Snipers?
- Thread starter Dwarmaj
- Start date
green slime
First Post
No, but you can't fire a long bow while lying in the grass...
Also, crossbows, longbows and the like are not modern day sniper weapons with silencers, and flash suppressors...
Try reloading a heavy crossbow silently... In fact, reloading a crossbow requires a substanstial amount of movement, which shouldn't be too difficult to spot. Especially if you get in close, 30 feet is a mere 10 meters.
Thus as much as the rules are rigid and square and only an approxiamation of events, I find them fairly adequate, given many other assumptions:
1) you have no facing, your opponent is aware of all things going on around him, and has no "behind".
2) Do you not find it rediculous that someone can reveal themselves by shooting an arrow, then hide in the same place, and their opponent has no idea of where they are?
Sure they could duck down and take cover... but Hide???
It sort of goes against my experience from playing paintball. Getting off a shot, sure, but then you pretty well know where the other SoB is...
Also, crossbows, longbows and the like are not modern day sniper weapons with silencers, and flash suppressors...
Try reloading a heavy crossbow silently... In fact, reloading a crossbow requires a substanstial amount of movement, which shouldn't be too difficult to spot. Especially if you get in close, 30 feet is a mere 10 meters.
Thus as much as the rules are rigid and square and only an approxiamation of events, I find them fairly adequate, given many other assumptions:
1) you have no facing, your opponent is aware of all things going on around him, and has no "behind".
2) Do you not find it rediculous that someone can reveal themselves by shooting an arrow, then hide in the same place, and their opponent has no idea of where they are?
Sure they could duck down and take cover... but Hide???
It sort of goes against my experience from playing paintball. Getting off a shot, sure, but then you pretty well know where the other SoB is...
green slime said:
Tell me again where anyone (except you) made a reference to 30 feet.
I wasn't aware that a good response to "rule X is stupid" was "rules Y, Z and W are also stupid".
Why yes, it's ridiculous. Now read the following again:
So yes, after the sniper takes their shot, you might know the arrow or bolt came from over to the left, as opposed to the right, straight ahead, or 300 feet in the air. That doesn't mean you can immediately shoot back or hit them with a targeted spell.
Ducking down and taking cover is not hiding?
Indeed, such brilliance cannot be taught.
green slime
First Post
Taking cover and hiding are indeed two different things within the rules.
Such brilliance can indeed not be taught. smart arse. cut out the wise cracks. or leave the discussion. Your choice.
Such brilliance can indeed not be taught. smart arse. cut out the wise cracks. or leave the discussion. Your choice.
green slime said:
First, context, as always, helps:
I wasn't aware that "this is how the rules work" is a good response to "the rules are broken". Second, if one has 100% cover (or 100% concealment), then one is indeed hidden. Is this, or is this not, within the rules?
You're funny!
Last edited:
green slime
First Post
And you can be on occassion. however, try and keep it civil.
The reason I brought up the 30 feet:
The only good reason to be closer than a couple of hundred feet with a ranged weapon (if given the choice) is to be within 30 feet to gain the benefit of the feats manyshot, point blank shot, and any sneak attack damage the attacker may have.
A person who is out of sight is not necessarily "hidden" in the respect that I can still know he is behind the sole tree out on the bloody plain. Sure, he might have 100% cover, but gee wow, where could he be?
The reason I brought up the 30 feet:
The only good reason to be closer than a couple of hundred feet with a ranged weapon (if given the choice) is to be within 30 feet to gain the benefit of the feats manyshot, point blank shot, and any sneak attack damage the attacker may have.
A person who is out of sight is not necessarily "hidden" in the respect that I can still know he is behind the sole tree out on the bloody plain. Sure, he might have 100% cover, but gee wow, where could he be?
green slime said:
Oh, I'm _always_ civil. Well, except when I'm not.
A high-level deepwood sniper has a good chance of doing 80-100 points of damage on a regular basis, from anywhere up to 2,000 feet away. There are also feats and prestige classes that allow sneak attacks at ranges beyond 30 feet (but at a price).
That's the point. In the real world, that's what happens. In D&D-land, however, there appears to be no middle ground between "I see him" (and therefore I can target him with arrows, spells, etc) and "I don't know where he is". That's what I mean when I say the rules are screwy.
Last edited:
green slime
First Post
The rules are screwy because you are using 25mm figures, 6 second rounds, in turn based game to represent a fluid reality. It is always going to get strange and fudgey, and feel square.
If we are discussing rules in a rules forum, we are discussing what is possible. You want to discuss in house rules what it should be like, we can move over there. Which would you prefer?
If we are discussing rules in a rules forum, we are discussing what is possible. You want to discuss in house rules what it should be like, we can move over there. Which would you prefer?
green slime
First Post
So we are back to discussing what is possible. IMO, the rules are a reasonable, albiet admitedly klunky, approximation of reality, and no-one has any simple, elegant suggestions that are better.
Isn't it your bedtime by now? What is the time in sid's knees?
Isn't it your bedtime by now? What is the time in sid's knees?
Similar Threads
