased intelligence you can simply command the creature what to do and the spell states that the player controls the mount, so it will follow those commands no problem. This was confirmed in a JC interview at some point that can be dug up if someone wants to challenge it XD.
The seperate initiatives does cause a slight issue with timing your actions ofcourse, and generally in my opinion I think to maximise offense you want the mount to act first, so it can charge in & use it's full multi/extra attack, then on your turn you're also next to the enemy & can do the same. Otherwise you have to hold an attack action, in which you can't use extra attack. Ofcourse alternatively if you're playing more defensively, perhaps having the mount act after is better so it can disengage and fly out of combat.
“Targets only you” is a loaded phrase that different folks read differently...
...Maybe. “Target” in 5E probably (or, definitely) is used in a broader sense than just the range of a spell, but it’s not consistent.
I definitely see this come up in the context of smite spells and a very mean DM might disallow Tensers Transformation based on the extra damage from attacks, but personally I really don't see it that way. While the smite spells, booming blade etc. are very clearly evocations directed out at enemies despite them being "target: self", Tensers operates far closer to a seriously powered up enlarge spell (Which also adds damage to attacks which therefore effects other creatures by some metric), being a self buff and thus within the intent of the find steed spell sharing feature. That's how I'd rule it atleast, and my friend / DM agrees.
Indeed, and works really well with a Swords halfling on a Peryton...
You know what, in the past I've never seen the peryton as particularly appealing due to it's half hitpoints compared to griffons/pegasi (mitigated by resistance, but that's meaningless against magic damage) and slower speed, plus it only being medium so not viable for most characters.
However, giving it 50 temp hp not only shortens the gap somewhat (proportionally, 59 vs 33 up to 109 vs 83), but with the resistance, if you are fighting non magical opponents that's an effective hp of 166! Completely outclasses the alternatives in that scenario, and dive attack+flyby are just gravy.
Sadly I'm playing human though so this isn't a viable option on my current pc 😥.
You have to stay on the mount for it to work but except for that, go crazy. :)
I don't think you do? To cast the spell for sure, but for the duration of the spell as written I believe it still affects the mount after you dismount. I wouldn't be terribly upset if a DM ruled differently though, it fits with the theme of you and your mount being one unit.
Well, no. That is completely wrong. Read the text of FGS: "Whilemounted on it, you can make any spell you cast that targets only you also target the mount. "If you are no longer on it, you can't have the spell target it and thus it ends.
If the mount is following your commands, telepathic or otherwise, it is by definition not acting independently.
I'm not sure I'd agree. There's no indication that you can mind control your mount and force it to take specific actions, just that it is "unusually intelligent, strong, and loyal" and happens to have a telepathic bond that lets it hear and understand your thoughts and fight beside you "as a seamless unit." It's a summoned creature that is a trusted ally, not a summoned creature that is controlled.
Well, no. That is completely wrong. Read the text of FGS: "Whilemounted on it, you can make any spell you cast that targets only you also target the mount. "If you are no longer on it, you can't have the spell target it and thus it ends.
A spell only needs to target a creature when cast. After it is cast, it does not need to continue re-targeting a valid target on future rounds. No, a spell would not end when you get off the steed, even though you needed to be on the steed when first casting.
If the mount is following your commands, telepathic or otherwise, it is by definition not acting independently.
I'm not sure I'd agree. There's no indication that you can mind control your mount and force it to take specific actions, just that it is "unusually intelligent, strong, and loyal" and happens to have a telepathic bond that lets it hear and understand your thoughts and fight beside you "as a seamless unit." It's a summoned creature that is a trusted ally, not a summoned creature that is controlled.
Who said anything about mind control?
OP suggested that telepathic communication with your mount means you are not controlling your mount in terms of the mounted combat rules. I disagreed. If you telepathically tell the mount, “go over there” it will do so, same as if you directed it with the reins. When that happens, it is not acting independently, and could only dash, dodge or disengage.
So, yes, if you choose to control your mount and guide it here or there etc. with reins or telepathic communication... it's a controlled mount, and follows controlled mount rules, acting on your turn.
