Is it ever a good idea to hit the party?

[Olaf the Stout]

It's happened in our 3.5E game a couple of times. On one occasion I think the Rogue may have even encouraged it. He was confident that his high Reflex save would keep him safe (and it did on that occasion). His HP's are low enough that it is asking for trouble though.

On another occasion I think the party fighter may have been hit by an AOE, but wasn't particularly fussed as he had more than enough HP's for it to be a worry.

In general I wouldn't encourage it unless the players were ok with it. That's up for the players involved to sort out though. If a player wants to do it, I don't think the DM should stop him. Do it enough and it may result in an alignment change though.

Olaf the Stout

 

[kyrand]

As a rogue in a 3.5 module, I actually (repeatedly, in fact) asked the sorcerer to drop fireballs on me. The other PCs were normally hanging a bit back, with the paladin guarding the cleric and rogue. A high Reflex save and evasion helped a lot with my reasoning though... I think in 10-15 fireballs, I took damage maybe once.

 

[Dice4Hire]

Well, with the War Wizard feat from FR, friendly fire becomes a far more viable tactic.

 

[Hand of Evil]

I don't think it is a good idea and try to keep my players from playing the numbers, oh; I have enough HP to jump off the cliff!

Parties should have an attack plan, it is one of those things that should be discussed, like making camp! What is the formation, defence or attack? Low level or high?

As a DM I also look at the area of effect and ask; what else is in this area? I have seen players surprised when a building or forest catches on fire or a street colapses from not thinking about their spell.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Tactically and mechanically, friendly fire can be a valid. But it's rare that hitting the entire party is a good idea. But if you hit more enemies than allies, it might make sense.

Basically, the tactical decision is: How can you inflict the most harm. You could define "effective harm" by subtracting the damage you inflict on your party members. If avoiding to hit them deals still less damage than you inflict with catching them in an area effect, it seems a good choice. Of course, it is never that easy. Sometimes it might also matter if you can finish an opponent off that you catch extra (because now the action economy is directly impacted), or if there is still healing available at all and hitting your comrade now might mean he drops now or on the enemies turn (again, action economy).


Beyond this, another question obviously is whether it's "nice" to catch some of your allies in the blast. Or if it feels believable to be willing to do so in the first place. As someone else mentioned - in-game, hit points have no clear meaning and being caught in a blast of fire is always deadly. Of course, one could argue that the player characters can still determine their general chances, and a high hit point value might indicate that they feel that they can protect themselves from your area effect (maybe readying their shield or taking cover behind a corner (or even an enemy).

 

[wayne62682]

Sometimes you don't have a choice. Most of the Sorcerer's powers, for instance, are close blasts and are not friend aware (a design mistake, IMO, for exactly the fact that they almost never get used for fear of hitting another PC) so unless he is straight up there next to the tanks/strikers, then there's a good chance that he might end up hitting another PC. At least with ranged bursts you can position them to avoid hitting people, but with close blasts you cannot.

 

[Dice4Hire]

At least with ranged bursts you can position them to avoid hitting people, but with close blasts you cannot.

With close blasts and bursts you have to position yourself.

 

[Hadrian the Builder]

I have a player in my group who includes friendlies in the AOE every combat. He's even killed a fellow PC recently. We tease him about it, but it's all good fun and no one gets their feelings hurt. He does not make an extra effort to include friendlies, he just tries to get maximum effect from every template, and sometimes that means collateral damage.

 

[Nai_Calus]

I won't do it and don't like when other people do it. I hate friendly fire. (Which is probably why I hated the DMG2 WWGD Invoker so much when I played him, I had the one multi-target power that was enemies only... And then the rest all included allies, and any time there was more than one monster together, there was the rest of the frickin' party, so it was always 'Zap everyone else when we're not doing so hot to begin with and this is an utterly insane encounter' or 'Do I really want to blow this daily on one enemy oh well it's not like I'll get to use it otherwise'. Really makes me appreciate Swordmage's party friendliness.)

 

[rjdafoe]

It is OK with me, as long as it does not go against the casting character's personality that has been created.

I don't like as much metagaming (even though it happens more than I like it to), so talking about it and getting permission from the players doesn't really appeal to me.

However, players understanding the type of character the other players are playing before the game starts (and hashing out problems) I encourage.