Fumble on firing into melee

[Rafael Ceurdepyr]

How would you handle this situation?

A druid is firing her bow down a tunnel at some kobolds about 40 feet away. Thirty feet away, at the tunnel entrance, is the paladin, engaged in melee with said kobolds. She's decided she'll take the -4 penalty for firing into melee.

After a couple of successful shots, she rolls a 1.

We play a 1 as a fumble, meaning something bad happens. My 1st thought, as DM, was that she would hit the paladin. But if she did, would she roll again (as with critical threat/hit), adding her modifiers, and if she would normally hit, then she'd have hit the paladin?

I ruled that she just lost the arrow, but it's possible this will come up again, and I'd like to be ready.

 

[Halivar]

I agree with your ultimate ruling. Having a chance to hit your own folks, no matter how small, is an excellent and effective way to completely remove ranged combat from your game (since no one will use it). The reason I say this is that many magic spells use ranged attacks. Ick.

 

[Rafael Ceurdepyr]

Having a chance to hit your own folks, no matter how small, is an excellent and effective way to completely remove ranged combat from your game (since no one will use it).

Excellent point. Our group tends to play pretty conservatively, so I definitely don't want to remove ranged combat. Better to chance hitting someone. I was thrilled that the druid would even try it.

[Of course, as the Oysterband song says, "It's friendly fire, but you still get shot."]

 

[darthkilmor]

You could say that her bowstring pops off and it takes 2 rounds to put it back on, provoking AoO's each round.

Or say the arrow snaps in half when she fires it and the half shard hits her in the arm for 1d4 points of dmg.

Or both.

Or if she does it say, 4-ish times in one combat, breaks her bow(if its non-magical)

Or the arrow goes sailing over the kobolds and you hear a yelp, and then a deep growl as the <insert appropriate beastie that was unseen before> charges into combat.

We usually roll a chance to see if you hit one of your companions in the back, but our DM likes to hurt us.

 

[scholz]

First: In many cases firing into melee does have a good chance of hitting your friends, that is assuming you are using the hitting cover rules. If your target gets cover from your ally, even if you have precise shot, or are taking the -4 penalty, there is an additional penalty (typically -4 cover penalty for medium sized creature in front of medium sized opponent). If you miss your target because of this penalty. then there is a chance you can hit your ally. I don't have my book handy, and it isn't in the SRD, but I believe the rule is either that you make a new attack roll, or use the roll you made against the initial target to determine if you would hit your ally (if you would miss your ally with a ranged touch attack, you actually hit the original target). Complex but possible.

Second, what does a Fumble do for a melee attack? Is it possible to hit an adjacent ally with a fumble. I think the rules should be the same for both missilers and meleers.

 

[Judas]

Our group uses a method similar to critical hits. It's simple but effective. When you roll a 1, you then have to roll again to confirm the fumble, much like confirming a critical hit. If you don't confirm the fumble, then it was simply a miss.

Weapon threat range/number needed to confirm fumble:
20 / 1
19-20 / 1-2
18-20 / 1-3
(Keen and Improved Critical don't affect fumble rolls)

Fumble penalties
Melee with only one attack available: Provoke AoO
Melee with multiple atttacks: Lose remaining attacks / End of Turn
Ranged with only one attack: Missfire/ May only take a partial action next turn
Ranged with multiple attacks: Missfire/ Lose remaining attacks / End of turn.

 

[was]

We just usually rule that the bowstring snaps on a 1. Its really annoying because it takes a while to restring it, assuming that you're carrying extra strings...

 

[Rafael Ceurdepyr]

Our group uses a method similar to critical hits. It's simple but effective. When you roll a 1, you then have to roll again to confirm the fumble, much like confirming a critical hit. If you don't confirm the fumble, then it was simply a miss.

Three out of the four members of our gaming group had an extensive discussion at lunch yesterday on just this idea. I suspect it's what we'll end up adopting. We had wondered if you'd have a range for fumbles as you do for crits and you've answered that question. Thanks!

 

[Judas]

Glad to be of help. One thing that has bugged me about our fumble house rule is that most (melee) weapons that only have 20 for the threat range, are usually the bigger, heavier weapons. The lighter weapons that do less damage per hit, seem to have the greater threat ranges. To me, it would make more sense that the melee weapons have a fumble confirm like the following example:

Threat Range / Fumble Confirm
20 / 1-3
19-20 / 1-2
18-20 / 1

This is because I view fumbles not as a debilitating misses, but as errors in judgement while in combat. The Fighter with the heavy maul has to expend more energy to recover from the momentum of the weapon.

Anyhow, those are just some of my thoughts.

 

[reanjr]

I agree with your ultimate ruling. Having a chance to hit your own folks, no matter how small, is an excellent and effective way to completely remove ranged combat from your game (since no one will use it). The reason I say this is that many magic spells use ranged attacks. Ick.

I don't know about that. I have players who consistently fire into grapples...