I was looking up some feats and noticed that the text for mounted warrior is just as it is for standard d20, meaning it mentions AC. I might just be spacing out or something since it's been a while but logic would tell me to make the ride roll the Defence roll and leave it at that. I think I'm just having a brain lapse so forgive me. Is that how you all do it?
Here's the text:
|During combat, when your mount is threatened by an attack, you may choose to replace the horse’s Armour Class with a value equal to your total Ride Skill (Ride Skill +Dex Modifier + Class Modifiers). This value (as a static number), becomes the horse’s newArmour Class. Multiple attacks will impose a cumulative -2 penalty on the Armour Class.|
You don't make a check, its just a flat number--NPCs are static defenses of 10 + defense bonus, and this assumption is made for the horse. Rather than using this as the defence score (which takes the place of the roll), you use the total -modifier- to your ride skill--that is, ranks, + dex mod, + class modifiers and I'm assuming feat and regional modifiers. That's how I read it, anyway.
Just one part of the big AC vs. Defense Modifier vs. Total Defense Check Modifier mix-up in the book, I would imagine.
I'd play it so that your total Ride check modifier becomes the effective Defense check modifier, ie. if you wish to use static defenses and no rolling for NPCs, add 10 to the Ride check modifier. If you wished to roll it, use d20 + the total Ride check modifier.
If you used just the modifier as the static defense rating, the feat would be totally shafted. Your modifier on the Ride check would have to be +11 (+13 with a sand steed) or more for you to gain any advantage from it whatsoever, and horses in general would be extremely easy to hit in combat. This might be realistic, but it would certainly have a huge impact in the balance between infantry and cavalry in an AGoT D20 combat.