Shooting arrows into the water - rules?

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

You know, you'd think there'd be a rule for this, but if there is, I'm just not seeing it.

Adventurers on shore are shooting arrows at a beastie in the water. Does the beastie get any sort of benefit from being underwater? Concealment? Cover? A simple bonus to AC?

 

[Ourph]

You know, you'd think there'd be a rule for this, but if there is, I'm just not seeing it.

Adventurers on shore are shooting arrows at a beastie in the water. Does the beastie get any sort of benefit from being underwater? Concealment? Cover? A simple bonus to AC?

It seems to me the rules for Soft Cover are exactly appropriate for the situation.

Depending on the clarity of the water and the depth of the target you might also include concealment, but that's a judgement call.

 

[arwink]

According to page 93 of the DMG:


Characters simming on the surface of the water have improved cover from attackers on land (+8 AC, +4 to Reflex saves). Completely submerged characters have total cover.

 

[Asmor]

I'm not well versed in the area by any means, but I'd say that if said beastie (or, at least, the part being aimed at) is more thana few feet under the water I'd rule that any attacks are simply wasted. I can't imagine arrows travelling very well through water.

I'd also do it all-or-nothing. Full effect up to the threshhold you choose, and doesn't work at all beyond that. Maybe not terribly realistic, but very easy to implement and I'm all for simplified abstractions.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

In this case, it's a hapless wizard shrunken down to the size of a doll about to be gobbled by a "cave trout." (DCC fans will recognize the module.)

The action is effectively taking place just below the water, as the trout tries to pull the wizard under before his buddies can pull him out. +4 to AC for the trout sounds right. If the trout grabs Katadid and pulls him under, though, the adventurers will have to go after him, since yeah, arrows penetrating any real distance in the water isn't plausible unless they're somehow specially designed to do so.

Thanks!

 

[Man in the Funny Hat]

I'm not well versed in the area by any means, but I'd say that if said beastie (or, at least, the part being aimed at) is more thana few feet under the water I'd rule that any attacks are simply wasted. I can't imagine arrows travelling very well through water.

Heck, BULLETS don't even penetrate water more than a few inches. One of the Mythbusters shows did several tests with weapons up to .50 caliber and IIRC none really penetrated more than about 18" and many bullets "disintigrated" in the process of getting even that far. Obviously there are reasons of physics for higher velocities and calibers doing progressively WORSE at penetrating water, but it seems HIGHLY improbable that arrows should be able to succeed where bullets fail.

 

[Thurbane]

Heck, BULLETS don't even penetrate water more than a few inches. One of the Mythbusters shows did several tests with weapons up to .50 caliber and IIRC none really penetrated more than about 18" and many bullets "disintigrated" in the process of getting even that far. Obviously there are reasons of physics for higher velocities and calibers doing progressively WORSE at penetrating water, but it seems HIGHLY improbable that arrows should be able to succeed where bullets fail.

I think you'd find arrows are actually better at penetrating water than bullets. I saw that episode of Mythbusters, and the main thing that hurt the bullets was their velocity. The more velocity they hit the water with, the quicker they fragmented and the less depth they reached.

Many primitive tribes use bows and arrows for shallow water fishing, albeit with arrows specially designed for that purpose...

If I was going to houserule, I'd probably give the target Damage Reduction equal to the feet of water the arrow has to travel through - eg. DR 5 at 5 feet, DR 10 at 10 feet etc.

 

[Ourph]

Two words... spear gun.

 

[Aus_Snow]

If I was going to houserule, I'd probably give the target Damage Reduction equal to the feet of water the arrow has to travel through - eg. DR 5 at 5 feet, DR 10 at 10 feet etc.

That's not a bad way. I was thinking maybe halve the damage for every 5 feet of water the projectile travels through (so, 1/4 total damage between 10 and 15 feet, etc.)

That's pretty harsh though. Maybe every 10 feet?

 

[Davelozzi]

I'm pretty sure that I read something (feat, magic item, class feature?) last week in Stormwrack that lets you shoot from land into water at reduced (or no) penalty. Though, obviously, I don't recall the exact details.