D&D 5E (2014) How do you adjudicate firing through combatants?

[painted_klown]

I'm house rulling it like I always did before, cover bonus and if you miss because of the cover you roll an attack on the cover, friend or foe. Came up Sunday when the thief shot his bow into a melee and hit the cover, then rolled a max damage critical on his buddy. If you don't want to shoot your friends don't shoot ranged weapons into a melee they are fighting in. I'm going to be house ruling a lot of combat stuff in 5e since we do use a map and models.

I love this solution. This post made me LOL @ work. I bet the buddy who was the cover was not happy...

Regarding rolling a natural 1. I am going to rule that if you are in combat, or doing something that requires DEX, then you will fall prone. I know some people don't like that idea, but I think there should be something as a penalty (sort of a counter balance to a nat 20), and falling prone seems to be a good solution. Still up in the air on this one, but I think it will work ok. However, If I find my players having a tough time with it, then I will remove the penalty.

 

[Lidgar]

While the cover rules specify +2 (1/2 cover) or +5 (3/4 cover), I think it is fine to use something in between as well. Say 1 medium creature, +2, 2 medium, +3, 3 medium, +4, up to four+ medium, +5.

I have always used a house rule that if you miss the target because of cover, see if that roll would hit any of the "covering" creatures.

 

[Hriston]

I'd only use cover rules for a target who is actually using other creatures as cover, not in a melee, because in a melee round, as I see it all of the action is simultaneous, so you never know who you are going to hit if you fire into it.

So this is how I'd adjudicate it (inspired by AD&D):

1. Give a probability value to hit each creature in the melee using the following ratios according to their size (1/2 for small, 1 for medium, 1 1/2 for large).
2. Use whatever size die works best for the number and sizes of creatures in the melee to determine who actually gets targeted.
3. The attacker rolls to hit the target that has been determined.

If the melee involves huge or larger creatures, I'd allow them to be targeted directly because the line of fire could be directed above the heads of the other participants.

I believe this method dissuades archers from firing into melees in which a large number of their allies are participating, but works well in situations where most of the participants are enemies (or the enemies are very large.)

 

[LabyrinthLord718]

I'd only use cover rules for a target who is actually using other creatures as cover, not in a melee, because in a melee round, as I see it all of the action is simultaneous, so you never know who you are going to hit if you fire into it.

So this is how I'd adjudicate it (inspired by AD&D):

1. Give a probability value to hit each creature in the melee using the following ratios according to their size (1/2 for small, 1 for medium, 1 1/2 for large).
2. Use whatever size die works best for the number and sizes of creatures in the melee to determine who actually gets targeted.
3. The attacker rolls to hit the target that has been determined.

If the melee involves huge or larger creatures, I'd allow them to be targeted directly because the line of fire could be directed above the heads of the other participants.

I believe this method dissuades archers from firing into melees in which a large number of their allies are participating, but works well in situations where most of the participants are enemies (or the enemies are very large.)

Wow, that is amazing. Definitely looks inspired by 1e, which has melee rules seemingly designed to get my brain leaking out of my ears lol.

Waaay too fiddly for me, however!

 

[Psikerlord#]

For lots of creatures providing cover I use +2 or +3 AC, but also the hitting cover variant from DMG p.272. Allowing the occasional friendly fire makes shooting into melee just a bit more hazardous/interesting/not so optimal.

 

[Tormyr]

It should also be noted that disadvantage is roughly equal to a -5 anyway, so -5 or disadvantage for firing through 3/4 cover (mob) is roughly the same thing.

 

[Tormyr]

I love this solution. This post made me LOL @ work. I bet the buddy who was the cover was not happy...

Regarding rolling a natural 1. I am going to rule that if you are in combat, or doing something that requires DEX, then you will fall prone. I know some people don't like that idea, but I think there should be something as a penalty (sort of a counter balance to a nat 20), and falling prone seems to be a good solution. Still up in the air on this one, but I think it will work ok. However, If I find my players having a tough time with it, then I will remove the penalty.

I don't generally do fumbles unless the situation seems to really call for it except for one situation: someone has advantage or disadvantage or 2 attacks and rolls double 1s. I feel that should be rewarded. The very first session of our campaign, the TWF fighter rolled double 1s for her two swords. She closed her eyes and swung her blades wildly as she ran in between two of the wolves and out the other side, drawing opportunity attacks from both. A couple months ago, the paladin threw a javelin at long range and rolled double 1s. I rolled randomly for a nearby creature and had the paladin make another attack roll. It was either a hit or a critical and impaled the sorcerer. One of the bad guys rolled double ones with advantage and tripped and fell on his weapon. Each time was lots of fun for everyone including the character who had "bad things" happen to it. Of course, shenanigans happen a lot at our table.

 

[Rune]

Regarding rolling a natural 1. I am going to rule that if you are in combat, or doing something that requires DEX, then you will fall prone. I know some people don't like that idea, but I think there should be something as a penalty (sort of a counter balance to a nat 20), and falling prone seems to be a good solution. Still up in the air on this one, but I think it will work ok. However, If I find my players having a tough time with it, then I will remove the penalty.

I just give disadvantage to the next roll of whoever rolled the 1. And I hand out inspiration (which could be used to cancel the disadvantage), if they don't already have it.

 

[jgsugden]

If you're a player, ask the DM. They have the only answer that matters.

If you're a DM looking for an answer, the books suggest a judgment call between a +2 and +5 AC bonus for cover. Those are good general ideas, but you might want to adopt different cover bonuses if you feel the situation warrants a different approach.

Someone mentioned ideas for hitting allies or other intervening creatures: It is hard to come up with fair rules for this type of thing. Most attempts result in counterintuitive results that often feel like you're punishing players randomly. Generally, I prefer to just assume that the allies are coordinating their efforts and are waiting for the right time to strike without risking hitting an ally.

 

[Uchawi]

Scenarios like shooting into combat and cover is a perfect area to add in a specific fumble table. I prefer that over a generic random fumble table to account for a broad class of actions.