Nothing about the spell provides you have to do that. To the same extent that a rider can normally sit on top of their Warhorse and let it be an independent allied creature in combat (with the risk that it might decide it wants to run away or behave unpredictably), you can do that on your Find Steed magical Warhorse too. The only difference, while the store-bought Warhorse has an Intelligence of 2 and may or may not feel loyal to its rider or motivated to stick around in combat... the one summoned by the spell has an Intelligence of 6 and is "unusually loyal" to you and wants to "fight as a seamless unit" with you. It's still independent, it's an independent NPC that the DM controls, and they'd be within their right to still make it decide to run away or act contrary to your interests in the thick of battle... but if they're roleplaying that summoned horse correctly, it should be (1) smart enough to know whats helpful and not helpful to its rider, and (2) be strongly motivated to be helpful.
But, still independent. Or, you can ride it with control, if you want the benefit of being able to move on your turn rather than being carried around on the horse's turn! There are tradeoffs!
Well, no. That is completely wrong. Read the text of FGS: "Whilemounted on it, you can make any spell you cast that targets only you also target the mount. "If you are no longer on it, you can't have the spell target it and thus it ends.
A spell only needs to target a creature when cast. After it is cast, it does not need to continue re-targeting a valid target on future rounds. No, a spell would not end when you get off the steed, even though you needed to be on the steed when first casting.
It's not about "re-targeting," whatever you think that is. It's a requisite for the spell to work. Just as certain other spells only works as long as your target is within range.
It's not about "re-targeting," whatever you think that is. It's a requisite for the spell to work. Just as certain other spells only works as long as your target is within range.
As a general rule, spells that workin with X range don't continue to check their range. I think you're misunderstanding something:
PHB Chapter 11 describes how to cast a spell. In relevant part, when you're casting a spell, you need a valid target within range. "The target of a spell must be within the spell's range." But in case there's any confusion about whether that range continues to be relevant... "Once a spell is cast, its effects aren't limited by its range, unless the spell's description says otherwise."
So let's look at some examples to see what it looks like when "a spell's description says otherwise." First, Hex is an example of a normal spell with a range of 90 feet. We know from Chapter 11 that it must be cast on a target within that 90 feet range when it is first cast. But once the spell is cast, if the effected creature then moves further away than 90 feet.... that doesn't end the spell, because the spell's description doesn't say it does. They could move to the other side of the world, or even an entirely different plane of existence, and so long as you continue to concentrate for the duration, the spell stays on them, because "its effects aren't limited by its range."
By contrast, Witch Bolt is a spell with a range of 30 feet. Again, PHB Chapter 11 tells us that it must be cast on a target within 30 feet when it is cast. But if the effected creature ever moves further away than 30 feet.... the spell specifically provides that that ends the spell: "The spell also ends if the target is ever outside the spell’s range or if it has total cover from you."
So yes, "certain other spells only work as long as your target is in range," you are right about that. But PHB Chapter 11 tells us that most spells with a range don't have that restriction, just "certain" spells that specifically describe that in their description. And when we look at Witch Bolt we see that that description, when it exists, is very explicit indeed.
Tenser's Transformation is a spell with a range of "self". It doesn't describe anything like Witch Bolt, about ending if you're ever a certain distance away from yourself... it would be ridiculous if it did, how would you ever find yourself out of range of yourself? But again, PHB Chapter 11 tells us that there's no general rule that that sort of assumed restriction exists in all spells, so it just really isn't there.
Find Steed describes that "While mounted on your steed, you can make any spell you cast that targets only you also target your steed." So, Tenser's Transformation, when cast, targets (1) you and also (2) your steed. It does not claim to create any new additional requirements that you need to stay mounted for the duration or the spell will end, just that you need to be mounted while casting it. So, the PHB Chapter 11 general rule controls, that there is no meaningful range rule controlling the spell's effect, after it is cast on a valid target.
It's not about "re-targeting," whatever you think that is. It's a requisite for the spell to work. Just as certain other spells only works as long as your target is within range.
As a general rule, spells that workin with X range don't continue to check their range. I think you're misunderstanding something:
PHB Chapter 11 describes how to cast a spell. In relevant part, when you're casting a spell, you need a valid target within range. "The target of a spell must be within the spell's range." But in case there's any confusion about whether that range continues to be relevant... "Once a spell is cast, its effects aren't limited by its range, unless the spell's description says otherwise."
