Mounted Archery

[Dunheved]

As I read it, bows cannot be used from a mount when in Close Combat. But they can be used in a Charge. A Charge is not Closed Combat.

Doh! The order of events in HLoR makes it clear that the Charge is not Close Combat. I missed that, thank you.

I also can't see any missile weapons being fired into a melee where the risk of friendly-fire casualties is significant because a cavalry melee seems to be a lot more mobile and fluid with targets and friends changing relative positions many times.

That would be represented by the fact that, to fire into a melee once in Close Combat, the archer has either to dismount and get to Rearward Stance (with a base TN of 12) or have the Horse-archery Virtue and go into the melee itself (with lower TNs due to the closer approach to enemies).

Agreed. The Virtue does suggest that. I guess I don't like the mechanic of allowing archery in a cavalry melee. It certainly is not prohibited however, so I must live with it.

As for the sections from the Two Towers describing the mobile archery of the Rohirrim: I think I actually don't want a specific mechanic in RAW: I'd rather let a PC suggest how it would work and reward good narrative with an ad hoc decision then and there. I can't come up with a short and clear idea how I would run this. If I was in a good mood I'd maybe remind a PC of the possibility and ask them if they had a plan to shoot on the run. However, I agree that using the the Wheel & Charge rule as a starting point seems best advice.

(Maybe Oaths of the Riddermark might have a scene about horse archery put in to it - ....hint hint to anyone who might know...)

And thanks to Rich H as well: I quoted from TTT as the only canon example I could think of. Using the skills tests that you put is a good alternative and a closer match to the narrative.

The Horse Archery virtue in HLoR simply permits you to fire a bow while on a horse: just as you would fire a bow while on foot in normal combat. Or am I reading this wrong?

It permits you to fire the bow from a horse when in Close Combat, from a position of melee (Forward, Open or Defensive), thus having a lower TN to hit. Also, it negates the limit to the Bow skill due to the Athletics skill.

Again. Thanks for the pointer. (My excuse is that it is so much easier to read these things when in hard copy than pdf!)

[Falenthal]

I guess I don't like the mechanic of allowing archery in a cavalry melee. It certainly is not prohibited however, so I must live with it.

Well, you can alway house-rule whatever you want, or conduct any situation however feels more dramatic and intense to you and your group (even when there might be written rules that seem to cover it). I've done it a thousand times.
My issue here was that I didn't understand how archery from horseback worked in the rules. I now see that the problem was that I took for guaranteed that Charges and Charge Damage Bonus didn't work with ranged weapons.
But once you get how the RAW works, then you have more resources and freedom to do variations as you see fit or as special situations arise. Only sometimes we all tend to elaborate house-rules before we understand that the RAW might be fine as it is, and already covered what we where struggling to do.

[Cawdorthane]

I was about to express a degree of perplexity at some ingenious attempts in this thread to over parse what I thought were elegantly clearly written rules, when I paused to reread the charge rules in light of the proposition that bows could be used in a charge. To my surprise, I think the RAW do in fact permit this, but as always if individual LM's do not like it, that's up to them. It is certainly not contrary to any clear Tolkien canon as noted by others. Indeed, the early Dark Age Germanic tribes that Tolkien modelled so much of his Rohirrim upon, were often closely allied to the Alan and the Sarmatian peoples who migrated into southern Europe ( with a none too gentle push by the Huns) and both were tribes of horsed archers (the Sarmatian Iazgys being heavily armoured with lances too). There is some strong evidence that the Romans stationed a large body of Sarmatian auxiliaries in Britain and some of the Arthurian believers suggest they may have been the origin of the Arthur knightly legends. So I for one now have no difficulty with this suggestion. If it makes a Rohirrim companion more effective, then so be it. Sneaky Loremasters can always pose major battles in poor going or indoors or underground...

cheers
Mark

[Deadmanwalking]

The stance limitation only applies to close combat.
Ranged combat is not mentioned, and should therefore not be affected. i.e. no different from on foot, except the limit to success dice.

I don't think that's correct. The rules make reference to 'close quarters' but not 'close combat' per se, and are listed as a limitation on all Combat Stances, not as one of Close Combat Stances only. 'Close quarters' can easily refer to combat as it occurs in most games in general, not just that in a close combat stance, so I'm seeing little support for that interpretation.

[aramis]

I think there might be two different situations that can come up with mounted archers:
A) A mounted character or NPC that, simply, is in Rearward Stance firing a bow.

While the character would still get the Armour Encumbrance Reduction benefit of being mounted, I don't see any other benefit or hindrance applying to him. Enemies with ranged weapons might still target the mount to force Riding tests. But as far as I can see, the forced Riding test doesn't prevent the mounted character from attacking. That is, the Riding test is made in addition to his action (firing the bow, preparing shot,...), not instead.

B) A mounted character or NPC that wants to fire his bow AND stay out of melee range from his enemies. I think that was a common tactic by some eastern cultures. Or a company of mounted elven archers might look great like this.
That might be a little trickier, if supported by the RAW at all.

It was the default mode of light cavalry in the Greek and Roman eras, too. (According to John Keegan, at least. While I think he's concluded totally wrong about everything after about 1867, he's pretty dead on for ancients era.) Then again, both horseback and charioteers had both light and heavy, with light being archers and heavy being melee.

Maybe it should be considered as an attempt to chain Opening Volleys with Escape Combat (given that horses grant a bonus to the Athletics roll). So, it could look like this:

1.Opening Volleys are resolved
2. Proceed to Close Quarters
3. When it's the Mounted Archer's turn to act, he tries to Escape Combat
4. If succesful, the Mounted Archer decides to enter the Onset phase again next turn
5. Opening Volleys are resolved again

If the Mounted Archer is part of a group that includes melee fighters, he might simply be considered as in case A.


Any thought? As said in the beginning, I'm not trying to house-rule anything. Just to understand what does the RAW support, as I've had the experience of finding once and again that the RAW can be fully usable for situations not specified in the rules, but that seem to have been taken into consideration when designing the mechanics of the game.

The RAW is wheel and turn returns to the opening volley.

And Escape Combat isn't exactly an Orderly wheel and turn.

There's a LOT of Cavalry tactics that the RAW doesn't use, because they don't fit with the (relatively basic) cavalry tactics the Professor includes in LOTR. We see them charge, we see them wheel, we see them melee mounted.

Tolkien paints a very incomplete picture. And makes the use of light infantry (archers) almost characteristic only of Elves and Goblins, with Men favoring the sword, and Dwarves the axe. And Hobbits the bow and sling, and the bounders their beaters...

RAW, to fire from horse, you'd need to be rearward... but horsemen are not ALLOWED to go rearward. If one uses the house ruled melee shot maneuver (TN to hit 12, to be hit 9, only in open), it would work just fine from horse, but that's not RAW. (But it's a popular enough house rule. I didn't invent it, i got it from someone else's house rules, because my players asked for an ability to use the bow in melee, like the movie Legolas does.)

The rules imply strongly that Escape Combat is neither orderly nor is there provision for return... so, as an LM, I'd not allow rejoining until the rest of the fight is done. At which point, it's a whole new battle. In new terrain, and with new prep rolls.