We need mounted rules!

[Darkson71]

Ok, we don't "need" them, but there are so many great ounted figures around I wouldn't mind some coming out.

To go along with the War Bears and Stag Ridders from Dead Earth Games (http://leadadventureforum.com/index.php?topic=82844.0) this popped up in my email today:
http://www.beastsofwar.com/albino-raven-miniatures/albino-raven-mount-sabretooth-battle/

[Elbows]

Until they do...just make some up.  No one's holding you back. 

[Philhelm]

I came up with simple mounted rules as a by-product of coming up with alternative Soldiers in an earlier thread.

Cavalier

Move: 8 / Fight: +4 / Shoot: +0 / Armor: 14 / Will: +1 / Health: 12

Equipment:  Hand Weapon, Shield, Mail Armor, Barded Steed
*Barded Steed: +1 Armor (bonus already included); may not climb; may not carry treasure.
*Control Animal Spell:  Mounted soldiers may be affected by the Control Animal Spell; however, the effects of the spell are identical to the Mind Control spell (including a Will save after each activation, as the rider attempts to regain control of his steed), with the exception that the controlled mounted soldier cannot attack while the spell is activated.

Generic rule suggestions:

Move = X (I chose 8 for the warhorse - this probably shouldn't be too high, for balancing reasons);
Barding confers a +1 Armor bonus;
May not climb;
May not carry treasure;
Different Control Animal spell effect (my special rule above was to represent the mount being effected, but not the rider).

Edit:

If lances were introduced, I would suggest that they add either +2 Fight on the charge (for inherent damage bonus) or +4 damage (higher than a two-hander, but more situational).

[markdienekes]

I think they could get treasure too, though it takes an action to dismount/mount...

[Weezbeez37]

Hey all,

I like the idea of having mounted warriors but there should be a price tag on them.

Let's say 100gc for a horse/creature...
&
200gc for an armored horse/creature...

M/8  F/+2  S/0  A/+1  W/+1  H/+2. ... For 100gc

M/8  F/+3  S/0  A/+3  W/+2  H/+4. ... For 200gc



Weez

[rexscarlet]

I agree there are some very cool mounted miniatures out there, but no real need for mounted rules.
.
Mounts are for open areas.
.
Mounts get spooked (even warhorses) by; tiny Mouse size creatures (imagine Bear size creatures), in tight areas, and by obstacles like fences.
Mounts can also; Break legs, throw riders (causing riders to break body parts).
etc.
FG is a ruined, rubble ridden, snow and ice covered city and much takes place inside buildings where accidents would be abundant.
.
Pack animals, sure.
.
Maybe if the mount was part of the group and counted toward maximum number as a warhound, etc. Maybe make the mount count separately, and instead of a "rider" the member would would be in base contact with his own sides warhound, rules wise, nothing would change.
.
Now real mount rules for FG;
Rules for getting thrown off a mount, rider then being helpless for a turn.
Rules for very costly upkeep of mount, rules for stable, etc.
Rules for cost of saddle, etc.
Rules for difficult terrain, mount breaking an appendage.
Rules for selling the meat once mount has to be put down,
etc.

[punkrabbitt]

Sorry for the thread necromancy here, but I noticed this topic and truly feel the need to add here.

I believe that, given the conditions postulated in the game, that mounted troops would move no faster than people on foot due to debris, ice, loose rock etc. Any advantage or protection provided by being on a mount would be offset by being an easier target.

Mounted models in Frostgrave can be defined by base size, which when provides both benefits and hindrances. I am working on my first mounted wizard, and it will be treated just like any other model, wirh it's own built-in advantages and disadvantages determined by the base and figure size.

[Daysman]

I also think that it's better to keep the rules simple without mounts.
You could maybe use your miniature as "count as" knight or templar and buy "magical boots" (move +1). 

[Like_Clockwork]

When I considered the idea of mounts, I more so thought of it as an ability you would give to a horse figure, as any figure can spend an action to "get on it", then spend its move action to move twice its normal speed, then wherever they land, they would then become separate figures again.

Alternatively, I could see simply a mounted warrior, and I see no problem with it being capable of carrying treasure, but I would say it should be incapable of picking it up. It would function like a fast, tougher pack mule. It can trade items with figures, but that's it. Otherwise all it can do is move around and fight.


Thank you,
Like Clockwork

[CthulhuPunk]

I strongly suspect that we will be getting rules for a mount in Dark Pact later this year. Hell, there is a mounted woolly rhino on the cover! That's gotta be more than a tease. I look forward to an official set of rules and what people will proxy - a horse is fine for a human warband but dwarves need a bear, skaven a giant rat (Reaper do a great one with baggage on it!), and my Drow will want a lizard (old school D&D stylee!)