So let's look at some examples to see what it looks like when "a spell's description says otherwise." First, Hex is an example of a normal spell with a range of 90 feet. We know from Chapter 11 that it must be cast on a target within that 90 feet range when it is first cast. But once the spell is cast, if the effected creature then moves further away than 90 feet.... that doesn't end the spell, because the spell's description doesn't say it does. They could move to the other side of the world, or even an entirely different plane of existence, and so long as you continue to concentrate for the duration, the spell stays on them, because "its effects aren't limited by its range."
By contrast, Witch Bolt is a spell with a range of 30 feet. Again, PHB Chapter 11 tells us that it must be cast on a target within 30 feet when it is cast. But if the effected creature ever moves further away than 30 feet.... the spell specifically provides that that ends the spell: "The spell also ends if the target is ever outside the spell’s range or if it has total cover from you."
So yes, "certain other spells only work as long as your target is in range," you are right about that. But PHB Chapter 11 tells us that most spells with a range don't have that restriction, just "certain" spells that specifically describe that in their description. And when we look at Witch Bolt we see that that description, when it exists, is very explicit indeed.
Tenser's Transformation is a spell with a range of "self". It doesn't describe anything like Witch Bolt, about ending if you're ever a certain distance away from yourself... it would be ridiculous if it did, how would you ever find yourself out of range of yourself? But again, PHB Chapter 11 tells us that there's no general rule that that sort of assumed restriction exists in all spells, so it just really isn't there.
Find Steed describes that "While mounted on your steed, you can make any spell you cast that targets only you also target your steed." So, Tenser's Transformation, when cast, targets (1) you and also (2) your steed. It does not claim to create any new additional requirements that you need to stay mounted for the duration or the spell will end, just that you need to be mounted while casting it. So, the PHB Chapter 11 general rule controls, that there is no meaningful range rule controlling the spell's effect, after it is cast on a valid target.
Since Tenser's is usually cast on just one the caster the "range" of that spell is irrelevant. What we must look at is the requirements in FGS which has the restriction of "while". Note that it says nothing about "when casting the spell", just "target" which means that technically, due to the weird wording in FGS you could cast say, Haste on yourself in turn 1 and then in Turn 2 have it "target" your steed. And of course, if you are no longer targeted by the spell you are no longer affected by it.
I think you're still misunderstanding when "spell you cast" takes place. You pick targets when you "cast" a spell, not on future rounds. Find Steed lets you pick an additional target when you "cast" the spell while mounted, not make a spell that is already cast effect additional creatures on future rounds while mounted.
No: who cares, the spell is already cast, and its effect is on the one or two creatures it was cast on last round, as long as you maintain concentration.
Yes: who cares, the spell is already cast and its effect is on the one or two creatures it was cast on last round, as long as you maintain concentration.
There is no such thing as "no longer targeted by the spell" in this context (other spells may have spell effects that pick new targets every round, like Telekinesis, but that's not what we're talking about here). A spell is targeted when it is cast, once. If its a spell with an ongoing effect for a duration, then it continues to effect you, not "target" you.
So, yes, if you choose to control your mount and guide it here or there etc. with reins or telepathic communication... it's a controlled mount, and follows controlled mount rules, acting on your turn.
Nothing about the spell provides you have to do that. To the same extent that a rider can normally sit on top of their Warhorse and let it be an independent allied creature in combat (with the risk that it might decide it wants to run away or behave unpredictably), you can do that on your Find Steed magical Warhorse too. The only difference, while the store-bought Warhorse has an Intelligence of 2 and may or may not feel loyal to its rider or motivated to stick around in combat... the one summoned by the spell has an Intelligence of 6 and is "unusually loyal" to you and wants to "fight as a seamless unit" with you. It's still independent, it's an independent NPC that the DM controls, and they'd be within their right to still make it decide to run away or act contrary to your interests in the thick of battle... but if they're roleplaying that summoned horse correctly, it should be (1) smart enough to know whats helpful and not helpful to its rider, and (2) be strongly motivated to be helpful.
