Campaign Conundrum 1 - Silence

irdeggman said:
But that makes the arrow have multiple components - which the 3.5 rule s don't really support.

Actually, it does. Consider a house. Houses have walls, with separate hit points and break DCs for each 5' section, not including doors and windows.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Patryn of Elvenshae said:
Actually, it does. Consider a house. Houses have walls, with separate hit points and break DCs for each 5' section, not including doors and windows.

Alright then which part of the arrow gets the +1 enchantment?

As far as weapons and construction goes this type of detail is (preumably purposefully) left out) because of the types of questions and resolutions it would require.

Is the hardness of an axe in the shaft, the head or the hilt (hand guards)?

These are the types of things that the rules do not address and must (if necesary) be decided by the DM.
 

Inigo Carmine said:
You might not agree with it from a realism standpoint (and yeah, you'd probably be right), but its necessary from a balance standpoint in the game.

Without that rule, magic arrows become overpowered real quick. If you change the rules on arrows you're have to change many other rules to keep the game balanced.

First off, I'd make magic arrows cost about 100x more than they currently do. They're currently 1/50th of the cost of a similar magic item because they're expected to be single use only. While putting the price back to the level of a normal permanent magic item, I'd double it because of its reliability, specificity, and stacking power with bows. (ie, having a continual reliable supply of death/bane arrows that aren't one-time use for specific enemies is really really powerful).

Second, I'd change it so that a whole lot of things that are normally castable on an object (like silence, darkness, etc) are no longer castable on an object. That's a few 100 spells that need editing.


Or, you could say that magical arrows (specifically) break as a result of the magic being released, and normal arrows do not automatically break. Problem solved.
 

The Yahoo Test

Personally, I think AC 9 is perfectly reasonable. It passes the Yahoo Test.

The Yahoo Test basically asks, how often can an untrained Yahoo succeed at this tasK?

If the ground is AC 9, then the Yahoo requires a 13 to hit (assuming a BAB of +0 and -4 for non-proficiency), meaning he can still make the arrow land in (hit) the desired square 35% of the time. Which is, if you think about it, pretty generous. It's probably better than I could do. You could always grid an area with stakes and string, get a bow, and test to see how accurately you could hit the desired square.

Assume an AC of 5, and the untrained Yahoo can hit that square better than half the time. That fails the Yahoo Test to my way of thinking, because I don't buy the idea that any average merchant could do it.
 

Raven Crowking said:
Assume an AC of 5, and the untrained Yahoo can hit that square better than half the time. That fails the Yahoo Test to my way of thinking, because I don't buy the idea that any average merchant could do it.

What's he shooting with?

Remember, it's an AC of 5 and better than half only so long as it's within his first range increment.
 

Assume that our Yahoo is using a longbow (range increment of 100 feet). Now note the original post:


Archade said:
3) Sometimes they want to shoot a specific square, and stick an arrow in the turf. Shooting a flat surface 100' away should be harder than AC 9 I would think. Am I right?


EDIT: Even if you assume a range increment of, say, 60 ft, that's still only a -2 penalty (i.e., our Yahoo now needs an 11 to hit if the turf is AC 5, allowing him to strike any given 5-foot square within 120 feet at least 45% of the time). Either the Yahoos are pretty talented, or AC 5 is wrong.


EDIT AGAIN: With a turf AC of 5, and a longbow, our Yahoo could hit any square up to 200 feet away with a 45% accuracy rate. And, remember, this isn't an Imperial Soldier; it's a guy with no proficiency and a BAB of +0!
 
Last edited:

When considering whether arrows break upon hitting the target, keep in mind the D&D target is not a bale of hay. It is usually a moving creature, maybe covered in metal, that will probably move after being hit: if still alive and fighting, excellent chance of breaking the arrow either intentionally or incidentally; if killed the target will usually fall, probably breaking the arrow if falling on the arrow, plus thrashing about or whatever.
 

Another Yahoo Test

Despite his skill with a bow, our Yahoo would much prefer to be away from the battlefield while the war is on. However, once the fighting is done, he steals out to scavenge whatever he can. Specifically, he is looking for arrows.

Let's say that 500 archers fired 20 shots each during the battle, with a hit rate of roughly 50% (most conscripts were only supplied with studded leather armor, and the archers had a bit of talent). So, 10,000 arrows were loosed in the fray. Of these, 5,000 found their mark and were therefore destroyed.

Of the remainder, 50% are either lost or destroyed. If our Yahoo is lucky, he can find a maximum of 2,500 usable arrows on the battlefield. That's 1/4 of the arrows used, which passes the Yahoo Test for me, numerically.

However, the idea that our Yahoo can never find an intact arrow sticking out of a body seems a little odd. We could adjust this by claiming that 10% of the arrows that hit survive, but 60% of the arrows that miss are either lost or destroyed. More arrows that miss would be lost in areas like bogs and thick forest, of course, meaning that our Yahoo would find far fewer arrows after the Battle of the Bog.
 

Wow, we're quite a bit off-topic here, aren't we?! The discussion is not about whether an archer can hit a 5' square from 100', the question is whether a silence spell cast on the arrow should survive the shot made. (Btw, longbows require a significant arc and really shouldn't be allowed in a typical low-ceiling dungeon, and a longbow would be best for attacking a square. A shortbow, such as the Turkish shortbow which the D&D shortbow is patterned after, would be hard-pressed to hit a 5' patch of ground and not skid another 40' or 50'.)

My ruling on silence cast on projectiles has always been that the arrow is simply being used as a spell delivery vehicle. If it hits a creature, the creature gets its normal chance to check for saving throws and spell resistance. If it doesn't hit a creature, but hits some other surface (which it must, eventually!), there is a 50-50 chance that the arrow breaks, disrupting the spell. If the arrow doesn't break, treat it as a grenade-like missile. When using a longbow (because sufficient height is available), the 5' square being targeted has AC 9: AC 10 -5 for Dex of 0 and +4 for shooting into melee (if applicable). Because targeting a square on the ground is more difficult that targeting an upright creature, I require a Spot check -- the square gains +2 circumstance bonus for each 5 points that you fail the Spot check. (No modifiers if you succeed on the Spot check.) Then, squares on the ground usually have at least partial concealment, even if you can see them, so there's a 20% miss chance. And it's 50% if you're just guessing at the location!

All of that means that the arrow is unlikely to hit the right square in the first place. And if it does, the spell may be disrupted anyway. This also takes care of the cast-it-on-a-tack-which-is-attached-to-the-arrow problem.

If a coin or other "unbreakable" object is used instead, all of the attack modifiers are still in place, but the range increment on throwing (10 feet) means you'd have to be right nearby to hit the targeted square.

One more thing. If they use a longbow outside and miss, use the grenade-like missile table to determine where the arrow did hit. If they use a shortbow or crossbow, use the same grenade-like missile scheme, but multiply the distance off-target (measured in multiples of 10 feet) by the range increment. This is basically what the RSRD says under "Throw Splash Weapon", but I've changed the multiple from 5 feet to 10 feet. (Come to think of it, I should probably change the direction from 1d8 into 2d4 to represent the fact that a bow shot from shortbows or crossbows will likely overshoot the target square rather than end up on either side or short of the target.)
 
Last edited:


Remove ads

Top