D&D 5E (2024) How to make ranged attack more hazardous for the user.

[Horwath]

Ranged attacks are powerful in 5E(14 or 24) version.

and while I do not want to reduce their effectiveness on the target as I really do not miss former editions with 1 worth of longbow damage. Good riddance on that.

I do want for ranged attackers to be more tactical and careful with their positioning.


I would add this to "hazards" of using ranged weapons in melee chaos of battle.

1st. Ranged attacks provoke AoO. This is very simple to add and most of the time it wont be triggered. But still, it's there.

2nd: When you make an attack with a ranged weapon, ALL melee attacks have advantage vs you until the start of your next turn.
This is more punishing as it will follow you until your next turn and enemies can utilize it if you are too close.


OFC, every new penalty would not be complete without the feat to remove it.

New feat:

Close quarters shooting:
+1 STR, DEX or CON

1. you do not have disadvantage on ranged attacks in melee
2. you do not provoke AoO for using ranged attacks
3. enemies do not gain advantage vs you after you use a ranged attack
4. while you are using a ranged weapon you threaten area 5ft away from you as with a melee weapon.


option:
this all can apply to ranged spell attacks also.

 

[sevenbastard]

2nd: When you make an attack with a ranged weapon, ALL melee attacks have advantage vs you until the start of your next turn.
This is more punishing as it will follow you until your next turn and enemies can utilize it if you are too close.

5e doesn't really lean into realism and once you go down that path you open it up for a ton of questions. Sure firing a bow makes you less melle ready but so does digging around your backpack or performing first aid.

Also let say I fight with a hand axe and a short sword. If on my turn I hurl my hand axe am then easier to hit? Even though im still armed with my short sword? Or fire my crossbow, drop it, draw my sword and advance into melee ?

I think its a solid premise, but to broad implications.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I like suggestion 2.

 

[Horwath]

5e doesn't really lean into realism and once you go down that path you open it up for a ton of questions. Sure firing a bow makes you less melle ready but so does digging around your backpack or performing first aid.

maybe more things should provoke AoO.
all spells that are not touch/personal or Bonus action should provoke AoO

Also let say I fight with a hand axe and a short sword. If on my turn I hurl my hand axe am then easier to hit? Even though im still armed with my short sword? Or fire my crossbow, drop it, draw my sword and advance into melee ?

this is interesting idea.
maybe if your last attack during your turn is ranged attack you suffer penalties.
having Extra attack feature is being faster with your weapons and if you only used half your time using ranged weapons, you had the time to set your guard up again.

 

[el-remmen]

In my games we play with penalties (Disadvantage) for shooting at enemies engaged with allies (even if they aren't providing cover) and a chance for hitting an ally if they do provide cover.

House rules are here: Allies & Cover In Ranged Combat - Ghosts of Saltmarsh

We haven't implemented it yet, but when my next campaign begin trying to fire a bow or crossbow while engaged with an enemy in melee range, will draw an opportunity attack.

 

[Horwath]

In my games we play with penalties (Disadvantage) for shooting at enemies engaged with allies (even if they aren't providing cover) and a chance for hitting an ally if they do provide cover.

House rules are here: Allies & Cover In Ranged Combat - Ghosts of Saltmarsh

We haven't implemented it yet, but when my next campaign begin trying to fire a bow or crossbow while engaged with an enemy in melee range, will draw an opportunity attack.

I like the idea of hitting cover, but I do not like the disadvantage on attack if targets are engaged.
by that you can say that if enemies are in formation you can always hit something if you miss your target.

also you would hit cover only if that attack is high enough to hit covers AC. That is, if cover has AC of 1 lower than the target or higher, you cannot hit cover.

 

[TiQuinn]

Personally, I’m good with #1 and think that’s probably enough to force a change in behavior and tactics for ranged combat. I think #2 is heaping on a bit too much but that’s just my two cents.

 

[aco175]

It seems to be adding a layer or more difficulty that may not be needed. DMs might be able to overcome some of the problems you see with making dungeons smaller or closer with bending halls and low ceilings to have limited use of bows. This of course nerfs the player that wanted to play an archer, but if this is your nail looking for a hammer.

Same thing with adding a feat tree to climb to be able to do the things you can do now. I do like the idea of shooting becoming loke the barbarians reckless attack in that monsters get advantage until the next turn, but there is holes in it that need patching like the thought of throwing an axe. You might need to modify the free action to draw a weapon and such.

There might also be problems with casters shooting spells into combat as well and if they are treated the same as archers. If a caster shots a firebolt into combat, is this the same as shooting a bow. You might be holding nothing or just a wand or spellbook to defend you instead of a bow which might be little better.

Maybe throw more monsters at the party to make all PCs melee combatants. 30 goblins might become a threat to a party of 5th level PCs if they can close before the fireball takes most of them out. As a DM though I might want to limit the number of times I play this to give all the PCs some time to shine and have a combat on both sides of a river or such to allow the archer to blast away and have fun.

 

[el-remmen]

also you would hit cover only if that attack is high enough to hit covers AC. That is, if cover has AC of 1 lower than the target or higher, you cannot hit cover.

Oh yeah, I forgot that we changed that to a reroll of the attack.

 

[sevenbastard]

5e doesn't really lean into realism and once you go down that path you open it up for a ton of questions. Sure firing a bow makes you less melle ready but so does digging around your backpack or performing first aid.

Also let say I fight with a hand axe and a short sword. If on my turn I hurl my hand axe am then easier to hit? Even though im still armed with my short sword? Or fire my crossbow, drop it, draw my sword and advance into melee ?

I think its a solid premise, but to broad implications.

Thinking about is maybe a rule like

"If you are not armed with a melee weapon, melee attacks against you are done at advantage. "