But, still independent. Or, you can ride it with control, if you want the benefit of being able to move on your turn rather than being carried around on the horse's turn! There are tradeoffs!
You are kind of making my point for me.
If you want the offensive benefits of the spell to apply to the mount, you can’t control the mount. That’s my whole point. Even if the DM chooses to have it charge into the thick of the fight, it will be the DMs call where, specifically, the mount goes, if it chooses to attack (probably it will, but the player doesn’t have a say in it), and who it attacks. Smarter than the average horse, sure, but that still doesn’t mean it will make the same choices that you would.
OP suggested that telepathic communication with your mount means you are not controlling your mount in terms of the mounted combat rules. I disagreed. If you telepathically tell the mount, “go over there” it will do so, same as if you directed it with the reins. When that happens, it is not acting independently, and could only dash, dodge or disengage.
As I mentioned before, this is a thoroughly discussed topic with the rule designers and no, talking to your mount and telling it what to do does not constitute "controlling" it, communicating & coordinating attacks is a very different thing to direct control ala taking the reins and steering it.
I'll refer to another thread for a deeper conversation on this topic with various sources cited, but the overall up-to-date advice from the rule designers (JC has supported both sides in the past but has consistently clarified his current position in all recent communications) is that the mount is always allowed to act independently under the mounted combat rules if the caster wishes, and nothing about the enhanced intelligence or telepathy prevents this, nor does commanding the mount to do exactly what you want it to inhibit it's action options.
Formally ofcourse, the mount is a DM controlled NPC in this case, and the DM is always allowed to decide the mount might flee etc. If the situation is dire, but this is up to the DM and *I personally* would never do such a thing in my games since I feel it undermines the spells description of it being an unusually loyal & intelligent mount, which is able to seamlessly coordinate with the caster in combat.
Anyway the point I'm getting at is no, there is never anything preventing a ridden find steed mount from acting independently in any circumstances unless the rider specifically wants it to be controlled, and the spell suggests even when acting independently the mount will always follow it's summoners orders to the best of it's ability. Hence my previous stance that this is a non-issue for summoned steeds.
To further my previous point I do strongly recommend you watch this video, because unlike the tweets and forum posts etc., JC addresses this directly and goes in detail into the premise of the question, what the rule intent is, and even how he's given bad advice on it in the past that he now does not support (ie, he retracts his 2015 statement that the mount would not be able to act independently when ridden)
It's a long video but only the 2 mins after 33:39 are relevant to this. There is additionally a section from 15:00-19:00 discussing independent mounts in general which may also be of interest, in which JC actually recommends handing control of independent mounts over to players anyway, as you might do for a summoned creature etc., unless there is a strong reason not to do so.
Would also like to say that I fully agree with everything Chicken_champ has said about when the target of a spell is determined & that this has no effect on the duration the spell stays active, though as I said I wouldn't be too annoyed with the DM if they made a ruling that the spell effects disappeared when I dismounted, it's just not RAW.
First off, as everyone including JC knows, what JC says on Twitter is not an official rule, and is really no more valuable than the opinion of any other DM. Second, what a bunch of people say on the internet is also not a rule.
It is not making your point for you. It simply says you can decide if you want the mount to be controlled or not. It does nothing to change the rules about mounted combat. It just says you can decide if you want to control your mount or not. It says nothing about allowing a controlled mount to act like an uncontrolled mount. And just because you are using the word “directing” instead of controlling doesn’t change anything. They are synonymous in this situation. If you tell the mount “go there” and it does, you have controlled it.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
So I'm theory crafting for a bards future levels & thinking about magical secrets. I already am planning on getting find greater steed at 10th because who doesn't want to fly around on the back of a griffon? But then it got me thinking. See, there are a tonne of guides for good magical secrets spells, and likewise for spells that work with the find steed spells' ability for mount and caster to share spell effects. However rarely are these combined.
So then it dawned on me, far as I can tell, Tenser's transformation should qualify as a spell that targets only you? Which means you can give your mount 50 temp HP, Con & Strength saves, Extra attack, and 2d12 force damage on its attacks (they unfortunately won't benefit from the advantage on weapon attacks but that's a minor nerf to a crazy combo).
