Wanting to imitate the Cleave feat for Missile weapons

[Mondrin]

This would basically create a Pierce Feat, allowing an archer to hit multiple targets with one arrow if they are in a line. This is more limiting than the Cleave feat since enemies are not standing in a nice line most of the time. To balance this I thought instead of just allowing the extra attack if the first creature is reduced to 0 hit points, but also if the attack on the first creature is a critical result. You can then have Greater Pierce to follow this one. I haven't looked at pre-reqs but I can think they'd at least need point-blank shot and possibly precise shot.

Any feedback on this idea?

 

[chilibean]

Perhaps you should put a creature size limit on this?

An arrow getting 2 birds? Ok, perhaps ...

An arrow getting 2 stone giants? Not unless it's a 10' long razor sharp mithril spike shot from a +20 mighty Bilistae ...

I'd say a weapon might only be able to completely go through a creature 2 size categories smaller than the weapon.

It should also be limited to a single weapon in a small group of peircing ranged weapons. Like thrown spears, javlins, bows, crossbows, etc...

It should also perhaps require special ammunition that costs like masterwork, but does -1 to damage because it's really slender and made to easily pass through something.

Plus, the damage dice of the second hit should be AT MOST half of the first hit.

With all these restrictions I'd say, sure, if you still really want to ...

[edit]

Also, I forgot, -20 on the second to hit roll.

[second edit]

Ok, maybe only -10 on the second roll. I didn't notice that it only happened on a crit. Also, the crit would have a 50/50 chance of either flying on to the next target (range increments 10-20 times shorter) OR getting the extra crit damage. I would remove the "reduced to 0 hp" rule though. I wouldn't think that it would make any difference if the first target dies or not. Just did it go through or not?

 

[CRGreathouse]

My advice: Wait for the ELH. That's the only way to have a realistic chance...

 

[Sir Hawkeye]

Why is it that whenever someone proposes a house rule, people get all "you can but I would nerf it to the point of utter uselessness."?

The size limit does make sense, although size of the launching weapon would be more reasonable (Legolas shoots through orcs with a longbow in FotR, for example).

Otherwise, I think it's a fairly balanced feat.

Minor nitpick: this should be in the house rules forum.

 

[Mondrin]

My apologies as this should be in house rules.

 

[Tome]

The problem is that with the exception of magical wands and other such there is no ranged attack that will do enough damage in a single attack to kill an enemy outright. The concept is good, but in execution I think that players would view the feat as a poor choice at higher level. Seriously folks, how often are you really in position about 70 feet away from a horde of advancing kobolds?

That being said, there are other options. Try to improve upon the rapid shot feat.

Flurry of Arrows: If you normal shot and your rapid shot both hit the same target, then you get an additional attack against the same target at your highest BAB -5.

This feat allows you to concentrate upon killing those really big nasty bad critters that are lumbering toward you taking 12 foot long strides and have a reach of 30' with their giant spears.

 

[chilibean]

Why is it that whenever someone proposes a house rule, people get all "you can but I would nerf it to the point of utter uselessness."?

I don't think I was "nerfing" it. I mean, is a thrown dagger really like a .50 cal sniper rifle?

Granted the -20 was a bit harsh, and I did say 'perhaps' on the special weapon requirement. But other than that, the qualifiers I suggested seem reasonable to me.

Maybe if you limited the effect to only within point blank range, added a min strength requirement, and limited the range to the second target drastically, I suppose you could boost the creature size to equal the weapon size.

That way an archer with a mighty bow and this feat could potentially shoot THROUGH the wizard's bodyguard orc to hit the wizard right behind him.

It's really the range to the second target that I see as extremely limiting. Only crossbows have a really flat firing trajectory. A bow shot a 150' that penetrated it's target would just hit the ground 5' behind it. Take a bow and shoot at a paper taget and see for yourself.

 

[melkoriii]

interesting

Funny.

My Table was just talking about this at our last game.

THe idea was to have it that you get one extra attack on a mob in direct line from you through the first mob to the second mob
as long as the second mob is within 30' of you.

eg.

A = Archer
1 = First mob
2 = Second mob
X = 5' space

AXX1XX2

You could have a Improved feat that allows as meny mobs in a strate line upto 30'

(30' because all ranged things with persition or damage are within 30')

EDIT:
This was for Ranged attacks only not Thrown

 

[UrielFallen]

For some reason, I'm reminded of LOTR, where Legolas fires off arrows in quick succession, killing several Orcs, before stabbing another Orc in the eye.

 

[Quickbeam]

For some reason, I'm reminded of LOTR, where Legolas fires off arrows in quick succession, killing several Orcs, before stabbing another Orc in the eye.

I was thinking more along these lines myself when I first read the thread's tagline. The obvious problem with this take on the 'Pierce Feat' is that unlike Cleave, there is no true follow through on the first killing blow to rationalize a subsequent attack. Then again, who said every aspect of a feat has to make perfect sense ?

I would be more in favor of allowing a 'Pierce Feat' which grants a second attack with the same weapon upon a killing strike, than hassling over whether or not X number of creatures are grouped Y feet apart and in a line. I like the Legolas flavor of the first version, but would definitely make Point Blank Shot and either Precise Shot or Rapid Shot prereqs.