Mounted Characters/units

[ausrick]

Ok, in d20/3.0/3.5, if a character is mounted on a warhorse and is chargeing and or attacking, does his horse get to do damage too? i.e. hoof hoof bite? I seem to have seen different publications hint different ways and I can't cite anything so I'm a little confused. Any help to clear this up will be appreciated.

[Benjamin]

I tend to think, due to the info below...



<H5 id=movementDuringaCharge>Movement During a Charge

You must move before your attack, not after. You must move at least 10 feet (2 squares) and may move up to double your speed directly toward the designated opponent.

You must have a clear path toward the opponent, and nothing can hinder your movement (such as difficult terrain or obstacles). Here’s what it means to have a clear path. First, you must move to the closest space from which you can attack the opponent. (If this space is occupied or otherwise blocked, you can’t charge.) Second, if any line from your starting space to the ending space passes through a square that blocks movement, slows movement, or contains a creature (even an ally), you can’t charge. (Helpless creatures don’t stop a charge.)

If you don’t have line of sight to the opponent at the start of your turn, you can’t charge that opponent.

You can’t take a 5-foot step in the same round as a charge.

If you are able to take only a standard action or a move action on your turn, you can still charge, but you are only allowed to move up to your speed (instead of up to double your speed). You can’t use this option unless you are restricted to taking only a standard action or move action on your turn.

Attacking on a Charge
</H5>After moving, you may make a single melee attack. You get a +2 bonus on the attack roll. and take a -2 penalty to your AC until the start of your next turn.

A charging character gets a +2 bonus on the Strength check made to bull rush an opponent.

Even if you have extra attacks, such as from having a high enough base attack bonus or from using multiple weapons, you only get to make one attack during a charge.


Heavy Warhorse description
A heavy warhorse can fight while carrying a rider, but the rider cannot also attack unless he or she succeeds on a Ride check.
... that your mount is unable to attack during a charge. Doing a charge seems to be hard, and having your horse bucking around beneath you to attack things will certainly offer a hindrance to your charge.

That's MHO.

[Rhiannon Faramiriel]

I realize we are talking about game mechanics, but from a realistic POV, during a charge, if someone gets in the path of a charging horse, there are a few things that can happen:

1) Target gets trampled
2) Target gets bumped, and if you've ever had a horse "bump" into you, at speed (15-24 mph), this will knock you off balance if not dump you into the dirt. I've seen hefty adults bowled over by shetland ponies.
3) the horse, if the DM knows about horse psychology, may not want to step on said person and go for a hole in the ranks.
4) The recipient of the charge has to make a morale roll to see if they can face a 700 - 1600lb animal running toward them at full speed. It is an awesome and scary feeling.

In game context, a horse would not have time to bite, kick, or strike with it's hooves at a full gallop, other than running the poor person over or knocking them aside.

I would tend to think though that there should be some extra damage from the impact on a ground target.

As an aside, realistically, you couldn't get a horse up to full speed in 10 feet. Think about how big an animal a horse really is and their body length.

I've seen horses buck down a list in real life, only the skill of the rider kept him in the saddle and he still managed to hit his target, but it wasn't a clean strike. If something like that happened in the context of a game, the DM could apply a to hit penalty and probably a horsemanship check.

Horse attacks (such as aires above ground) would come during a melee. Once the change is over, the rider throws the lance aside and the saddle weapon of choice comes out (hammer, mace, etc...). You guide your horse with the bridle hand or leg aides (horsemanship rolls). You'd have to be a really good horseman in the context of the game to use two weapons simultaneously without controlling the horse with the bit.

I think only at this time would your warhorse be able to apply damage of it's own. It could bite, cow kick, rear and strike with front hooves. A rider would find it difficult to strike if your horse pitched forward and kicked out with it's hind legs. Same thing is true of the Capriole. Where unless you have a spear, your horse is completely off the ground and kicks out with its hind legs, you'd have some difficulty reaching a target on the ground with a shorter weapon. If you seen the Lippizzaners of the Spanish Riding School in Vienna, you'll know the move I'm talking about.

Sorry... I'm an equestrian in the real world and it tends to bleed over into my games. ;)

[ausrick]

but, if you were just attacking say round after a charge, then yes?

[ausrick]

and the horse gets to bite as well?

