So I'm looking to make Sir Didymus and he's gonna be partly a custom race (small variant) battlesmith with mounted combatant and the saddle of the cavalier item. so if I cast misty step while mounted do I get to take my mount with me for it? Any help is welcomed. I guess added onto this can I cast Shadow Blade and have both myself and my mount (even if just the normal summon steed spell) Be using an individual shadow blade?
While Misty Step won't work on a normal mount, it would work on the mount that you summon with the find steed spell. As mentioned within the verbiage of said spell:
Your steed serves you as a mount, both in combat and out, and you have an instinctive bond with it that allows you to fight as a seamless unit. While mounted on your steed, you can make any spell you cast that targets only you also target your steed.
Since misty step has a range of self, you could cast the spell and teleport both yourself and your [summoned] steed to an unoccupied space within 30 feet.
While it doesn't specifically state anything that prohibits your [summoned] steed from being able to wield a shadow blade as well, I would expect most DMs would disallow it. The simple fact that the shadow blade spell creates a sword in your hand would disallow most mounts from holding the magical weapon (i.e., the steed lacking hands).
While Misty Step won't work on a normal mount, it would work on the mount that you summon with the find steed spell. As mentioned within the verbiage of said spell:
Your steed serves you as a mount, both in combat and out, and you have an instinctive bond with it that allows you to fight as a seamless unit. While mounted on your steed, you can make any spell you cast that targets only you also target your steed.
Since misty step has a range of self, you could cast the spell and teleport both yourself and your [summoned] steed to an unoccupied space within 30 feet.
While it doesn't specifically state anything that prohibits your [summoned] steed from being able to wield a shadow blade as well, I would expect most DMs would disallow it. The simple fact that the shadow blade spell creates a sword in your hand would disallow most mounts from holding the magical weapon (i.e., the steed lacking hands).
mhm, the thing I was debating was if you could have the steed hold in its mouth and atk. I feel its a weird gray area.
mhm, the thing I was debating was if you could have the steed hold in its mouth and atk. I feel its a weird gray area.
If we're strictly looking at the rules (i.e., RAW), then I would stand by the idea that the [summoned] steed would not be able to benefit from a shadow blade (or similar) spell.
The shadow blade spell specifically states that it creates the weapon in the caster's hand, so a steed without a hand would technically not be able to hold it.
None of the various mounts listed under the find steed spell have the ability to use weapons as an action. In other words, all of their "attack" actions involve using their hooves, horns, teeth, etc.
Having said that, a DM could certainly interpret the rules differently for the sake of gameplay. You stated that you're creating a "Sir Didymus" character, so I'm assuming that you're using the mastiff option of the find steed spell to have a large dog mount, yes? DM might say that your dog mount could hold the shadow blade in its jaws in place of a hand. They could even say that the dog, which normally using its mouth to bite, could swing the shadow blade with its head to land an attack.
Definitely goes beyond what I believe the rules would normally allow, but it could certainly be an option if the DM is open to it. I wouldn't necessarily expect it for something like shadow blade, though.
Battlesmiths don't have access to find steed, so that won't really be an option for you.
For misty step, the range is self, so no, it would not apply to your mount. Though battle smith's don't get access to that spell either, so again, not really an issue. (As others have said, it would apply to a mount you have via find steed, but that's only for paladins).
Shadow blade, also, is not a spell to which you would have access as a battlesmith. But for argument's sake, it, too, has a range of self, so you couldn't give it to your mount (with the find steed exception, though that would be a bit weird, as other noted.)
So, in short, you can't (by RAW) cast any of the spells you mention, so it should really uncomplicate things.
You also might want to look over the rules for mounted combat. If you control the mount, it can only dash, dodge or disengage. If you want to mount to be able to attack, you don't "control" it. It will act on its own initiative (which may or may not work to your benefit -- you're kind of screwed if it goes after you, so you're just sitting there, waiting for it to move.) This is something you'd really need to discuss with your DM, and pin down the definition of "control." If that means the DM will decide what the mount will do or you do. If I was DMing, I wouldn't want the hassle of another creature to control in a fight, but yours might rule differently.
Lol, I like your spirit, but a horse holding a shadow blade in its mouth is not really a gray area - it is definitely in homebrew territory. Try holding a knife in your own mouth and see what kind of attack moves you can perform - you're like 10 times more likely to hurt yourself than anyone else.
There are a lot of spells and effects in this game that turn an adventurer into a different creature, and even though these are intelligent, trained individuals they still can't use weapons in that form unless they are something very close to humanoid, like an ape. A horse has neither the training or the physiology to attack with a sword.
Lol, I like your spirit, but a horse holding a shadow blade in its mouth is not really a gray area - it is definitely in homebrew territory. Try holding a knife in your own mouth and see what kind of attack moves you can perform - you're like 10 times more likely to hurt yourself than anyone else.