This won't come online till 14th level but it sounds hella dope. It won't be the best in every scenario, you do give up spellcasting (Although the potential damage output makes up for it imo) but you still get to use your bardic inspiration so it's not too bad. Sounds like a fun way to basically turn your bard into a high damage front line flyer, like a Narzugon or Deva, for 10 minutes.
What do people think / are there any cool combos you can think of along these lines?
I'd say it would work. Like you mention, it takes 14 levels to pull of but good damn, is it a sweet move. A transformed Pegasus would probably be the best bet. And remember , you have to stay on the mount for it to work but except for that, go crazy. :)
It could work, but there’s still the mounted combat rules to deal with. If you are controlling it, it can only dash, dodge or disengage. If you’re not controlling, it can attack, but you’re just along for the ride, better hope it has the same ideas as you about where to go. The hp and saves will be good either way, but the attacks can be tricky.
“Targets only you” is a loaded phrase that different folks read differently. Arguably, the new version of the spell Booming Blade targets only you (and then immediately grants an ability to target an enemy with an attack as a spell effect), so a character with that spell on an “independent mount” steed might be able to empower the steed to make a BB attack after the Paladin makes their own on their own turn.
Maybe. “Target” in 5E probably (or, definitely) is used in a broader sense than just the range of a spell, but it’s not consistent.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
Indeed, and works really well with a Swords halfling on a Peryton...
Even a blind squirrel finds a nut once in awhile.
I don't think you do? To cast the spell for sure, but for the duration of the spell as written I believe it still affects the mount after you dismount. I wouldn't be terribly upset if a DM ruled differently though, it fits with the theme of you and your mount being one unit.
This is largely a non-issue for the find steed spells. To take advantage of the offensive buffs you'll ofcourse want to let it act "independently", but with the telepathy & increased intelligence you can simply command the creature what to do and the spell states that the player controls the mount, so it will follow those commands no problem. This was confirmed in a JC interview at some point that can be dug up if someone wants to challenge it XD.
The seperate initiatives does cause a slight issue with timing your actions ofcourse, and generally in my opinion I think to maximise offense you want the mount to act first, so it can charge in & use it's full multi/extra attack, then on your turn you're also next to the enemy & can do the same. Otherwise you have to hold an attack action, in which you can't use extra attack. Ofcourse alternatively if you're playing more defensively, perhaps having the mount act after is better so it can disengage and fly out of combat.
I definitely see this come up in the context of smite spells and a very mean DM might disallow Tensers Transformation based on the extra damage from attacks, but personally I really don't see it that way. While the smite spells, booming blade etc. are very clearly evocations directed out at enemies despite them being "target: self", Tensers operates far closer to a seriously powered up enlarge spell (Which also adds damage to attacks which therefore effects other creatures by some metric), being a self buff and thus within the intent of the find steed spell sharing feature. That's how I'd rule it atleast, and my friend / DM agrees.
You know what, in the past I've never seen the peryton as particularly appealing due to it's half hitpoints compared to griffons/pegasi (mitigated by resistance, but that's meaningless against magic damage) and slower speed, plus it only being medium so not viable for most characters.
However, giving it 50 temp hp not only shortens the gap somewhat (proportionally, 59 vs 33 up to 109 vs 83), but with the resistance, if you are fighting non magical opponents that's an effective hp of 166! Completely outclasses the alternatives in that scenario, and dive attack+flyby are just gravy.
Sadly I'm playing human though so this isn't a viable option on my current pc 😥.
If the mount is following your commands, telepathic or otherwise, it is by definition not acting independently.
Well, no. That is completely wrong. Read the text of FGS: "While mounted on it, you can make any spell you cast that targets only you also target the mount. "If you are no longer on it, you can't have the spell target it and thus it ends.
I'm not sure I'd agree. There's no indication that you can mind control your mount and force it to take specific actions, just that it is "unusually intelligent, strong, and loyal" and happens to have a telepathic bond that lets it hear and understand your thoughts and fight beside you "as a seamless unit." It's a summoned creature that is a trusted ally, not a summoned creature that is controlled.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
A spell only needs to target a creature when cast. After it is cast, it does not need to continue re-targeting a valid target on future rounds. No, a spell would not end when you get off the steed, even though you needed to be on the steed when first casting.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
Who said anything about mind control?