[Rhiannon Faramiriel]

After the charge, you'd have to probably reroll an initiative to re-engage your opponent, unless you get bogged down in an melee immediately after the charge.

In which case, the horse should be able to attack any foe near its rider.

Oh yeah, horses can bite even with a bit in their mouth.

There's an example of a medieval warhorse who after one battle was severly injured by halberds, and survived his wounds. In every battle that he was in after that, if anyone got near him with a halberd, the horse would immediately grab it with it's teeth and yank it from the wielder's hands.

I would say that the horse would either get to bite, kick, or strike, but not a combo at the same time.

[Athos69]

Anatomy of a mounted charge
(culled from the PHB 3.5)

A rider decides to charge an opponent on foot, and spurs his horse to move the requisite 10+ feet to do so. Both the mount and the rider suffer the +2 penalty to their AC, but both gain the +2 bonus to their attack rolls. The rider, being of higher elevation than the target will get an additional +1 bonus to his attack roll for 'higher ground'. The mount, being on the ground, will not.

If the rider successfully makes a DC 5 Ride check, he can use both hands in combat, to (potentialy) gain a shield bonus to his AC or to wield a 2-handed weapon. If he makes a seperate Ride check at DC 10, he can fight in addition to his warhorse, else only the warhorse can engage in combat.

This means that yes, a mount would get an attack, but only a single attack, since it moved when executing the charge. Since the Hoof attack is what is listed first (and has the highest attack bonus) for a Warhorse in the Monster Manual 3.5, the single attack would be a hoof strike at the target. Note that the horse will always get an attack, but the rider may not.

Things get a bit more complex when the rider has Trample and attempts an overrun. Following the steps outlined on p. 157 of the PHB 3.5, tho opponent has no option to avoid the charge, and according to p. 102 under Trample,
"Your mount may make one hoof attack against any target that you knock down, gaining the standard +4 bonus on attack rolls against prone targets."
As a DM myself, I would rule that the mount would get an additional hoof attack, bringing the total attacks to two in this case.

The Ride-by Attack feat allows you to continue moving after you do all this wonderful nastiness to your target and sets you up for a repeat performance on the next combat round...

In the case of a combat round where the horse and rider did not move, the horse would get a full attack (hoof/hoof/bite) and if the rider made a DC 10 ride check, he too would get a full attack.

[ausrick]

fun mechanics point:



Trample [General]

Prerequisites: Ride skill, Mounted Combat.

Benefit: When the character attempts to overrun an opponent while mounted, the target may not choose to avoid the character.

If the character knocks down the target, the character's mount may make one hoof attack against the target, gaining the standard

+4 bonus on attack rolls against prone targets.




As to what you were saying about being hard to still attack and have the horse attacking and thrashing about, thats why there is a ride check associated with it, I can't remember how high it is but I think I recall it being DC 20, meaning that a level one rider skilled all the way up in ride would have to roll depending on attributes 12-16 on a d20.

What I wonder though is that a Heavy War Horse packs quite a wallop if it gets a full attack (i.e. doesn't move more than 5ft in the round), I'm not sure if getting the double damage with the lance and a +2 to hit at -2 ac is quite worth not getting to hit anything with the horse, which I would assume as Rhiannon said, is a very heavy fast moving weapon in and of itself. But what it comes down to is what the developers of the d20 system intend. I would honestly think that maybe the horse gets one attack as well? IF the rider only gets one attack no matter how his/her multiple attacks are figured, then maybe the horse would get only one attack, as they are technically individual creatures working in tandum of a sorts. so you could say the horse is chargeing, AND the rider is charging, sharing the same movement speed and initiative. I don't know I'm just rambling now.

Another thing I would think is if your morale failed while you were being charged by a war horse, you would be more screwed than if you stood fast. The horseman could, with his faster movement and already charging momentum, run you down from behind.

If any of you have the "Cry Havoc" d20 mass combat suppliment, this is what does not make sense about their cavalry unit chargeing a ground unit morale ruleset. They basically say if a cavalry unit during its turn charges a foot unit, that foot unit has to make a morale save before damage is dealt and if it fails it immediately routes a full move. The cavalry, if they have moves left can pursue, if they reach the foot unit again in the same turn the foot unit must make another morale check, or route another move. This continues until the foot unit stands firm or the cavalry runs out of moves.

