Rashak Mani
First Post
So for Lousy Archers its good and for more able archers its bad then this 50% or -4 thing... if your friend has more AC than the foe then its even better since if you do hit him it will bounce off his AC...
Archery - Not cover nor engaged penalty
- Thread starter Rashak Mani
- Start date
SableWyvern
Cruel Despot
Rashak Mani said:
Your comments appear to be disagreeing with the 50% or -4 solution.
So, I'll delve deeper into my reasoning.
First, your last comment - your ally's good AC makes things good for him. Uh, yeah. If you know your ally has DR 5/+5, would you worry about hitting him with +2 arrows? No. Similarly, if you know you're unlikely to injure him because of non-magical armour/skill/whatever, then you won't worry so much about it.
Regarding good/bad archers.
Assume a mediocre archer would usually need 16 to hit the enemy. If he is worried about hitting his ally he needs 20, due to the -4. If he just fires into the group, he needs 16, but will automatically miss 50% of the time. So, his chances of hitting the bad guy are:
Firing at lone enemy: 20%
Fire carefully at enemy in melee: 5%
Fire uncautiously at enemy in melee: 10%
A good archer needs 6 to hit a lone enemy. His chances of hitting are:
Lone enemy: 80%
Carefully in melee: 60%
Uncautiously in melee: 40%
So, you are right. The poor archer is more likely to hit his enemy by firing indiscriminantly. Which means that a good archer does not need to risk hitting his friends/allies when firing into melee. He's good enough to pick the targets he wants. A poor archer simply is not good enough to be able to pick targets at leisure. If he wants his best chance at hitting an enemy, he has to release and hope.
So: a poor archer relies on luck to hit in this circumstance, while a skilled one relies on skill. Makes sense to me.
The poor archer simply has to realise that he isn't good enough to fire safely into melee with a decent chance of hitting his intended target.
Last edited:
GhostHawke
First Post
A little something on Ranged Attacks
Well, where to start... As for the cover issue, because the Barbarian is out of the flight path of the arrows (or bolts)– he’s standing to the side – cover would not apply here.
As for the –4 penalty for the Barbarian being engaged in melee with the monster, this would still apply. While the PHB says that “if you shoot or throw a ranged weapon at a target that is engaged in melee with an ally, you suffer a –4 penalty on your attack roll because you have to aim carefully to avoid hitting your ally” (pg. 124). The term “your ally” should be interpreted as a lucid one; a more general term “combatant” can replace it. Being engaged in melee is determined if one or the other combatant threatens the other (although this penalty is limited to a threatening range of 10 ft.).
So following through with this train of thought, if a PC were to enter into combat where two creatures were fighting, and a PC wanted to attack one of the monsters but not hit the other, then the –4 penalty would still apply here. This is so even though neither of the two creatures were the PC’s “ally” – the rest of the condition set above is accomplished, trying to avoid hitting the non-targeted creature. Now if the PC’s did not care which of the creatures were hit, I’d suggest one of two methods. Either use a 50% chance to attack one of the two (and scale however you wish, for multiple targets and/or creature size) or attack whichever of the two are closer to the attacker (if you choose to do the latter, follow the rules for the variant rule mentioned below. If they are both equally far away, roll 50-50).
Finally, to satisfy the curiosity of anyone wanting greater accuracy for ranged weapons, I’d suggest using the “Variant: Firing into a Crowd” that can be found on pg. 65-66 in the DMG. This should take care of any stray missiles and help answer other range weapon questions (This can also be used to determine where a missile goes if it misses by the -4, which would still apply even to a ranged touch attack I believe).
Well, where to start... As for the cover issue, because the Barbarian is out of the flight path of the arrows (or bolts)– he’s standing to the side – cover would not apply here.
As for the –4 penalty for the Barbarian being engaged in melee with the monster, this would still apply. While the PHB says that “if you shoot or throw a ranged weapon at a target that is engaged in melee with an ally, you suffer a –4 penalty on your attack roll because you have to aim carefully to avoid hitting your ally” (pg. 124). The term “your ally” should be interpreted as a lucid one; a more general term “combatant” can replace it. Being engaged in melee is determined if one or the other combatant threatens the other (although this penalty is limited to a threatening range of 10 ft.).
So following through with this train of thought, if a PC were to enter into combat where two creatures were fighting, and a PC wanted to attack one of the monsters but not hit the other, then the –4 penalty would still apply here. This is so even though neither of the two creatures were the PC’s “ally” – the rest of the condition set above is accomplished, trying to avoid hitting the non-targeted creature. Now if the PC’s did not care which of the creatures were hit, I’d suggest one of two methods. Either use a 50% chance to attack one of the two (and scale however you wish, for multiple targets and/or creature size) or attack whichever of the two are closer to the attacker (if you choose to do the latter, follow the rules for the variant rule mentioned below. If they are both equally far away, roll 50-50).
Finally, to satisfy the curiosity of anyone wanting greater accuracy for ranged weapons, I’d suggest using the “Variant: Firing into a Crowd” that can be found on pg. 65-66 in the DMG. This should take care of any stray missiles and help answer other range weapon questions (This can also be used to determine where a missile goes if it misses by the -4, which would still apply even to a ranged touch attack I believe).
Rashak Mani
First Post
Whoa great page reference... to make it more simple... since the DMG takes lot workout... if it didnt make the rangetouch then it went 50% left or 50% right... see if it hits your "ally"...
SableWyvern
Cruel Despot
Rashak Mani said:
I'm not sure what exactly you have in mind for this rule, so I thought I'd point out that it still assumes that the firer was endeavouring to hit a particular target. If you apply it in place of the -4 firing into melee penalty, rather than in addition to, you are giving archers a large advantage when firing indiscriminantly.
BASTOCHE: Thanks. I was actually fairly confident that there was some logic to my reasoning before I came up with the summary, but not entirely sure why. It actually clarified things quite well in my own mind.
CRGreathouse
Community Supporter
Caliban said:
I'll agree with a similar ruling: -4 to hit or 50% chance to target your ally.
SableWyvern
Cruel Despot
CRGreathouse said:
I think that was the intent of all those pro this house rule. It was certainly mine.
Similar Threads
D&D (2024)
4 Things Per Turn
