Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Thurbane" data-source="post: 3411530" data-attributes="member: 43273">Thanks all for the thoughts - the reason I didn't post the rule is basically I was more concerned about the ettiquette involved rather than a dissection of the rule itself (I've previously posted it here a while back, and got mixed feedback on it).The basic gist of the rule is that if you fire into an ongiong melee combat, and miss the intended target by a large enough margin, you have a chance of accidentally targetting a different (random) creature in the melee.The other two players actually support the rule, rather than just abide by it. They agree with my reasoning behind it - but as I said, that may be a result of our 1E and 2E conditioning.I think the reason that things came to a head was that this was the first time the rule had a (potentially) major impact on a battle. In the past, it had only resulted in the occasional accidental arrow hit for a few points of damage, but in this case it was a Melf's Acid Arrow against a low level allied warrior, which had the potential to kill him (it didn't, as it turned out).Like I said, myself and two other players are happy with the rule, and the other player is happy enough with it's intention, but not it's mechanics. I really don't want to modify the mechanics though, as it could significantly complicate combats.The disgruntled player is my flatmate, so I'll have plenty of time to discuss the matter with him before next week's game. I'm fairly hopeful we'll reach a compromise...</blockquote>

Verification