To me this is BS, I've always understood that one of the great attributes of cavalry was the ability to run down fleeing but slower moving combatants. and in this scenario, you could almost in one turn chase a unit all over the entire battlefield until your cavalry got tired and still not engage a single one of them. I rarely have such a "thats crap" attitude about a printed rule, especially one printed by someone so respected for his books in the RPG community, but maybe I'm just missing the point of that morale vrs cavarly charge rule.

[ausrick]

My previous post makes much more sense and sounds a lot less ignorant if you read it BEFORE Athos69's reply, Dang it takes me too long to type and press submit. :)

[irdeggman]

When you charge you no longer get to do a full attack action and are limited to a single attack.

The warhorse's primary attacks are its hooves with its bite as a secondary attack (order they are listed in the MM).

So on a charge the horse could reasonably make an attack with a single hoof following all of the normal rules for a charging.

Once in melee both rider and horse can perform full attacks if not moving. The rider is using the horse's move instead of his so he can perform full attack actions when riding.

But in order for the rider to make any attacks on a warhorse (the animal can attack) he needs to make a ride check DC 5 as a free action.

[Athos69]

Um Duane, it's a DC 10 check to fight with a warhorse, as per p. 80 PHB. The DC5 check is to guide the horse with your knees, freeing up a second hand for shield work, spellcasting or a weapon.

-Mike

[Rhiannon Faramiriel]

Just confirms my belief that the folks that wrote the Core Rules don't know a lot about how cavalry and mounted combat really works. ;)


Another thing I would think is if your morale failed while you were being charged by a war horse, you would be more screwed than if you stood fast. The horseman could, with his faster movement and already charging momentum, run you down from behind.

Yes, when a medieval battle broke, the fleeing side would generally be slaughtered. I cite the Battle of Towton 1461. When the Lancastrians broke, the Yorkists under Edward IV, SLAUGHTERED them. Their cavalry reserve rode them down and hacked them to bits.


J

[irdeggman]

That's what I get for typing so fast.

DC 10 it is.

There are no morale checks in 3.0/3.5 anymore. Only the BRCS has morale for unit combat, not for individual combat.

[Osprey]

Things get a bit more complex when the rider has Trample and attempts an overrun. Following the steps outlined on p. 157 of the PHB 3.5, tho opponent has no option to avoid the charge, and according to p. 102 under Trample,
Quote:
"Your mount may make one hoof attack against any target that you knock down, gaining the standard +4 bonus on attack rolls against prone targets."

As a DM myself, I would rule that the mount would get an additional hoof attack, bringing the total attacks to two in this case.

Overrun IS a form of attack (standard action), thus it would replace the hoof attack. The horse whose rider has the Trample feat gets the bonus effect of not only knocking an opponent down, but then stomping on the poor bugger with a free hoof attack vs. a prone target. So not 2 hoof attacks, but an overrun attack + free hoof strike if the overrun is successful (fair chance vs. a human opponent, since the horse is large and quite strong).


The Ride-by Attack feat allows you to continue moving after you do all this wonderful nastiness to your target and sets you up for a repeat performance on the next combat round...

I'm not too certain about that...my recollection is that a charge attack is defined by the fact that you end your movement at the target (check combat rules to verify, I have no PHB in my current location). Which would mean that Ride-By Attack applies only to a standard attack, not a charge (big difference for the lance-wielders, and anyone with Spirited Charge feat, most especially Cavaliers).

However, no reason Ride-By Attack (rider) and Trample (steed) couldn't work together.

Also, keep situations in mind. Ride-By Attack is ideal against lone targets and fleeing (slower) enemies. Not so useful against a tight-packed defensive formation (ex: infantry braced for charge), where there's no space for the horse to "ride by."

I believe Ride-By Attack is limited to the horse making a single move (?), so it doesn't have the reach of a charge move (up to 2x speed).

Finally, re. a "Ride-By Charge," consider the practical aspect: will a charge really have the same force of impact if the horse and rider are trying to maintain their forward momentum? One of the things that makes a charge with a lance so deadly is the hurtling mass of horse and rider being suddenly transferred through the lance point - WHAM! Man, that's gotta hurt... No wonder lances broke all the time, and people got killed and maimed in tourneys. Whether the lance has a sharp or blunt tip, that's a tremendous amount of force concentrated in a very small area. I imagine the Spirited Charge feat represents the expertise of a skilled jouster being able to consistently hit more squarely, along with techniques like timing his bracing in the stirrups, and rising up and forward to add his own forward surge to the power of the attack.

