need help on integrating size AC modifier into ranged accuracy

[Dandu]

Just curious, but if I cast Acid Arrow at someone 500 feet away, what kind of penalty would be incurred?

 

[epicbob]

Based on which rules? Vanilla PHB or whatever I'm trying to come up with?

 

[Dandu]

The ones you are trying to come up with.

 

[Herzog]

GURPS range/speed table using metric system: GURPS Metric Speed/Range Table

from their official site, pdf containing (among others) the speed/range and size modifier tables:
http://www.sjgames.com/gameaids/gurps/Combat_Table.pdf

 

[epicbob]

[MENTION=25696]Herzog[/MENTION]

Thanks The .pdf especially looks useful since all the measures are the same system as D&D.

[MENTION=85158]Dandu[/MENTION]

Using the initial measurement from my first post, you'd get -32 to hit

 

[Dandu]

Interesting. I take it the effect of your houserule would be to shut down ranged combat altogether?

 

[epicbob]

Interesting. I take it the effect of your houserule would be to shut down ranged combat altogether?

This idea is still a WIP.

Even I agree that -32 at that range is ridiculous. So no, I don't want to ultimately shut down ranged combat.

The ultimate goal is to create a more organic penalty system than just -2 every increment.

 

[Dandu]

You wish to make ranged combat more carbon based?

 

[Eldritch_Lord]

This idea is still a WIP.

Even I agree that -32 at that range is ridiculous. So no, I don't want to ultimately shut down ranged combat.

The ultimate goal is to create a more organic penalty system than just -2 every increment.

There's a blog out there called Delta's D&D where the author takes a look at the math and assumptions underlying OD&D to see if they need tweaking, how historically accurate they are, and how they've influenced AD&D and 3e. He did two articles on archery, one on range penalties and one on indoor archery.

His basic conclusion, translated to 3e, is that the range increment penalty should be -4 instead of -2 (so you have -10 at a "medium range" of ~300 feet and -20 at a "long range" of ~600 feet, instead of -10 at ~600 feet and -20 at ~1200 feet), with no other changes really required; sure, it's a ridiculous penalty, but it's historically and physically accurate, which is what you were looking for. I suggest you take a look at the first article, since it goes into detail regarding the math behind it, including the issue of the inverse-square visual distance issue this thread is about.

 

[epicbob]

Depending on the weapon, that -4 per increment is still a better deal than what I came up with. :/

Although, from what I've read on my side about bow ranges, what came up was how the average archer tended to be comfortable in ranges around 30 yards, which is the longbow's 100 foot increment.

Past that, i'd agree we're stepping into competition shooting. Which means you'd need to be a very dextrous archer to make a shot into 50+ yard territory without trouble. (+4 dex to cancel out the -4 penalty)