Invisibility and Arrows

[Szordrin]

I had a situation in a game where an invisible creature was hit with an arrow (actually several arrows). A player argued that the arrow sticking out of the invisible creature would negate (or at least reduce) the 50% miss chance of the invisibility spell.

After much discussion I ruled that the visible arrows sticking out of the invisible creature reduced the miss chance to 30% but that the creature could "pull" the arrows out and bump it back up to 50%. The problem then was how long does it take to pull an arrow out of oneself. I ruled that pulling one arrow out was a standard action or you could pull multiple arrows out as part of a full attack action (each "attack" would allow you to pull one arrow out).

Does this seem fair? I want to know what other people think. Are there any rules that govern this?

 

[Tobold Hornblower]

A hit with an arrow that does Hit Point damage doesn't always mean that an arrow is left sticking out of the bad guy.

 

[Murrdox]

I guess you house-rule this no matter what way you go. There's no real ruling on how well arrows stick into their targets. However, I'd certainly agree that arrows are certainly visible after they strike an invisible creature.

Personally, I'd allow a character a ME action to pull an arrow out of himself after being wounded, or a full round action that provokes an AoO to remove all the arrows sticking in him.

I'd make an arbitrary 50% rule on whether or not arrows stick into the target or graze/go through them

I also would not allow the arrows sticking out of a character to negate the miss chance to hit a character at all... but no checks would be required to know exactly where the invisible character is.

 

[kreynolds]

What Tobold Hornblower said. To be more precise, however, there is one very good reason that arrows do not stick in a target in a manner that would impact the rules. The porcupine effect. If you shoot a 20th level fighter 90 times, he would simply be unable to even walk with 90 arrows sticking in him, which is why arrows don't stick in regards to the rules.

 

[Magic Rub]

In my game I've ruled that arrows stick-in only on a critical hit (or what would be a critical on creatures that are not subject to critical hits) All other arrow hits, graze, go through, or fall out on there own. Pulling an arrow out in combat is a ME action, & the subject takes the base XdX (no magical, or str.. just the base 1d6, 1d8 whatever it was)damage in removing each arrow.

 

[Szordrin]

A hit with an arrow that does Hit Point damage doesn't always mean that an arrow is left sticking out of the bad guy.

I never thought of that. However, I'd think that the chances of an arrow simply grazing a creature, the arrow "falling out on it's own", or the arrow passing completely through a creature are significantly less than the arrow sticking in them and having to be pulled out.

For instance I'd say if they role a 1 (on whatever the damage die is), it falls out next round, if they just barely hit them (roll to hit = target's AC) the arrow just grazes them, and if they critical it goes right through them. Most of hits thought I'd say are solid and stick into the target.

 

[Szordrin]

Pulling an arrow out as a ME action

I'd say that if you have a BAB +1 or better you can pull the arrow out as you're moving, just like you can draw a weapon and move at the same time.

Taking damage as a result of pulling arrows out makes sense, however it compounds the critical hit damage if that's how you determine if the arrow sticks in them in the first place.

 

[Magic Rub]

If you take them out carefully after combat (or step aside from combat if it's possible), you take no damage.

I do see what you mean about the critical damge, but it's never been an issue & we've played this way since 3e came out.

[edit] Besides it's a two way street, everyone plays by the same rule, so monsters & NPC's take the same 'extra' damage.[/edit]

 

[kreynolds]

However, I'd think that the chances of an arrow simply grazing a creature, the arrow "falling out on it's own", or the arrow passing completely through a creature are significantly less than the arrow sticking in them and having to be pulled out.

Hit points do not merely represent your ability to shrug off or take damage. They also represent your overall ability to stay alive. In an abstract combat system like D&D, taking damage from an arrow does not necessarily mean that you took a solid hit. If you were physically injured with each and every hit from a dagger, then at 20th level, with that many hit points to spare, you would be covered head to toe in dagger cuts, you would have no clothing left and your armor would be torn to shreds. Even 1,000 grazing hits will eventually kill someone.

 

[Szordrin]

Hit points do not merely represent your ability to shrug off or take damage. They also represent your overall ability to stay alive. In an abstract combat system like D&D, taking damage from an arrow does not necessarily mean that you took a solid hit. If you were physically injured with each and every hit from a dagger, then at 20th level, with that many hit points to spare, you would be covered head to toe in dagger cuts, you would have no clothing left and your armor would be torn to shreds. Even 1,000 grazing hits will eventually kill someone.

While I understand the point you are trying to make, I don't think that somehow because you have more hp arrows now only graze off you and never stick into you.