Tests and Trials OOC

[spiderwrangler]

Dang... was hoping that bless would stick around a bit longer...

[thinkslogically]

Yeah that would have been handy! I'm quite enjoying the lucky feat right about now tho! That crit would have probably screwed me over quite badly...

[Rodgeir]

I gotta to remember you have that as well! It turned a bad round into a meh round.

[thinkslogically]

Well it's only 3 uses per day, and she's used 2 already so we'll see how it goes for the remainder of the day!

[Rodgeir]

So everyone knows, dismounting takes half your movement to do. Probably should have posted this before the fight but better late than never!

[Dlover]

So, I just realised the number of spells clerics can have prepared is impacted by their cleric level, so I've got one more spell to have prepared. Which I won't actually prepare until after this fight, for fairness.

Anyway, once the fight's done, I figure there'll be three options; Command, Inflict Wounds, or Cure Wounds.

Cure Wounds requires touching the target, but heals 1d8+5 as opposed to Healing Word's 60' 1d4+5.

Inflict Wounds is a melee spell, but does 3d10 damage and I'll have +7 to the attack modifier, so pretty easy to hit most targets.

Finally, Command will have a 15DC will save involved, and even though it's only one word it can still be pretty effective. For example, commanding "Surrender" would make the target discard their weapon, possibly go prone, so they'd then have a turn of retrieving their weapon and standing, which makes for two turns of doing nothing. In a big group battle like this, not so useful unless the leader has low wisdom, can ruin morale for the entire group with him surrendering, but would be particularly good with a small number of larger enemies.

Any thoughts on which I should take?

[spiderwrangler]

They are all solid options, Kroshav currently has Command and Cure Wounds prepared (not that it matters now that he's out of spells.

Cure Wounds does do more healing than HW (~2 HP / spell slot level on average), but at the cost of your action. HW does a bit less, but can be done as a bonus action, and at range. If you've got space for both, it's reasonable to keep both, as they serve slightly different roles, but that's also determined by what else you can be doing with your action or bonus action. As far as damage output/turn, right now that's usually going to take an action (eg, weapon attack or toll the dead), so you may get more use from HW during combat, if you prepare spiritual weapon at 3rd + level, then that gives you a bonus action option for damage output, your action can be used to attack or heal while still being able to make attacks.

Inflict Wounds, with an average of 16.5 damage, is one of the higher damage outputs from a 1st level spell (at least vs single target, AoE have higher if enough are near), and as you mentioned, you've got a pretty good chance to hit, and aren't a slouch in terms of AC and HP, so getting in range to use it is a fairly viable option. ((Also the source of the most memorable kill from an in person game I've run... Attack was at advantage against a paralyzed orc boss... double natural 20's. They liquefied him.)) The drawback (besides needing to get up close and personal) is the same with any spell attack that requires a slot... if you miss, the slot is gone with nothing to show for it.

Command has its uses, though 'surrender' would probably fall under DM discretion as to how they behave, as what you're describing combines the 'drop' and 'grovel' examples called out in the spell. Even if they do drop their weapon and go prone, their next turn, they'd still be able to get up for half movement, scoop their weapon, move up to half movement and attack. That being said, 'grovel' is probably the strongest of the examples in combat, as it does give the potential for a full round of allies (and you, next turn) being able to melee attack with advantage against a prone target. I considered using "apologize" against the elf shopkeeper...

TL;DR: Any are good, depending on if you see Lurn serving role of healer, damage output, or control.

[thinkslogically]

Yup, whatever you think suits Lurn the best. I think all three are useful options, but just pick what suits your playstyle. I think you can change your prepared spells after each long rest, can't you? You might not have to actually decide this for the long-term.

[spiderwrangler]

Yeah, clerics, druids, paladins, and wizards can reshuffle from their available spells each day, while bard, ranger, sorcerer and warlock are locked in to what they learn on leveling (but think they can all respec one spell when they level).

[Rodgeir]

Dlover, your application of Command is a bit broad but Spider cleared that up already. Again I get to be the lazy DM because I have two other DMs in the game!

I really like inflict wounds at low levels, A PC melted the 'hard' bad guy with a max damage roll. No crit needed.

[Dlover]

I'd considered Command would be something where if you choose your word right you can get some significant effects out of it - even though the exact result would be up to the DM - but I guess it does take some balancing.
(Though, the weapon would be retrieved as part of the movement? I thought it was movement to stand from being prone and would be Bonus to retrieve the weapon, though that would still leave an action for attacking... And I was mistaken anyway.)

As for what suits Lurn... He's really been half-and-half with "I'll heal people" and "You anger me and I'll explode your head." Maybe I should just stop preparing Detect Poison And Disease and get Cure and Inflict Wounds instead. XD
Though, I'd need a long rest before removing Detect, so I guess I'll start with Cure Wounds. If I really need damage, Guiding Bolt does a good amount and gives advantage to the next attack on that target, and I've already got that prepared.

[spiderwrangler]

It is half your movement to send from prone, so after standing, you still have the other half, action and bonus action. Recovering a weapon would typically fall under a "free object interaction".

PHB: "You can also interact with one object or feature of The Environment for free, during either your move or your action. For example, you could open a door during your move as you stride toward a foe, or you could draw your weapon as part of the same action you use to Attack.

If you want to interact with a second object, you need to use your action. Some Magic Items and other Special Objects always require an action to use, as stated in their descriptions.

The GM might require you to use an action for any of these activities when it needs Special care or when it presents an unusual obstacle. For instance, the GM could reasonably expect you to use an action to open a stuck door or turn a crank to lower a drawbridge."