There are a lot of spells and effects in this game that turn an adventurer into a different creature, and even though these are intelligent, trained individuals they still can't use weapons in that form unless they are something very close to humanoid, like an ape. A horse has neither the training or the physiology to attack with a sword.
but but but Sanji from One Piece can do it, I can too! XD hahaha oh I agree though, more just thinking outside the box for other ideas. I also should mention (sorry I didnt earlier) I am only going 3rd level battlesmith and mostly using the "pet" from that as my mount. I will be going the rest in wizard and from there, when needed, cast the phantom steed, usually as a ritual. This is mostly just for reskinning when I need underwater travel (already approved to do it). Granted, by that logic I could ask the BS mount be able to have a swim speed too. Hmmmm...
Either way though yeah the SB idea is almost entirely too out of the box, the misty step idea failing means I may have to look into thunderstep or dim door.
Battlesmiths don't have access to find steed, so that won't really be an option for you.
For misty step, the range is self, so no, it would not apply to your mount. Though battle smith's don't get access to that spell either, so again, not really an issue. (As others have said, it would apply to a mount you have via find steed, but that's only for paladins).
Shadow blade, also, is not a spell to which you would have access as a battlesmith. But for argument's sake, it, too, has a range of self, so you couldn't give it to your mount (with the find steed exception, though that would be a bit weird, as other noted.)
So, in short, you can't (by RAW) cast any of the spells you mention, so it should really uncomplicate things.
You also might want to look over the rules for mounted combat. If you control the mount, it can only dash, dodge or disengage. If you want to mount to be able to attack, you don't "control" it. It will act on its own initiative (which may or may not work to your benefit -- you're kind of screwed if it goes after you, so you're just sitting there, waiting for it to move.) This is something you'd really need to discuss with your DM, and pin down the definition of "control." If that means the DM will decide what the mount will do or you do. If I was DMing, I wouldn't want the hassle of another creature to control in a fight, but yours might rule differently.
The aspect of the control, wouldn't that be superseded by the aspect of how its worded for the battlesmith (to still make a bonus action attack), or the phantom steed spell details, or am I wrong in that thought?
I’d forgotten about the battle smith action. Yes, you are right, that specific would beat the general rule of mounted combat. So you could use the steel defender to attack with your bonus action. And if you are a small creature you could use it as a mount, no problem since it’s medium. Come to think of it, if you want it to have a sword in its mouth, you could easily flavor it that way. Say you built the thing to look like it has a sword in its mouth, and when it makes its weapon attack from the stat block, that’s what it is using. As for phantom steed, no. There nothing in the spell description that would allow it to do anything differently from the standard mounted combat rules.
And phantom steed is not like find steed. You still can’t bring the phantom steed with you when you misty step.
I’d forgotten about the battle smith action. Yes, you are right, that specific would beat the general rule of mounted combat. So you could use the steel defender to attack with your bonus action. And if you are a small creature you could use it as a mount, no problem since it’s medium. Come to think of it, if you want it to have a sword in its mouth, you could easily flavor it that way. Say you built the thing to look like it has a sword in its mouth, and when it makes its weapon attack from the stat block, that’s what it is using. As for phantom steed, no. There nothing in the spell description that would allow it to do anything differently from the standard mounted combat rules.
And phantom steed is not like find steed. You still can’t bring the phantom steed with you when you misty step.
Rock on, at least I can still do the Steel Defender craziness, and good to know for the phantom. Thank ya!
You want a homebrew version of a combination of Misty Step and Thunder Step, without the damage of Thunder Step. Make it a subclass ability at lvl 6 with proficiency bonus uses per long rest and I think it would balance well.
As an alternative, could make it a feature of a Rare Wonderous Magic Item.
You want a homebrew version of a combination of Misty Step and Thunder Step, without the damage of Thunder Step. Make it a subclass ability at lvl 6 with proficiency bonus uses per long rest and I think it would balance well.
As an alternative, could make it a feature of a Rare Wonderous Magic Item.
Great thinking, I'll look into to see if available. Thanks.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
So I'm looking to make Sir Didymus and he's gonna be partly a custom race (small variant) battlesmith with mounted combatant and the saddle of the cavalier item. so if I cast misty step while mounted do I get to take my mount with me for it? Any help is welcomed. I guess added onto this can I cast Shadow Blade and have both myself and my mount (even if just the normal summon steed spell) Be using an individual shadow blade?
While Misty Step won't work on a normal mount, it would work on the mount that you summon with the find steed spell. As mentioned within the verbiage of said spell:
Since misty step has a range of self, you could cast the spell and teleport both yourself and your [summoned] steed to an unoccupied space within 30 feet.
