Out of Character discussion:

I would like to mention that RAW (Rules As Written) state the -4 penalty is for flying mounts and makes no mention of ground mounts. From a rules as intended perspective I read this as being because a flying mount is bobbing up and down radically with each pump of their wings, where as there is a huge culture of horse mounted archers throughout history that are very accurate from horseback and stabilize themselves by rising out of the saddle a bit while shooting.

Hmmm... Let me ponder a bit. I'm not against this, but let me see what the RAW of the Basic/Expert books say.

EDIT: I'm back. I didn't agree with you, but then I chewed on it and now I do agree with you. You've made a convincing argument for stabilizing by standing in your stirrups. You've made an even stronger point by pointing out that we're playing Rules as Written, in which case even if I disagreed with your logic (I don't) I would begrudgingly concede because keeping this game Rules As Written is one of the main tenets of this campaign. I will strikethrough my post and redact that part of the OOC comment.

@dominion451 is right; there's no penalty for missile attacks on horseback.

EDIT 2: I'm chewing on this still... I can't let it go. I think we're going to go "no penalty" for horseback. But if this game was was leaning on rulings over rules, I think a very strong case could be made that shooting from horseback is a difficult thing (certainly more difficult that shooting from the ground) and if a PC had spent a significant amount of time in their life training to shoot arrows from horseback, they would probably have a pretty decent Dexterity modifier, which would mechanically offset any penalties incurred for unstable shooting.

But Rules As Written has been a foundational cornerstone for this game, and I can't find anything in the rules to support this, so I think I'm going to have to concede to @dominion451... You got me this time! *shakes finger...

EDIT 3: Grrr... STIRRUPS AREN'T STABLE!!!

Lets take a vote from everyone. My argument is shooting from stirrups is Unstabe Surfaces, and it would take a lot of training to actually do that. And if your character was training for that sort of thing, their Dexterity Modifier would reflect that, and offset the -4 penalty some. But I'm willing to concede to a vote if the rest of you disagree.

There were no rules written for mounted combat in B/X but here's how Dungeon Crawl Classics does it:

• Mounted characters their use horse's speed but otherwise act normally.
• Horses can attack, but the rider must make an Agility (Dexterity) check to stay mounted if horse isn't combat trained.
• Mounted characters get +1 to attack and AC versus non-mounted enemies due to higher ground.
• Mounted characters must a make DC 10 Agility check to stay mounted if their horse is spooked.
• People trained in riding get a +2 to this check.
• Characters fall prone if thrown from their horse.
• Combat trained horses are spooked when they lose half their hit points. All other horses are spooked whenever

In my mind, the point of Basic d&d VS Advanced is the rules light nature of the system. Start adding a bunch of combat modifiers and you arrive at AD&D 1e.

But I'll be happy with whatever you decide. Just wanted to point out the RAW thing cuz that's the kind of jerk I am ;)

I was always under the impression that the Mongols were successful at horseback archery because they trained to do it from an early age, but they also had numbers on their side (hence calling them a horde). When you look at Cossack skirmishers, they would use horses as a means of transportation before stopping to shoot. In my mind, using the horse's movement would give you a penalty, but being in a saddle wouldn't do it on its own.

I can see both sides of it. Seems like Horse Archery is a hard practiced skill, to do it reliably.

But that doesn’t mean someone else couldn’t get off a good shot, either by fluke or in a way that is less elegant than the horse archer.

Similar to a trained swordsman and a militia man handed a sword. Both could stick you, but one will do it more reliably than the other.

As for mechanics, I couldn’t say!

As I see it, RAW, yes it makes no mention, but logically, yes training will come into it. But it seems we are discussing shooting from a moving mount. Why not just bring the mount to a stop, like the Cossacks did? Best of both worlds, or adjust the ruling slightly for ground based mounts to a -2 penalty instead?

I like that... so firing at the end of your mount's full movement when it's stopped would be no penalty but having the mount move, fire, then finish the move (as in shooting while moving) would get a penalty?

I just noticed that I had noted experience points of 6784 on my character sheet. Haven't looked back at all the posts but, if that's real, all our characters would qualify for a new level or two. Am I missing something?

It must have been a typo on my part. I found the post that reads 684 XP for the Gnoll encounter. I'll make the adjustment on my cs.

I have 676.5 exp if that helps

Yeah that’s what I was thinking

Okay, if you stop your horse's movement no penalty, but if you're fire from mid-run, the penalty applies. That sounds good.

Also, I have Alice and any other PCs with a 10% at 687.5 xp. I'm not sure where the difference came from.

Shoot, I'll take the higher number any day.

@dominion451: There's an 11XP difference between your math and mine I noticed. I'm guessing it's because I gave you XP for the gold earned for delivering the wheels. You got 10gp, and with a 10% bonus, you earned 11XP. That's the only thing I can imagine.

Makes sense, and I just forgot to add it. Sounds about right ;)

Gotta get Alice to 1500 xp so she can become a real cleric with heals and such. Always a bummer to me that they started clerics with no spells in Basic, but at least they gave them the second fastest experience track.

@dominion451: Yeah I agree, it stinks to be a 1st Level Cleric in B/X. They have Turn Undead I guess, but having a healing spell to back you up always feels a little more cozy.

@KCC69: Dude your halfling game is on point! I've been cracking up this whole time XD

Hah! Thanks! Trying to keep the voice straight in my head. A naive, wonder-stricken, slightly dumb Halfling. Doesn’t know the half of what’s possible! (And what’s not possible for her!)

@KCC69: Reminds me of a kender in many ways. Good comic relief