OK, I'm done dissecting now... :eek:

Osprey

[irdeggman]

Nope, Ride-by-Attack (from the SRD):


RIDE-BY ATTACK [GENERAL]

Prerequisites: Ride 1 rank, Mounted Combat.

Benefit: When you are mounted and use the charge action, you may move and attack as if with a standard charge and then move again (continuing the straight line of the charge). Your total movement for the round can’t exceed double your mounted speed. You and your mount do not provoke an attack of opportunity from the opponent that you attack.

Special: A fighter may select Ride-By Attack as one of his fighter bonus feats.

[Osprey]

Heh, well, I never really realized that...Ride-By Attack+Charge...sick. :cool:

You learn something new everyday, eh?

[irdeggman]

Yes the it is the whole point of ride-by-attack, otherwise the charge ends with the attack. Note that no extra movement is allowed by the feat only the fact that the attack doesn't end the movement.

[RaspK_FOG]

Heh, well, I never really realized that...Ride-By Attack+Charge...sick. :cool:

You learn something new everyday, eh?Add the use of Spirited Charge and the use of a lance to the equation and tell me what you think! :D

That's an interesting idea: we could work on typical stats for individual unit members; for example, Anuirean heavy cavalryman, Ride-By Attack, Spirited Charge, Weapon Focus (lance) [...]

[Osprey]

Add the use of Spirited Charge and the use of a lance to the equation and tell me what you think!

Spirited Charge? Yeah, that's nasty...check out a cavalier on the rampage and tell me what you think.

In my epic BR campaign (PCs hitting 25th-30th levels), the champion of Roesone, Sir Alencon de Vries, is an epic cavalier...at x6 damage with a charging lance each round, well...the ability to do that every single round is pretty disgusting.

With a clear line, a cavalryman with the Ride-By Attack Feat can charge back and forth every round, AND can ignore attacks of opportunity from his opponent. Of course, when you have more than one enemy, there are two problems: having a clear line of movement, and the attacks of opportunity that your target's buddies get to make against you. That could add up to a lot of punishment for trying to ride through enemy lines.


That's an interesting idea: we could work on typical stats for individual unit members; for example, Anuirean heavy cavalryman, Ride-By Attack, Spirited Charge, Weapon Focus (lance) [...]

I've done some of that for my campaign, though not all written out. In truth, "typical" soldiers of a given unit type will vary somewhat depending on your campaign style and level.

Ex.: In my campaign (one in which professional armies of veteran troops have become a norm), I allow professional (career) soldiers of standing armies to be Fighters rather than Warriors. Green soldiers can be treated as Warriors (which is a fair approximation to a "level 0" Fighter), Regulars are typically 1st level Fighters, Veterans 2-3, Elite 3-5, Crack 4-6. Unit size can affect this some...scout and knight units typically have fewer but higher-level members.

I give sergeants (squad leaders) +1 base level, lieutenants +2, and captains (unit commanders) +3 or more.

Naturally, these are loose guidelines from which to base individual encounters. There are plenty of exceptions, like the young but inexperienced noble officers (who get promoted early with their connections).

In this system, I'd assume an "average" Anuirean Knight would be a 4th level Fighter. With 6 feats and 4d10 HD, plus heavy armor on himself and his warhorse, this makes whole companies of these men real terrors on the battlefield. As dedicated heavy cavalrymen, their feats might be Mounted Combat, Ride-By Attack, Spirited Charge, Trample, Weapon Focus (lance), and Weapon Specialization (lance). Specialist lancers/jousters. Veterans, champions, and experienced officers might add sword specialties, skill focus (ride), Power Attack and Cleave, and may progress as Cavaliers. [not core, I know, but too perfect a fit to ignore; besides, I've been using Cavaliers since Dragon #72 had the writeup on them.]

I usually make Regular+ Scouts ranger-class troops, but fewer in numbers (hence the -1 Hits as a unit modifier while retaining excellent missile firepower).

Rangers would all have Track (along with skills like Survival, K/Nature, etc.) and one favored enemy (usually humans or goblins for Anuireans), and probably have feats like Point Blank Shot and Run. Veterans might gain Rapid Shot (L2), then Dodge and Endurance (L3).