While it doesn't specifically state anything that prohibits your [summoned] steed from being able to wield a shadow blade as well, I would expect most DMs would disallow it. The simple fact that the shadow blade spell creates a sword in your hand would disallow most mounts from holding the magical weapon (i.e., the steed lacking hands).
mhm, the thing I was debating was if you could have the steed hold in its mouth and atk. I feel its a weird gray area.
If we're strictly looking at the rules (i.e., RAW), then I would stand by the idea that the [summoned] steed would not be able to benefit from a shadow blade (or similar) spell.
Having said that, a DM could certainly interpret the rules differently for the sake of gameplay. You stated that you're creating a "Sir Didymus" character, so I'm assuming that you're using the mastiff option of the find steed spell to have a large dog mount, yes? DM might say that your dog mount could hold the shadow blade in its jaws in place of a hand. They could even say that the dog, which normally using its mouth to bite, could swing the shadow blade with its head to land an attack.
Definitely goes beyond what I believe the rules would normally allow, but it could certainly be an option if the DM is open to it. I wouldn't necessarily expect it for something like shadow blade, though.
Battlesmiths don't have access to find steed, so that won't really be an option for you.
For misty step, the range is self, so no, it would not apply to your mount. Though battle smith's don't get access to that spell either, so again, not really an issue. (As others have said, it would apply to a mount you have via find steed, but that's only for paladins).
Shadow blade, also, is not a spell to which you would have access as a battlesmith. But for argument's sake, it, too, has a range of self, so you couldn't give it to your mount (with the find steed exception, though that would be a bit weird, as other noted.)
So, in short, you can't (by RAW) cast any of the spells you mention, so it should really uncomplicate things.
You also might want to look over the rules for mounted combat. If you control the mount, it can only dash, dodge or disengage. If you want to mount to be able to attack, you don't "control" it. It will act on its own initiative (which may or may not work to your benefit -- you're kind of screwed if it goes after you, so you're just sitting there, waiting for it to move.) This is something you'd really need to discuss with your DM, and pin down the definition of "control." If that means the DM will decide what the mount will do or you do. If I was DMing, I wouldn't want the hassle of another creature to control in a fight, but yours might rule differently.
Lol, I like your spirit, but a horse holding a shadow blade in its mouth is not really a gray area - it is definitely in homebrew territory. Try holding a knife in your own mouth and see what kind of attack moves you can perform - you're like 10 times more likely to hurt yourself than anyone else.
There are a lot of spells and effects in this game that turn an adventurer into a different creature, and even though these are intelligent, trained individuals they still can't use weapons in that form unless they are something very close to humanoid, like an ape. A horse has neither the training or the physiology to attack with a sword.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
Would be cool to have your horse be like Great Grey Wolf SIf from Dark Souls, but yeah probably impractical.
if I edit a message, most of the time it's because of grammar. The rest of the time I'll put "Edit:" at the bottom.
but but but Sanji from One Piece can do it, I can too! XD hahaha oh I agree though, more just thinking outside the box for other ideas. I also should mention (sorry I didnt earlier) I am only going 3rd level battlesmith and mostly using the "pet" from that as my mount. I will be going the rest in wizard and from there, when needed, cast the phantom steed, usually as a ritual. This is mostly just for reskinning when I need underwater travel (already approved to do it). Granted, by that logic I could ask the BS mount be able to have a swim speed too. Hmmmm...
Either way though yeah the SB idea is almost entirely too out of the box, the misty step idea failing means I may have to look into thunderstep or dim door.
The aspect of the control, wouldn't that be superseded by the aspect of how its worded for the battlesmith (to still make a bonus action attack), or the phantom steed spell details, or am I wrong in that thought?
I’d forgotten about the battle smith action. Yes, you are right, that specific would beat the general rule of mounted combat. So you could use the steel defender to attack with your bonus action. And if you are a small creature you could use it as a mount, no problem since it’s medium.
Come to think of it, if you want it to have a sword in its mouth, you could easily flavor it that way. Say you built the thing to look like it has a sword in its mouth, and when it makes its weapon attack from the stat block, that’s what it is using.
As for phantom steed, no. There nothing in the spell description that would allow it to do anything differently from the standard mounted combat rules.
And phantom steed is not like find steed. You still can’t bring the phantom steed with you when you misty step.
Rock on, at least I can still do the Steel Defender craziness, and good to know for the phantom. Thank ya!
You want a homebrew version of a combination of Misty Step and Thunder Step, without the damage of Thunder Step. Make it a subclass ability at lvl 6 with proficiency bonus uses per long rest and I think it would balance well.
As an alternative, could make it a feature of a Rare Wonderous Magic Item.
Great thinking, I'll look into to see if available. Thanks.