D&D 3E/3.5 3.5 Deflect Arrows clarification

[Telas]

The SRD seems to imply that Deflect Arrows can block anything short of a Huge Crossbow or siege weaponry.

In kicking it around, I'm thinking of what can actually be deflected. I'm thinking anything that weighs one pound or less, and has a "safe area" that can be hit to deflect it.

So spears, hand axes, and shuriken couldn't be blocked, but arrows, bolts, daggers, and darts could.

If I wanted to "get really real", I could see spears/javelins being deflected, but I'm not so sure about hand axes and such. Sling stones are another problem... it's like deflecting a fastball, even if you deflect it, it still hurts.

Feedback?

Telas

 

[Kazinsky]

There is no reason to limit the effects of this feat, unless you specifically wish to house rule. The wording of the feat allows for any ranged attack to be deflected. If you wish to place a "realistic" limit on this feat, I would apply a "...up to one size category greater than you..." statement into the description.

Remember, with Deflect Arrows, you aren't necessarily using your bare hand to deflect ranged attacks. It can be reasonable to assume that you use your free hand to sweep your cloak into the path of the incoming attack to deflect it (ala supernatural martial arts flicks).

Otherwise, you are decreasing the effectiveness of this feat as written.

 

[Telas]

Yeah, that's kind of the point; I think the feat should be nerfed a bit, but I'm not sure how much. It seems to be a regular target of house rules.

I would like to come up with a hard-and-fast rule, like "you can't deflect anything over x pounds, and it has to have a haft or handle of some sort". That rules out spears (which seem to be highly deflectable), but includes sling stones (which probably hurt no matter what you do with them).

Hmm... looking over the weapons table... could one deflect a net?

Anyway, thanks for the reply. The feat bothers me a bit, but not enough to re-write the entire thing.... :\

Maybe I'll just let it lie, and worry about bigger things, like writing adventures good enough that the rules aren't the center of the game.

Telas

 

[Lord Pendragon]

Yeah, that's kind of the point; I think the feat should be nerfed a bit, but I'm not sure how much. It seems to be a regular target of house rules.

The only time I've seen this feat house ruled, it was made stronger on account of how weak it is. IME, this feat is rarely taken, and rarely relevent.

Maybe I'll just let it lie, and worry about bigger things, like writing adventures good enough that the rules aren't the center of the game.

A very good idea, methinks.

 

[dagger]

I have a hobgoblin ballistae ambush coming up at some point, and I might need to make a ruling on this very thing.

 

[Ogrork the Mighty]

I'm with those that think the feat is fine as written.

 

[Ferret]

I would take it as given too. Doesn't seem worth the kerfufal (sp? ) of changing it that much.

 

[Jdvn1]

It's only once per round anyway. Try shooting using a sling against the dude, and then the ballista.

 

[MeepoTheMighty]

Not that it adds much to the conversation, but you should have seen the look on my player's face when the BBEG monk used Snatch Arrows to fling alchemist's fire back in their face. It was pricesless.

 

[Bront]

Given that there is an epic feat that includes all ranged attacks, i sort of assumed that it was simply arrows, bolts and the like, but most definately not siege weapons, ranged attack spells, alchemist's fire, or other oddities. It is also one, and only once, per round, though a character can decide to not do it for one attack in hopes of saving it for the next.

So, it doesn't prevent you from being pincussioned from a rapidshot archer, just from the occasional stray arrow, bolt, or other ranged weapon.

Also keep in mind, other than for a monk, it has some nasty prereqs that most people aren't going to use, which tends to make a feat more powerfull (since it's harder to get).