OP suggested that telepathic communication with your mount means you are not controlling your mount in terms of the mounted combat rules. I disagreed. If you telepathically tell the mount, “go over there” it will do so, same as if you directed it with the reins. When that happens, it is not acting independently, and could only dash, dodge or disengage.
So, yes, if you choose to control your mount and guide it here or there etc. with reins or telepathic communication... it's a controlled mount, and follows controlled mount rules, acting on your turn.
Nothing about the spell provides you have to do that. To the same extent that a rider can normally sit on top of their Warhorse and let it be an independent allied creature in combat (with the risk that it might decide it wants to run away or behave unpredictably), you can do that on your Find Steed magical Warhorse too. The only difference, while the store-bought Warhorse has an Intelligence of 2 and may or may not feel loyal to its rider or motivated to stick around in combat... the one summoned by the spell has an Intelligence of 6 and is "unusually loyal" to you and wants to "fight as a seamless unit" with you. It's still independent, it's an independent NPC that the DM controls, and they'd be within their right to still make it decide to run away or act contrary to your interests in the thick of battle... but if they're roleplaying that summoned horse correctly, it should be (1) smart enough to know whats helpful and not helpful to its rider, and (2) be strongly motivated to be helpful.
But, still independent. Or, you can ride it with control, if you want the benefit of being able to move on your turn rather than being carried around on the horse's turn! There are tradeoffs!
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
It's not about "re-targeting," whatever you think that is. It's a requisite for the spell to work. Just as certain other spells only works as long as your target is within range.
As a general rule, spells that workin with X range don't continue to check their range. I think you're misunderstanding something:
PHB Chapter 11 describes how to cast a spell. In relevant part, when you're casting a spell, you need a valid target within range. "The target of a spell must be within the spell's range." But in case there's any confusion about whether that range continues to be relevant... "Once a spell is cast, its effects aren't limited by its range, unless the spell's description says otherwise."
So let's look at some examples to see what it looks like when "a spell's description says otherwise." First, Hex is an example of a normal spell with a range of 90 feet. We know from Chapter 11 that it must be cast on a target within that 90 feet range when it is first cast. But once the spell is cast, if the effected creature then moves further away than 90 feet.... that doesn't end the spell, because the spell's description doesn't say it does. They could move to the other side of the world, or even an entirely different plane of existence, and so long as you continue to concentrate for the duration, the spell stays on them, because "its effects aren't limited by its range."
By contrast, Witch Bolt is a spell with a range of 30 feet. Again, PHB Chapter 11 tells us that it must be cast on a target within 30 feet when it is cast. But if the effected creature ever moves further away than 30 feet.... the spell specifically provides that that ends the spell: "The spell also ends if the target is ever outside the spell’s range or if it has total cover from you."
So yes, "certain other spells only work as long as your target is in range," you are right about that. But PHB Chapter 11 tells us that most spells with a range don't have that restriction, just "certain" spells that specifically describe that in their description. And when we look at Witch Bolt we see that that description, when it exists, is very explicit indeed.
Tenser's Transformation is a spell with a range of "self". It doesn't describe anything like Witch Bolt, about ending if you're ever a certain distance away from yourself... it would be ridiculous if it did, how would you ever find yourself out of range of yourself? But again, PHB Chapter 11 tells us that there's no general rule that that sort of assumed restriction exists in all spells, so it just really isn't there.
Find Steed describes that "While mounted on your steed, you can make any spell you cast that targets only you also target your steed." So, Tenser's Transformation, when cast, targets (1) you and also (2) your steed. It does not claim to create any new additional requirements that you need to stay mounted for the duration or the spell will end, just that you need to be mounted while casting it. So, the PHB Chapter 11 general rule controls, that there is no meaningful range rule controlling the spell's effect, after it is cast on a valid target.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
Since Tenser's is usually cast on just one the caster the "range" of that spell is irrelevant. What we must look at is the requirements in FGS which has the restriction of "while". Note that it says nothing about "when casting the spell", just "target" which means that technically, due to the weird wording in FGS you could cast say, Haste on yourself in turn 1 and then in Turn 2 have it "target" your steed. And of course, if you are no longer targeted by the spell you are no longer affected by it.
