D&D (2024) Ranged weapons; can we return to the range increment penalty instead of this all consuming advantage/disadvantage?

[Horwath]

1st of the line, I like the advantage/disadvantage mechanics in general and it has it's place, but it does not have place EVERYWHERE?

And one place it does not have is in ranged combat and range penalties.

It always bugged me how you got perfect aim at 150ft with longbow and then you became completely incompetent at 155ft.

also 150ft is too long for no penalty at all.


So, maybe we could have -1 penalty per ranged increment and those ranged increments could be shorter.


For longbow;

range 60ft, -1 for every range increment after it. 65-120ft; -1. 125-180ft; -2. 185-240ft; -3. etc.... up to 1200ft with -19 penalty.

Sharpshooter feat could reduce the penalty by 5 or halve it (round down)

with even -1 penalty, players WILL consider moving closer, as no one wants to have any penalty ever.

maybe longbows normal range could be only 50ft, maxing out at 1000.


thrown weapons would all be 10ft, thrown weapon style would reduce thrown penalty by 5.
hand crossbow 20ft,
light crossbow 30ft,
shortbow/heavy crossbow 40ft,
longbow 50ft,

 

[John R Davis]

No thank you. One point of 5e is to ditch many fiddly modifiers.
Plus by its nature, not many time combat takes place as such distances!

 

[Baldurs_Underdark]

Mechanics like this make the game more balanced, and will better model the real world. But it's precisely the simplicity of a single value, and disadvantage beyond that which makes D&D 5E so easy to play. This simplicity is an important part of its success.

[edit: Multiple people in this thread about "Is 5E Special" make the same point]

 

[Li Shenron]

If the 50y revision would add something like that, it would be largely disliked by a lot of people who like 5e in the first place.

Maybe as an optional rule in the DMG, but then it's better to just play a game with a lot more focus on gradual bonuses everywhere, like 3e.

 

[delericho]

1st of the line, I like the advantage/disadvantage mechanics in general and it has it's place, but it does not have place EVERYWHERE?

I certainly agree with this. And yet...

And one place it does not have is in ranged combat and range penalties.

I'm afraid I don't agree with this - it's simple, it works. Of all my issues with 5e, I'm afraid this just doesn't make the list. Sorry.

In fact, I'd be tempted to simplify one step further than at present, and move ranged weapons to the same Short//Medium/Long range categories that spells use (though I would build in the two increments thing to those as well) The range differences between a javelin and a spear, or a longbow and a heavy crossbow, just don't seem important enough to really worry about.

 

[CleverNickName]

"We"? Nah, I prefer the Advantage/Disadvantage mechanic over stacking bonuses. Clean, simple, easy.

I don't think there's anything unbalanced or game-breaking with your idea; it's just not for me.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

1st of the line, I like the advantage/disadvantage mechanics in general and it has it's place, but it does not have place EVERYWHERE?

And one place it does not have is in ranged combat and range penalties.

It always bugged me how you got perfect aim at 150ft with longbow and then you became completely incompetent at 155ft.

also 150ft is too long for no penalty at all.


So, maybe we could have -1 penalty per ranged increment and those ranged increments could be shorter.


For longbow;

range 60ft, -1 for every range increment after it. 65-120ft; -1. 125-180ft; -2. 185-240ft; -3. etc.... up to 1200ft with -19 penalty.

Sharpshooter feat could reduce the penalty by 5 or halve it (round down)

with even -1 penalty, players WILL consider moving closer, as no one wants to have any penalty ever.

maybe longbows normal range could be only 50ft, maxing out at 1000.


thrown weapons would all be 10ft, thrown weapon style would reduce thrown penalty by 5.
hand crossbow 20ft,
light crossbow 30ft,
shortbow/heavy crossbow 40ft,
longbow 50ft,

I like the general Idea, because it buggs me that if you shoot at long range, suddenly bad sight, being prone and so on has no additional negative anymore.

I think your increments are too granular.

I would go up in -2/-5 steps.

75ft short: 0
150ft long: -2
600ft very long: -5

 

[Horwath]

I like the geberal Idea, because it buggs me that if you shoot at long range, suddenly bad sight, being prone and so on has no additional negative anymore.

I think your increments are too granular.

I would go up in -2/-5 steps.

75ft short: 0
150ft long: -2
600ft very long: -5

I have thought about it also, but why start at -2? isn't there somewhere before 115ft be better for -1?

if step of 1 is smallest that we can use(we really do not want decimal numbers here), why not use it?

also advantage/disadvantage should really stack twice at least.

 

[Morrus]

Yes, sure you can.

 

[Lazvon]

As a couple said before, keeping it simple, accessible, and fast is what is going on. I like it like it is especially for my 6-12 year old players. They all get it and having a great time. As they get more hooked into TTRPGing, I will introduce them to Rolemaster.

No matter what, I am having fun with 5e for the ease of play and staying out of the way.

But as Morrus said (at least how I interpreted his reply), absolutely for you and your table, easy thing to modify!