Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="DND_Reborn" data-source="post: 8167925" data-attributes="member: 6987520">This isn't the case of a bow or other ranged weapon, though, this is a spellcaster using INT--not nearly as favored an ability score RAW.Ranged attacks also have to deal with firing into melee and cover issues. Return range fire has all the advantages you have when making a ranged attack. Terrain adds to cover, so at best ranged attackers must ready an attack and use their reaction, limiting them to one at best.Ranged is superior to melee overall as it should be. The penalty a ranged PC has in melee, again, is typically a lower AC, etc.And frankly, IMO, game balance is never good justification for a rule. Period. Otherwise, it is just poor game design. shrugAnyway, I know why they made the rule--I just don't think it is needed. AD&D never had such a rule and the game played well without it. Remove it from 5E, and things really won't change much IMO.No, it is setting things back to level. If ranged attacks made against opponents in melee with the attacker had advantage, that would be a buff. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>