A moral question, opnions sought [long]

[Hatchling Dragon]

You know, Hatchling...you should keep in mind that you started all of this.

Whether you meant it or not, whether you're sorry or not, you're the one who shot your ally with an arrow during a combat. It's not the kind of thing D&D players tend to forget (hoo-boy, do I have experience with that one... ).

Anyway, stop firing into melee. The fact that you keep doing it has got to be irritating to the halfling who got shot, and irritating to the other PCs, who feel that they might be next.

Once you get the Feat, you're justified to fire to melee all you want.

As for the tampering...that's a big no-no as well. I'd start with the alarm, and if you catch him you can just say, "I'm learning to be more precise with my shots. But don't touch my stuff. That's your only warning."

Then put your strings in a little box warded with fire trap, explosive runes, or best of all, sepia snake sigil. That'll learn 'em to mess with wizards.

Well fooey! The Voice of Reason speaks and all my creativness goes right out the window. I'd already known everything he said, just having someone else point it out sorta deflates my 'rightous indignation' deal.

I still feel justified in the Alarm and (maybe) Blindness combo. As was already pointed out, and something I'd factored in, Blindness lasts only as long as I want it to.

Of course, it's never a good idea to have an irate Rogue around when one is trying to get enough sleep to recover spells...

FYI: I think I've tried to 'assist' 3 players so far that were in melee, and yes I've managed to peg each of them with increadibly bad dice rolls (ie: +6 to hit an AC of 14 ). I do not plan on using my bow forever, it's just the attack with the most 'endurance' I've got access to so far. If/when I get enough cash (or more likely levels) I'll give up all but my magic.

Hatchling Dragon

 

[Thorvald Kviksverd]

Let's see...

Cowardly wizard continuously risks comrades' lives by taking inappropriate actions in combat.

Said actions have, in fact, already resulted in serious bodily harm to comrades.

As wizard has chosen to ignore comrades' pleas that he refrain from such reckless conduct, they have had to resort to a bit of harmless subterfuge to protect themselves.

(Note to wizard: The entire party might very well be "in the know", so attacking one might not be such a great idea.)

Wizard now decides to attack 'culprit' so he may be free to continue endangering his comrades' lives.

Personally, my sympathies rest entirely with the party.

If I were the Halfling, I'd be tempted to sneak the odd cursed arrow of returning ('boomerangs' and attacks archer) into his quiver--just to let the wizard know how it feels...

 

[Tom Cashel]

I remember once upon a time in the real world my friend Dale shot me in the back of the head with a BB gun. He didnt mean to, these things just happen.

What if he'd shot you in the back of the head with hunting arrow? You think you might have been a little more peeved?

Once you got out of intensive care?

 

[Tom Cashel]

Of course, it's never a good idea to have an irate Rogue around when one is trying to get enough sleep to recover spells...

You shot him, he sabotaged your bowstrings. Why escalate it any further?

 

[Hatchling Dragon]

As wizard has chosen to ignore comrades' pleas that he refrain from such reckless conduct, they have had to resort to a bit of harmless subterfuge to protect themselves.

(Note to wizard: The entire party might very well be "in the know", so attacking one might not be such a great idea.)

ACK!!!! Ok, I'd never even considered that possibility!

Wizard now decides to attack 'culprit' so he may be free to continue endangering his comrades' lives.

Ouch, that hit home. Very well put indeed. Dangit.

Personally, my sympathies rest entirely with the party.

Nuts, mine are shifting that way too. Damn my 'opened eyes' and your confounded wisdom!

And for the record: I'm not cowardly! I was honestly trying to help comrads I thought I'd have an easy shot at helping. And I can't alway shoot at un-engaged targets at the rest of the group insists on immediately closing with everything we encounter, it's very frustrating. I'm not even sure I'll ever bother with Area of Effect spells because of this trend.

Sorry, didn't intend to rant there.

Hatchling Dragon

 

[Katerek]

An accident is an accident.

It doesnt matter if it is a hunting arrow or cruise missile. NO ONE can stop accidents from happening, that is why they are called accidents.

Now, if he is continually recreating the conditions where the said accident is happening, then maybe he is to blame. But if that is the case, and I saw nothing in his post that indicated that was the case, then he shouldnt have posted here in the first place.

Regardless of which, in all the games we have been playing in all of the years, how many of you have seen this type of situation ever turn out GOOD? Subterfuge like this is horrible for party cohesiveness.

Rather than being backstabbing boobs they should have just directly said, "Hey, DUDE, stop!" If he didnt, then there are clearly bigger issues here than at first appear.

I think the Arrows missing and hitting other party members is a stupid rule anyway. Unless of course the same is true for ALL weapons. I am curious to see if that DM also has a critical Hit and Miss table for every weapon. In side to side melee combat, the cobatants would be just as likely to hack off each others arms as they would be to be hit with an arrow. And, if THAT is the case, then why should anyone get upset about an arrow shot? IT is the rules they chose to play by, they should quit being babies about it.

How come when the arrow misses its target, it only has a chance of hitting a fellow PC? Why not another monster entirely? Why not just flat out missing?

See, ultimately these are the things that should be considered. Teh DM should be brought into question. As a DM myself, this was the argument I was once faced with.

I saw the error of my ways and did away with the stupid "arrow miss and hit my friend" rule. I have been happier without it ever since.

BTW Sorry if sounded offensive, I mean no offense to anyone. I just think it is a dumb rule in the first place.

 

[Enkhidu]

Just out of curiosity, HD, does your DM use the shooting into melee rules as cover rules? Or does he use them side by side.

The way I've always read it was that firing into Melee is a -4, and if you fire through space occupied by an another creature, it's now also cover (which means a total of -8 for same size creature in melee when you fire on the far side). But, if you fire into melee when they're side by side, it's only -4, with no cover.

Just curious.

 

[Baron Von StarBlade]

I think you are taking a pretty hefty risk if the halfling is sabotaging your bow and you decide to blind him. Obviously you will have to remove it at some point, assuming you actually succeed in blinding him, otherwise you have basically completely removed a member of the party who seems to contribute to the group.
Also, you have already determined that the halfling is vindictive so what makes you think he won't just kill you in your sleep at some later date after you have removed the blindness? A wizard definitely doesn't want to make enemies like that.
I would say just stop using the bow until you get Precise Shot. I'm sure there are other ways you can be productive in combat.

 

[Baron Von StarBlade]

I just think it is a dumb rule in the first place.

The problem is, that this rule is one of the things that helps balance ranged weapons. If rules like this weren't in place then you'd have one or two high Hit point/High AC tanks occupying the creature while the remainder of the party launches magical arrows from a mighty magical bow.

 

[Tom Cashel]

Whereas with the rule you can just have the halfling do the distracting.