ac/invis question

[alsih2o]

if 3 people are in combat, a being an archer, be being the archers invisible buddy and c being the bad guy of your choice. assume they are arranged like this-

A........ B C

now, if B is 5 ft from C and a shoots an arrow from whatever range keeps the shot shallow enough how much cover does C get from B if they are the same size? how do you determine if B gets hit? should he be rolled on first since soemthing that would have hit C may hit him first?

thanks, you guys are always helpful

 

[Magic Slim]

IMO, C gets 50% cover, as usual. Furthermore, I'd probably wouldn't let A use his Precise Shot feat, since he can't shoot to try to avoid his invisible friend. Anyway, the invisible guy deserves to get shot in that situation

As for who gets hit, use the same method as usual. Determine first if C is hit. If he isn't, then, uh, hm. B shouldn't receive his AC bonus for being invisible, and neither should the arrow suffer from 50% miss chance.

Slim

 

[Zaruthustran]

if 3 people are in combat, a being an archer, be being the archers invisible buddy and c being the bad guy of your choice. assume they are arranged like this-

A........ B C

now, if B is 5 ft from C and a shoots an arrow from whatever range keeps the shot shallow enough how much cover does C get from B if they are the same size? how do you determine if B gets hit? should he be rolled on first since soemthing that would have hit C may hit him first?

thanks, you guys are always helpful

Dang, that's a good question. I'd go with what Magic Slim said.

Interestingly, the 3.5 SRD doesn't have rules for striking cover.

-z

 

[Dimwhit]

IMO, C gets 50% cover, as usual. Furthermore, I'd probably wouldn't let A use his Precise Shot feat, since he can't shoot to try to avoid his invisible friend.

At the same time, I wouldn't give him a -4 to hit an opponent who is engaged in combat either, since the archer doesn't see any allies fighting the opponent.

This is just a wild stab, but I would consider it like grappling. 50/50 chance of hitting his ally, since he doesn't even know he's there. On top of that, I would grant "c" a cover bonus.

 

[KarinsDad]

IMO, C gets 50% cover, as usual. Furthermore, I'd probably wouldn't let A use his Precise Shot feat, since he can't shoot to try to avoid his invisible friend. Anyway, the invisible guy deserves to get shot in that situation

As for who gets hit, use the same method as usual. Determine first if C is hit. If he isn't, then, uh, hm. B shouldn't receive his AC bonus for being invisible, and neither should the arrow suffer from 50% miss chance.

Slim

I do not know about the 3.5 rules, but the 3.0 rules were:

"If the attack roll falls within a range low enough to miss the target with cover but high enough to strike the target if there had been no cover, the object used for cover was struck. This can be particularly important to know in cases where a character uses another character as cover. In such a case, if the cover is struck and the attack roll exceeds the AC of the covering character, the covering character takes the damage intended for the target.

If the covering character has a Dexterity bonus to AC or a dodge bonus, and this bonus keeps the covering character from being hit, then the original target is hit instead. The covering character has dodged out of the way and didn't provide cover after all."

What this boils down to (even though I do not particularly like these rules) is:

B gives C +4 cover AC.

If you roll above that AC+4, C is hit. If you roll above AC and that normally hits B, B is hit if you make the 50% invisible concealment hit chance. If you roll above AC but do not hit B, than C is hit. If you roll below AC, nobody is hit (AC in these sentences means C's AC).

Miss chance still applies since B is still invisible (he does not lose his defenses because he is standing next to a target).

Precise shot still applies because A does not lose his feat because an invisible character is between him and his target.

 

[youspoonybard]

What's that quote that Hyp keeps bringing up?

"Two people are considered engaged in melee if they are enemies and one of them threatens the other?"

Egads! It's like I'm learning something...Curse you! : P

Anyway, C gets the +4 cover bonus for the person directly in the way. A doesn't have a -4 penalty for firing into melee because of Precise shot. If you miss C by 4 or less, and this attack would hit B, roll concealment to see if you actually hit your friend.

 

[Hypersmurf]

I do not know about the 3.5 rules, but the 3.0 rules were...

My understanding (though I don't have the DMG, so I could be wrong) is that there are no Core rules for striking cover instead of a missed target in 3.5, but they are included as an optional variant in the 3.5 DMG.

Can someone confirm?

-Hyp.

 

[youspoonybard]

Yup.

DMG page 24.

Of interest, it says that "If the covering creature has a Dex to AC or a dodge bonus and this bonus keeps the covering creature from being hit, the original target is hit instead..."

 

[Darklone]

My understanding (though I don't have the DMG, so I could be wrong) is that there are no Core rules for striking cover instead of a missed target in 3.5, but they are included as an optional variant in the 3.5 DMG.

Can someone confirm?

-Hyp.

Page 24 of the revised DMG, bottom. Same complicated stuff about "If you would have hit the target without the cover and the covers dex bonus is not high enough to avoid it alone and blablablabla..." as in the old version.

Edit: da spooooony won initiative.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Of interest, it says that "If the covering creature has a Dex to AC or a dodge bonus and this bonus keeps the covering creature from being hit, the original target is hit instead..."

That was Core in 3E.

-Hyp.