Fire into Grapple with Large vs Medium creature

[Nail]

Let's say your an archer, and you want to shoot at the size Large bear grappling your size Medium buddy.

Could you pick a "square of the bear" that your buddy is not sharing, so that you have 0% chance to hit your buddy, rather than the normal chance (25%)?

 

[hong]

The fire into grapple rules are idiotic. They imply that all other things being equal, a 20th level munchkin archer has a higher chance of hitting his buddy than does a 1st level blind commoner.

 

[Darklone]

Don't think so, you shoot at the bear, not at a square. Same as shooting into melee, the -4 adressed by Precise Shot does not depend on whether your body is additionally (granting soft cover) in the way of your arrows.

Phew, I didn't even find the place in the SRD where the rule about shooting into a grapple stands.

 

[Brother MacLaren]

And it says "determine randomly which one you hit," but "randomly" doesn't necessarily mean 50/50. You could say that a Large creature counts as 4 Medium-sized creatures (based on the space they take up on the map), for a 1-in-5 chance of hitting your ally and a 4-in-5 chance of hitting the bear. A Huge creature is 9 squares, so if it were something Huge, 1-in-10 chance of hitting the ally, 9-in-10 of hitting the monster.

 

[The_Ditto]

What I find interesting is an extreme case ... (ie Sanity check).

We have 4 "targets" in the fight.

A is a 20th level elven archer .. he's 100 ft away ... (just to be sure he's "safe" and "not involved" re: melee).
B is a 1st level mercenary archer (hired by A) - also 100 ft away.

C is a Diminutive Toad (maybe a wizard's familiar who isn't present at the moment).

D is a Gargantuan Purple Worm

C and D are occupying the same space (thanks to the rule of more than 3 size categories different, they're just fine).

Because both A and B have precise shot .. they suffer no penalties to shoot at "D" ...
... and have zero change of hitting "C" accidentally.

Now let's assume the Purple Worm is grappling the Toad ... (he hasn't swallowed it yet ... it doesn't have to make sense ... hehe)

Now that they are grappling, there is a chance (whether it be 50:50 or something based on the difference in size) that the two archers will strike the toad by accident.

Does this really make any sense to anyone??
It doesn't to me. The size difference is just way too much ...
I can see the chance to hit a random target when they are both the same size ... however, once one target is significantly larger than the other, it becomes obvious (to me) that the larger target is quite simple to hit .. (and the smaller target quite difficult - in fact - likely more difficult to hit) ... however, the rules state the Toad is now easier to hit (ie Denied Dex ...)

I think the DM has to make some calls once the size differences start being "silly" (like in the above example). I think examples like this just reinforce the need of the DM to step in and say: "Hey, the rule was meant for 2 targets that are roughly the same size .. this situation is way out there ... I'm making a call ..."

.. Just my opinion ...

 

[The_Ditto]

And it says "determine randomly which one you hit," but "randomly" doesn't necessarily mean 50/50. You could say that a Large creature counts as 4 Medium-sized creatures (based on the space they take up on the map), for a 1-in-5 chance of hitting your ally and a 4-in-5 chance of hitting the bear. A Huge creature is 9 squares, so if it were something Huge, 1-in-10 chance of hitting the ally, 9-in-10 of hitting the monster.

I know the rules support this (ie RAW) ... no argument .. however, I tend to look at Large creatures as 2x2x2 = 8 squares ... and Huge as 3x3x3 = 27 squares ...
They are big - they are bulky .. and although the core rules don't really apply this too well, that Huge Target - beside the Medium ... occupies roughly 27 times the space on the combat ... (including the "altitude" component) ... It really brings out the "Yeah, not likely going to tag the little guy ...".

Maybe that's all that's needed ... in my example above (PWorm vs Toad, ie G vs D )
D is .. what ... 1/2 ??
G is .. 4x4x4 = 64 squares. (roughly 128:1)
so 1 in 129 chance of tagging the Toad?
Still goes back to what "Hong" said, though: That 1st level and 20th level archer both have the same chance of taggin the Toad? That still seems odd ... Wonder if we can adjust the figure further by BaB ??

 

[boolean]

The fire into grapple rules are idiotic. They imply that all other things being equal, a 20th level munchkin archer has a higher chance of hitting his buddy than does a 1st level blind commoner.

Hopefully the 20th level munchkin archer has Improved Precise Shot. The 1st level blind commoner certainly does not.

 

[Nail]

Could any one give me a specific rules quote? ...with section title?

Much appriciated.

 

[Nail]

....'cause all I got is:

3 Roll randomly to see which grappling combatant you strike. That defender loses any Dexterity bonus to AC.

Couldn't the archer just "chose a square" that the medium grappled creature isn't in?

 

[Brother MacLaren]

I know the rules support this (ie RAW) ... no argument .. however, I tend to look at Large creatures as 2x2x2 = 8 squares ... and Huge as 3x3x3 = 27 squares ...

It seems to me that surface area (cross-section) is more relevant than volume here. So the "depth" wouldn't matter, and Large would be 2x2, Huge 3x3, Tiny 0.5x0.5, etc.