I think you're still misunderstanding when "spell you cast" takes place. You pick targets when you "cast" a spell, not on future rounds. Find Steed lets you pick an additional target when you "cast" the spell while mounted, not make a spell that is already cast effect additional creatures on future rounds while mounted.
On the turn you cast Tenser's Transformation, are you mounted on your steed?
On future rounds, are you mounted on your steed?
There is no such thing as "no longer targeted by the spell" in this context (other spells may have spell effects that pick new targets every round, like Telekinesis, but that's not what we're talking about here). A spell is targeted when it is cast, once. If its a spell with an ongoing effect for a duration, then it continues to effect you, not "target" you.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
You are kind of making my point for me.
If you want the offensive benefits of the spell to apply to the mount, you can’t control the mount. That’s my whole point. Even if the DM chooses to have it charge into the thick of the fight, it will be the DMs call where, specifically, the mount goes, if it chooses to attack (probably it will, but the player doesn’t have a say in it), and who it attacks. Smarter than the average horse, sure, but that still doesn’t mean it will make the same choices that you would.
As I mentioned before, this is a thoroughly discussed topic with the rule designers and no, talking to your mount and telling it what to do does not constitute "controlling" it, communicating & coordinating attacks is a very different thing to direct control ala taking the reins and steering it.
I'll refer to another thread for a deeper conversation on this topic with various sources cited, but the overall up-to-date advice from the rule designers (JC has supported both sides in the past but has consistently clarified his current position in all recent communications) is that the mount is always allowed to act independently under the mounted combat rules if the caster wishes, and nothing about the enhanced intelligence or telepathy prevents this, nor does commanding the mount to do exactly what you want it to inhibit it's action options.
https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/99903/how-does-a-mount-from-find-steed-act-when-unmounted
Formally ofcourse, the mount is a DM controlled NPC in this case, and the DM is always allowed to decide the mount might flee etc. If the situation is dire, but this is up to the DM and *I personally* would never do such a thing in my games since I feel it undermines the spells description of it being an unusually loyal & intelligent mount, which is able to seamlessly coordinate with the caster in combat.
Anyway the point I'm getting at is no, there is never anything preventing a ridden find steed mount from acting independently in any circumstances unless the rider specifically wants it to be controlled, and the spell suggests even when acting independently the mount will always follow it's summoners orders to the best of it's ability. Hence my previous stance that this is a non-issue for summoned steeds.
To further my previous point I do strongly recommend you watch this video, because unlike the tweets and forum posts etc., JC addresses this directly and goes in detail into the premise of the question, what the rule intent is, and even how he's given bad advice on it in the past that he now does not support (ie, he retracts his 2015 statement that the mount would not be able to act independently when ridden)
https://youtu.be/99tX6tmc73Q?t=33m39s
It's a long video but only the 2 mins after 33:39 are relevant to this. There is additionally a section from 15:00-19:00 discussing independent mounts in general which may also be of interest, in which JC actually recommends handing control of independent mounts over to players anyway, as you might do for a summoned creature etc., unless there is a strong reason not to do so.
Would also like to say that I fully agree with everything Chicken_champ has said about when the target of a spell is determined & that this has no effect on the duration the spell stays active, though as I said I wouldn't be too annoyed with the DM if they made a ruling that the spell effects disappeared when I dismounted, it's just not RAW.
First off, as everyone including JC knows, what JC says on Twitter is not an official rule, and is really no more valuable than the opinion of any other DM. Second, what a bunch of people say on the internet is also not a rule.
Third, if you are referring to the conversation spawned by this tweet: https://mobile.twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/970111071955464198
It is not making your point for you. It simply says you can decide if you want the mount to be controlled or not. It does nothing to change the rules about mounted combat. It just says you can decide if you want to control your mount or not. It says nothing about allowing a controlled mount to act like an uncontrolled mount. And just because you are using the word “directing” instead of controlling doesn’t change anything. They are synonymous in this situation. If you tell the mount “go there” and it does, you have controlled it.