Shooting Into Combat

irdeggman · Nov 14, 2006

Random Axe said:
OK, given that the ally provides a +4 AC cover bonus for the bad guy, and assuming the archer DOESN'T wait for the ally to get the hell out of the way, what happens if the archer misses his ranged attack by only a little? Does that mean the ally gets shot in the back? If the archer has the Precise Shot feat, I can just imagine the objections that would come out of that!

Nothing unless you are using the striking cover variant rules from pg 24 of the DMG.

Without that variant rule you don't strike cover on a missed shot.

The Improved Precise Shot feat is the one that allows you to ignor cover not Precise Shot.

Infiniti2000 · Nov 14, 2006

Random Axe said:
If the archer has the Precise Shot feat, I can just imagine the objections that would come out of that!

Exactly, which is a reason not to use that variant. Until AC is defined with "layering", then you shouldn't treat it as layered for certain aspects of the game. It creates wonky situations like this.

Random Axe · Nov 14, 2006

irdeggman said:
The Improved Precise Shot feat is the one that allows you to ignor cover not Precise Shot.

I was talking about Precise Shot as the counter to the firing-into-melee penalty, but thanks for the clarifs.

irdeggman · Nov 14, 2006

Random Axe said:
I was talking about Precise Shot as the counter to the firing-into-melee penalty, but thanks for the clarifs.

The +4 AC to cover in your post is what got me this, as you pointed out earlier, is in addition to the -4 for firing into melee (which is negated by the Precise Shot feat).

Due to that -4 penalty for firing into melee, you have no chance of hitting him when you miss.

If, as has been pointed out, you are using the variant striking cover rules - you do have a chance of hitting him when you miss and he is providing cover.

Pyrex · Nov 14, 2006

frankthedm said:
Cover is valuable to both parties. if your allies make sure you have a clear shot at your enemies, your enemies have a clear shot at you.

Hey Frank, what'd you use to make the map diagrams?

frankthedm · Nov 14, 2006

MS paint

Gif of a dotted grid i found while googling [attached].

The sprites from old video games and some googled images. hexen and some marvel game with green arrow for above http://www.panelmonkey.org/category.php?id=1

Bad Paper · Nov 15, 2006

If the archer in this case rolls a 1 on his attack roll, then he strikes his ally. No need for complicated variants. On a 1, the DM gets to be cruel.

How far does the soft cover matter? What if the bad guy and the archer play monkey-in-the-middle with the soft cover? Is there some distance where cover doesn't matter? It is, after all, "arch-ery."

Nightfall · Nov 15, 2006

Shooting into combat....

Generally it's a bad idea. I favor "shoot him in the face AFTER you pin him." But that's just me being bloodthirsty.

Infiniti2000 · Nov 15, 2006

Bad Paper said:
If the archer in this case rolls a 1 on his attack roll, then he strikes his ally. No need for complicated variants. On a 1, the DM gets to be cruel.

But then if the ally is actually a mook of the BBEG, then a '1' turns out to be a whopping success? Shoot at the big bad evil guy because even if you roll a '1' you hit someone, but if you roll a '2' to whatever number just below what's needed to hit, you miss.

Drop the idea of the critical fumble.

Nightfall · Nov 15, 2006

Infiniti,

I'm personally not against critical fumbles at the beginning stages of a campaign (saves the PCs bacon some times) but I can see where (especially in this situation) it might be warranted not to do so.

Shooting Into Combat

irdeggman

First Post

Infiniti2000

First Post

Random Axe

Explorer

irdeggman

First Post

Pyrex

First Post

frankthedm

First Post

Attachments

Bad Paper

First Post

Nightfall

Sage of the Scarred Lands

Infiniti2000

First Post

Nightfall

Sage of the Scarred Lands

Similar Threads