Shot on the Run

[Lord Pendragon]

No, that's different (from memory, anyway). With Dirty Fighting and Circle Kick, you take the Full Attack action, give up all your regular attacks, and instead make a single attack with some special effect...

But the rest of Thanee's post was correct.

billd91: "Attack Action" is not defined by D&D as "any action which includes an attack," as you seem to be suggesting. If it were, the designation would be so broad as to be useless, including several spells as well as melee combat options. For the purposes of invisibility and the like "an attack" is is closer to what you're suggesting. But "Attack Action" has a very specific definition in D&D. It's a specific Standard Action, in which you make one attack against your foe. MS was defined as a Standard Action, not a modification of the Attack Action. As Thanee pointed out, MS is an alternative to the Attack Action, not a modification to it.

With doing "nothing" I was referring to making only a single attack each round, whereas the Fighter can do a full attack every round, thus is much more effective as a whole.

Perhaps, perhaps not. If the wizard is invisible and the archer is using SotR to duck in and out of cover, the only other targets for the fighter are going to be the opposing fighter and the opposing cleric. Both are likely to have very high AC and HPs, and the cleric has healing at his fingertips. If Archer stayed out in the open, Fighter might drop him. But instead he uses SotR to protect himself from most damage (while still dealing some each round). Fighter turns his attacks on the opposing fighter and cleric, who can handle the attention. Then, when Fighter is dead, Archer pops back into the open and concentrates all his attacks on the monk.

I'm not suggesting--and hope I haven't given the impression--that SotR is going to net an archer the best possible damage rate per round. Any time he uses it, he's going to be giving up attacks for defense. But staying alive by strategically boosting one's defense at key moments is, IME, very valuable.

In the previous example, wherein I basically deliniated an "archer showdown" with both combatants attacking at range, SotR also has the added advantage of robbing an opponent of more attacks than the SotR archer gives up.

I will admit, though, that the "archer showdown" does not occur every session. Still, it shows another way in which SotR can be tactically useful. And it can be created by a clever party and a bit of spellcasting.

If you assume, that the Archer and Fighter are facing off against each other, but in the same light assume, that it is not only them in the combat, then I must say, that these assumptions will almost never appear in a "realistic" scenario.

You may be right about that, Thanee, looking over my example again. It's an "archer showdown" which may not occur often. But it certainly can occur. And as I've noted above in this post, the archer still scores a tactical win if the fighter turns his attacks on the fighter and cleric.

If the Fighter is forced to ready, there must be nothing else he can do, because if there is, he won't ready. Thus he only ever loses attacks at the same rate as the Archer, who stays out of view for the time, because if not, the Fighter can shoot and ready again all within the same round. The loss you refer to is an artificial construct caused by the faulty assumptions (see above).

Huh? I think you need to rephrase this last part, because I'm not understanding you at all. How is the fighter going to shoot and ready in the same round? Ready is a Standard Action. To shoot he needs either a Standard Action, or a Full-Round Action...? The whole reason SotR has tactical effectiveness is because the fighter can't shoot and ready in the same round. He has to choose. His only other option is to delay.

Now, it's entirely possible, as you say, that the fighter can choose not to lose his attacks if he delays and the archer uses SotR. He could instead fire off those arrows at someone else with a better AC and HP. Again, by continuing to attack, and diverting the fighter's attacks to his own tank, the archer is doing well, IMO.

 

[Thanee]

No, that's different (from memory, anyway). With Dirty Fighting and Circle Kick, you take the Full Attack action, give up all your regular attacks, and instead make a single attack with some special effect.

Oops, you're right. But it's still very similar. A special attack form, which uses an action type on the "same level" as the generic action type (in this case even the same action type, Full Attack action).

Relating this to the problem at hand, both actions are a Standard Action, the Manyshot action and the Attack action. You can only choose either or.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Thanee]

Well, that part isn't overly important.

The "within the same round" part is really quite misleading. I meant this not in the context of the actual round, but rather the round that passes between the Fighter's readying and release of the action, if the Archer is not delaying (in which case the Fighter is delaying automatically at the same rate, because of the nature of the Ready action). That's why the loss is the same as for the Archer, because there is only a loss, if the Archer delays.

And if the Fighter shoots the Cleric who is harder to hit, that's still doing more than the Archer who is hiding.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Stormrunner]

OK, now you're confusing me .

Let's assume we've got A)rcher, B)arbarian, and C)leric vs. F)ighter, G)nolls and H)exer/Adept. We'll refer to them by their initials for brevity.

It sounds (forgive me if I'm wrong) Thanee, that you're saying that if F readies an action to shoot A, and A never pops up, that F can then say, "OK, I shoot C instead, then ready another action to shoot A." Can't do that. Readying is an action - if F readies to shoot A, he has taken his standard action for the round - it's a prolonged action, like casting a 1-round spell, but an action nonetheless. He can't retroactively change it when his initiative comes around again. If his initiative comes up next round, and he hasn't taken his shot yet, his action was wasted (Players Handbook, p160.)

If F chooses to Delay instead of Ready, then he hasn't taken his action yet . In this case he can choose to take a different action - but he will not be able to interrupt A's pop-and-shoot action. And if his delay takes him into the next round, he loses the action he would normally take in that round.

In short, if F takes a Ready against jack-in-the-box A each round, then the two trade single shots each round. If he chooses to ignore A and shoot someone else, then A is freed to rain full attacks on him (or more likely, on G and H, who probably have lower ACs).

F is probably better off choosing to ignore A and shoot B or C. Their higher ACs will reduce his average damage per round, but probably not as much as taking only a single attack rather than a full attack each round. If A is doing the pop-and-shoot in the first place, it must be because A fears to just stand there and trade shots with F - either A has a low AC, or is low on hit points, or F's shots do more damage. In either case, if A can distract F for several rounds it's almost as good as taking F out of the fight altogether for those rounds.

Alternatively, F can remember that Ready is a standard action, so you can take a Move action and still Ready in the same round. Each round he Readys against A's pop-up, he also Moves closer to A's hidey-hole. After a few rounds, he'll probably be close enough to close the distance with a double-move or charge - and then he'll be in melee with A, where F almost certainly has an advantage, being a fighter and more heavily armored and all.

 

[heggland]

Round 4: Fighter curses and calls Archer's mother indecent names.

Sorry about being completely irrelevant, but I've wondered about this for ages: When someone annoys you, why do you insult their mother?

 

[Thanee]

It sounds (forgive me if I'm wrong) Thanee, that you're saying that if F readies an action to shoot A, and A never pops up, that F can then say, "OK, I shoot C instead, then ready another action to shoot A."

Nope, I'm saying,that instead of readying, F can do that (except for the ready part). Basically F ignores A completely and focuses on someone else (C). If A then decides to stay out of his hiding place, then F concentrates on A.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Thanee]

Sorry about being completely irrelevant, but I've wondered about this for ages: When someone annoys you, why do you insult their mother?

That's an inheritance thing.

Bye
Thanee

 

[hong]

Sorry about being completely irrelevant, but I've wondered about this for ages: When someone annoys you, why do you insult their mother?

Because insulting their father carries a risk that you might get the wrong person.

 

[Plane Sailing]

Apropos of nothing in particular, it occurs to me that if shot on the run allowed a standard action instead of just an attack, it would be a brilliant feat for magic users

 

[Hypersmurf]

Apropos of nothing in particular, it occurs to me that if shot on the run allowed a standard action instead of just an attack, it would be a brilliant feat for magic users

If you can get your caster a fly speed, he can do it with Fly-By Attack...

-Hyp.