[Rodgeir]

Picking up a weapon is a free interaction so the only way I could see that working out well would be if the weapon was thrown away from the potential target or to reduce the impact of AoO. There are always potential uses of disarming someone!

[Rodgeir]

Gave Joe's fire a 10% chance of being super effective. It nailed that.

I defer to the rogue experts. I only just got a rogue in my RL campaign and am still learning what he can and can't do.

[Rodgeir]

Ves and Kroshav would know horses are faster than owlbears, it is doubtful Jolly and Jaq would. Lurn would probably know as well. Lurn just doesn't know it's an owlbear yet. Joe... maybe?

[spiderwrangler]

((I did not pick up on that before hahaha! Hope your other stats are better ))

Well, 20 STR, 19 CHA, and 15 CON leaves him with pretty good paladin stats. Who needs smarts?

[Dlover]

ohey, that means Lurn isn't the only demigod on the team then. The two religious people are now. XP

[Rodgeir]

Those stats have made it harder to balance fights... that and luck!

[Dlover]

Welp, you won't have to worry as much about balancing stats if everyone else flees properly, because I think Lurn's being thrown off his horse... Just watch, I'll turn around and intimidate three owlbears into running away.

[thinkslogically]

I'm assuming the moving away with the horse and then shooting isn't affecting in any way how far I can get from the owlbear, correct?

Mounted combat is a little weird, but the horse still gets its own action. While under control [of a rider] it can take the Dash, Disengage or Dodge actions only (i.e. it can't attack), on the same turn as the rider. They can control the animal for free (context depending of course), and still get their action to attack if they want it. Their movement becomes that of the mount.

So, following the book: Jaq should be able to attack and still have the horse use its action to Dash him away as fast as the rest of us.

Usual caveat: All rules are enacted at the DM's discretion.

[Rodgeir]

Hmm. I just read up on that but must have misunderstood! In that case shoot away! As it was neither of them would have been close enough for it have mattered either way.

[thinkslogically]

It's really not that clear online to be honest, but this is my understanding of it. Spider's used the mounted rules as a DM before so might be able to say more about it.

[Rodgeir]

I am okay with those rules. I have actively prevented my RL players from getting mounts because I didn't understand the rules and thought I had a grasp of it. You get to be my test rabbits for all sorts of fun stuff...

[thinkslogically]

Hahaha! Yup, and mounts that cant or don't want to be controlled are a whole other thing too just to add to the fun

[spiderwrangler]

► Show Spoiler

Once during your move, you can mount a creature that is within 5 feet of you or dismount. Doing so costs an amount of movement equal to half your speed. For example, if your speed is 30 feet, you must spend 15 feet of movement to mount a horse. Therefore, you can't mount it if you don't have 15 feet of movement left or if your speed is 0.

So you can potentially move half distance to your mount, then use the other half to mount. Also, if you're prone next to your mount, you can stand up for half, and mount for the other half. If you're grappled (speed = 0), you're not able to mount. The "once during your move" would seem to imply you'd not be able to both mount and dismount in one turn, though it's a bit grey. Limiting it to either or on a turn keeps people from cheesing mount and character dashing.

If an effect moves your mount against its will while you're on it, you must succeed on a DC 10 Dexterity saving throw or fall off the mount, landing prone in a space within 5 feet of it. If you're knocked prone while mounted, you must make the same saving throw.
If your mount is knocked prone, you can use your reaction to dismount it as it falls and land on your feet. Otherwise, you are dismounted and fall prone in a space within 5 feet it.

Various spells, shove attacks, etc can result in these rolls being made.

While you're mounted, you have two options. You can either control the mount or allow it to act independently. Intelligent creatures, such as dragons, act independently.

Makes sense, rider's choice but if the creature is intelligent, they'd be more likely to go on their own turn rather than being an extension of the rider's.

You can control a mount only if it has been trained to accept a rider. Domesticated horses, donkeys, and similar creatures are assumed to have such training. The initiative of a controlled mount changes to match yours when you mount it. It moves as you direct it, and it has only three action options: Dash, Disengage, and Dodge. A controlled mount can move and act even on the turn that you mount it.

So can only control trained creatures, and limited actions, but since you can have the mount move and act the turn mounted, you could run half your movement, mount for the other half, then have the mount move and dash. So in one turn with a 30ft character and 60 ft mount, end up 135 ft away from where you started if you run 15 ft to your horse, mount and move/dash, all while still having your action you can use anywhere in there. If you move/dash, you could potentially run 45 ft to your horse, then still have it move 120 ft with a move/dash.

An independent mount retains its place in the initiative order. Bearing a rider puts no restrictions on the actions the mount can take, and it moves and acts as it wishes. It might flee from combat, rush to attack and devour a badly injured foe, or otherwise act against your wishes.

With mundane mounts, there's limited times you'd want this to be your choice, if you can't trust your mount to do what needs doing, you're probably better off going with the first option. However, this is essentially how things have run the few times that Maji was a "mount" in SW, he's intelligent, so kept his own initiative, which frees him up to make attacks, etc. on his turn. If you have a non-intelligent mount that is trained in combat (eg, warhorse), it might be worth putting them on their own?

In either case, if the mount provokes an opportunity attack while you're on it, the attacker can target you or the mount.

It's really the lack of staying power that will make most mounts an iffy proposition for mounted combat for most characters. The 'best' mount that would be regularly available would be a warhorse, with AC 11 and HP 19. Riding horses have a puny AC 10 and HP 13, so it's pretty easy to cut a horse out from under a rider not trained to fight on one (ie, Mounted Combatant feat), so in most cases, horses and other mounts are mostly going to be a way to get around more quickly than walking, as well as be able to carry more stuff.