Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Noinarap" data-source="post: 4392360" data-attributes="member: 59730">Again (why did everyone ignore my earlier post? <img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/cry.png"  class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":.-(" title="Cry    :.-(" data-shortname=":.-(" /> ) it only matters as often as it happens. The overwhelming majority of ranged attacks come from characters/monsters who are good at them. The rare moments that feature a melee focused character using a ranged weapon simply don't merit an extra page or two of rules. Everyone knows the real world is far more complex and varied than the game world, but that doesn't mean we need rules that reflect every wrinkle. A rule to penalize actions that don't often succeed is pointless.To illustrate this, let's say my 4e character is a 9th level fighter with an 18 Strength, a 12 Dexterity, One-handed weapon talent, a +2 warhammer, and a +1 longbow. When he swings his sword, he has an extra +5 to hit level-appropriate foes that he doesn't get with his bow. This generally gives him a 60% to 40% chance of hitting. With the bow, he drops to a 35% to 15% chance of hitting. Do we really need to chip away at that and guarantee his failure? He's already doing marginal damage (1d10+2) if he even hits. And he had to use a few actions to stow or drop his weapon and shield. It's not like he'll be pulling that bow out all the time, since it basically sucks already.If he uses a +1 javelin instead of the bow (best case), he loses the bow's superior range and damage to get back up to a 55% to 35% chance to do 1d6+5 damage. This is still poor. Again, any additional penalty will make us feel more like we're in the real world, but its only game function will be to make ranged attacks totally worthless for this fighter.</blockquote>

Verification