Experienced companies of scouts are probably very diverse in their membership, more so than regulars. Some very grizzled officers and long-time veterans (level 6+) might work right alongside some new recruits (L1-2).

[Rhiannon Faramiriel]

Spirited Charge? Yeah, that's nasty...check out a cavalier on the rampage and tell me what you think.

In my epic BR campaign (PCs hitting 25th-30th levels), the champion of Roesone, Sir Alencon de Vries, is an epic cavalier...at x6 damage with a charging lance each round, well...the ability to do that every single round is pretty disgusting.



What does this guy have the "Unbreakable lance of mass destruction" or an artifact? ;) Is this amount of damage what you want or does it seem to unbalance things?

Seems to me if the lance is made of regular wood, like they are historically, it would eventually shatter which would cut down on the every "round" bit.

[Osprey]

What does this guy have the "Unbreakable lance of mass destruction" or an artifact? ;) Is this amount of damage what you want or does it seem to unbalance things?

Seems to me if the lance is made of regular wood, like they are historically, it would eventually shatter which would cut down on the every "round" bit.

Oops, my mistake, he's "only" at x5 charge damage with the lance.

A 10th level Cavalier (so c. 15th level+) gets Unstoppable Charge (x5 mounted charge with lance, x4 with melee weapon).

Yeah, I don't really get Ride-By Attack with a lance, as far as logic and believability are concerned. How do you retain the weapon and still deal the tremendous charging damage? Not to mention keeping the thing intact. Magic lances should have a very high resistance to breakage, otherwise they wouldn't exist. Thus, ironwood shafts, along with the strengthening of enhancement bonuses, would be pretty smart basics.

And you did notice that I was describibg an epic campaign? In epic, the numbers get huge on all ends of the various class and monster spectrums. The champion's charge damage is incredible, but it is only one attack per round, vs. the epic fighter with Dire Charge who runs in to deliver a full attack (5 attacks, hasted) at the start, vs. Maximized, Twinned, or Intensified spells being flung about. Epic combat turns very deadly no matter what class...

Also, I'm not runnign a particularly low-magic campaign, but rather one more in-line with standard D&D and perhaps even a bit more powerful now. It started off resonably low-magic, but in order to keep enemy regents and NPC's challengin, more and more magical gear kept falling into the hands of the victors (the PCs)...and things sort of spiralled away from there. Nowadays, I don't really think my BR world bears a whole lot of resemblance to the low-magic setting being fleshed out for the BRCS project. Finishing its third year (real-time), it has very much become its own beastie, but it's a good time. :)

Osprey

[ausrick]

The way 3rd ed. handles epic levels, I doubt it would be anything less than a +5 magical lance. it could even be an "Epic" magic item, meaning it can break the +5(+10*) rule of magic arms and armor bonuses and abilities.

Plus, epic characters' abilities are downright almost godlike (some deities aren't even as high of level as some characters using those rules), it seems like you would run into the quandry alot where the things the characters are capable of are super human. I'm sure if Super man charged with a lance he would get atleast x6 damage but "realistically" if the lance wasn't made of some material designed to hold up to his super power, it would probably break, but that kind of realism isn't "fun" in a game if it lets you attain superhero powers but forces realism on the tools of the trade and so doesn't let you use them.

Which is why a lot of people (myself included) struggle with using epic level stuff in settings like Birthright or Ravenloft. Epic levels just start escalating and before you know it your campaign could turn out to resemble Dragon Ball Z more than 15th century europe + magic.

about steering with legs, a DC 5 does seem a little easy, then again, an expert horseman (lvl 1 expert, 4 ranks in ride) is only going to have a 4 or 5 which means he can only steer with his knees 95-100% of the time, and ride it into combat 70-75% of the time. But PC's are about 20 notches above the rest sometimes it seems when it comes to ability. I think the designers were mainly anticipating the use of a shield with that check, or figured that you were penalized for using two weapons enough as it is. (without two weapon fighting and other feats, depending on version of the rules you can be looking at a -4/-10 penalty to your to hit roll) Now me, I can't even imagine trying to ride a war horse into battle at all, but that is because in rl I have probably a 10 Dex and 0 ranks in ride skill. :) in game mechanics that gives me a 50/50% to ride a war horse into battle. I suppose they assume that since the horse is specifically trained for war it would do most of the work ;) I think an untrained for combat mount though has a DC of 20, meaning it would probably buck me off just for thinking about fighting on it.

plus, the skill system sometimes seems broken for the sake of balance and ease of gameplay at the expense of reality. in D20, I think learning a foriegn language takes two skill points, but to give you a 10% better chance at knowing something in Knowledge (religion) also costs two skill points, and then only if it is a class skill. I had two semesters of religion classes, yet took german for 3 years. I am any where but fluent in german, but I think I would get that 10% bonus to any checks on religion related questions and topics. But I think the guys at Wotc did a pretty good job over all. . . My friend has owned a gaming store for 20 years, I've heard some horror stories about some broken gaming systems he's tested and played around with.:p all you can hope for is that when people publish a new version of something and keep on refining it, you come out with an improvement as opposed to a de-evolution.

[ausrick]

Question about the Ride-by-Attack feat, does that assume that you ride through the square occupied? what if the square directly behind the target, and to both sides is also occupied? (i.e. tight infantry formation) and I'm thinking more from a rules standpoint. We all know that if you stand in the way of the bus you get ran over (unless there are enough of you to swarm the bus and thus bog it down, at the expensive cost to those ranks who made contact with the bus first).

[irdeggman]

Question about the Ride-by-Attack feat, does that assume that you ride through the square occupied? what if the square directly behind the target, and to both sides is also occupied? (i.e. tight infantry formation) and I'm thinking more from a rules standpoint. We all know that if you stand in the way of the bus you get ran over (unless there are enough of you to swarm the bus and thus bog it down, at the expensive cost to those ranks who made contact with the bus first).

You only get to attack once in the round. So if you attempt to move into an occupied space after you've used your attack (either the normal charge or the trample one) you don't get an additional attack.

You also can't move into an occupied space without an attack of some kind either - so you can't technally use the ride-by-attack if you have no where to continue your movment. Ride-by-attack requires the continued movement to be in a straight line from the point of origin (basically a continued charge).

If you can't move there then it is simply a charge that ends at the point of contact.

[RaspK_FOG]

Overrunning and trampling are important tactical choices for cavalry, especially of the heavy variety... As for lances, well, most weapons should be penalised likewise, then, in a realistic campaign: their hit points (and hardness) should be pitted against the items they face (and their hardness), thus having the occassional club or spear breaking here and there... Yet D&D does not concern itself with such "trivia."

[Osprey]

Quote:
Originally Posted by ausrick
Question about the Ride-by-Attack feat, does that assume that you ride through the square occupied? what if the square directly behind the target, and to both sides is also occupied? (i.e. tight infantry formation) and I'm thinking more from a rules standpoint. We all know that if you stand in the way of the bus you get ran over (unless there are enough of you to swarm the bus and thus bog it down, at the expensive cost to those ranks who made contact with the bus first).


You only get to attack once in the round. So if you attempt to move into an occupied space after you've used your attack (either the normal charge or the trample one) you don't get an additional attack.

You also can't move into an occupied space without an attack of some kind either - so you can't technally use the ride-by-attack if you have no where to continue your movment. Ride-by-attack requires the continued movement to be in a straight line from the point of origin (basically a continued charge).

If you can't move there then it is simply a charge that ends at the point of contact.

I've been wondering if the horse couldn't Overrun/Trample an opponent in the way while the rider attacks the same or an adjacent opponent with a lance or sword? While both character's use the mount's speed for movement, what about the standard action or charge attack? Doesn't the horse get its own, and couldn't that be an overrun (as part of a charge, while the rider does a ride-by attack)?

I think the general assumption with Ride-By Attack is that you attack and ride past the target, not over or through them unless doing an overrun (much like a tourney joust).

[ausrick]

Sounds like they need to make another feat :)

It makes me wonder though, because obviously the outcome of riding by/through loosely spaced opponents as opposed to a tight formation or phalanx seems quite different. On the other hand, I've understood that a heavy cavalry charge could land you well into the second or third row of an enemy formation before your momentum stopped. In DnD there aren't any rules for momentem, that would be cumbersome and with combat being cyclicle and turn based it is hard to interpret if it means the horse actually comes to a stop at the end of a charge or not. for instance, after running up and attacking a solo individual from horse back, would it really take a feat to keep moving because the horse isn't going to want to stop on a dime anyways? Movement becomes complicated because RPG's are so often geared towards standing and taking turns duking-it-out it can be hard to imagine what is supposedly going on "realistically" underneath.