What does the -4 penalty for Shooting into Melee really represent?

[DrSpunj]

The SRD says:
"If a combatant shoots or throws a ranged weapon at a target that is engaged in melee with an ally, that combatant suffer a -4 penalty on it's attack roll."

PHB pg 124 "Shooting or Throwing into a Melee" says the same thing only at the end of the above quote the PHB goes on to say,
"...because you have to aim carefully to avoid hitting your ally."

The "avoid hitting your ally" part sounds to me like the situation outlined in the Cover rules where they actually fully describe when you may hit your ally instead of your target. It's pretty easy to imagine when your ally and target may be in melee but your ally is not providing any cover to your target. If your ally is magically protected or has a really high AC, can you choose to ignore the -4 penalty for firing into melee if you aren't worried about hitting your ally? Of course I'm assuming you don't have Precise Shot and I'm looking for the "official ruling" here.

This came up over the weekend in the first session of a group that just started up (Hi Nail! ) because in my old group we have been playing that you could choose to ignore the -4 penalty for firing into melee if you weren't concerned about hitting your ally. I guess we were just thoughtless b******s because we did it fairly often! After playing that way for two years I wasn't sure if that was an official rule or a house rule and I couldn't find anything in the FAQ, PHB or SRD to back up any official stance. Then I got to wondering about exactly what the -4 penalty is supposed to represent since what's written in the PHB to me seems to be talking more about Cover!

Thanks for any help on setting me straight!
DrSpunj

 

[IceBear]

Yeah, I have issues with that rule too. As far as I know you have the -4 penalty for shooting into melee AND if the ally is providing cover you have to deal with that too. That's how it works officially.

I remember a LONG debate on this, but unfortunately I can't remember all the details. My question always was - what if I decide that I don't care? I can think of lots of examples when someone might fire at two people in melee and not care who he hits. Does it become a 50/50 chance (assuming two equal sized opponents) of hitting the wrong person?

IceBear

 

[Caliban]

The -4 for firing into melee means that you have no chance of hitting your ally, only your target. You get this penalty even when your ally is not directly between you and your target, because it is assumed that combatants are always moving within their 5' square as they angle for position.

The -4 means that you are waiting for a clear shot, instead of taking the first shot that becomes available.

The Cover bonus means that your ally is directly between you and your target, and that even waiting for the best shot means that they may still be in the way.

Both the penalty to your attack roll and the bonus to your targets AC can apply at the same time. The Precise shot feat allows you to ignore the -4 penalty, but not the Cover bonus to their AC.


If you want to say that you don't care if you hit your allies, then I would apply a flat 20% chance of hitting them (although it may not be a successful hit if your allie has a high AC). No penalty to your attack roll, just a flat chance of hitting them. And no sneak attack because you obviously aren't taking the time to aim carefully.

 

[DrSpunj]

Thanks!

Thanks! That's what I was looking for, and is my current understanding of the rules.

One last clarification though, Caliban. By your phrase "If you want to say that you don't care if you hit your allies, then I would..." I assume that is your call as the DM (a House Rule, if you will) and not the official interpretation (that being that there is no "legal" way to ignore the -4 for firing into a melee with an ally). Correct?

Thanks again for the quick replies!
DrSpunj

 

[Olive]

this is something i got of the boards a looooong time ago.

it might have even been by caliban.
----
Firing in to Melee explained in detail:

There are two primary factors that come into play when you are shooting at someone who is in melee with an ally of yours: The modifier to your attack roll (for firing into melee) and the modifier to your target's AC (if an ally is providing cover for the target).

These two modifiers are separate, as it is possible for an ally of yours to be providing cover to your target even if they aren't in melee with them, and it's possible for an ally to be in melee with your target without
providing any cover for them.

The -4 penalty to your attack roll is because you have to aim more carefully to avoid hitting your ally.

If your target is at least 10 feet away from you ally (such as when you are fighting a creature with Reach), then you avoid the -4 attack penalty. (See Players Handbook, page 124)

If you have the Precise Shot feat, then you negate the penalty altogether. (See Players Handbook, page 84)

The Cover modifier to your targets AC only comes into play if one of your allies is between you and your target (or the part of your target you are aiming at if they take up more than one square).

If you draw a line from the center of your square to the center of your target's square, and it passes through the square an ally is in, then they are providing Cover to the target.

The amount of cover depends on the relative sizes of your ally and the target (See page 133 of the Players Handbook, Table 8-9: Cover):

If your ally is two size categories (or more) smaller than the target: No cover, +0 to target's AC.

If your ally is one size category smaller than the target: 1/4 cover, +2 to target's AC.

If your ally and the target are in the same size category: 1/2 cover, +4 to target's AC.

If your ally is one size category larger than the target: 3/4 cover, +7 to target's AC.

If your ally is two size categories larger than the target: 9/10 cover, +10 to target's AC.

If your ally is three size categories larger than the target: Total Cover, you can't even see the target.

If the target has a Tower Shield, the shield spell, or is hiding behind a wall, then they may already have an AC bonus from cover. Only use the highest AC modifier from cover, do not add them together.

If you have the Sharp-shooting feat from the Sword and Fist (page 9), then you get a +2 bonus on attack rolls when your target has an AC bonus from cover.

If your ally is providing cover to your target, it is possible to miss the target and hit your ally instead. It is also possible for a nimble ally to dodge out of the way at the last moment and not actually provide any cover to the target at all. (See Players Handbook, page 133.) To see if this happens, follow these steps:

1. Make your attack roll as normal, and check it against the targets' AC (including the cover bonus). If you exceed their total AC, then you hit them despite the cover.

2. If you miss them because of the cover bonus to AC your ally provided, then compare your attack roll with the your ally's flat-footed AC (even if they have Uncanny Dodge).

Their flat-footed AC is their normal AC, minus any AC bonus from Dexterity or from Dodge bonuses. Always use the original attack roll; do not roll the attack again.

If your attack roll is below your ally's flat-footed AC, then your shot hit them but did not penetrate their armor. No damage is dealt.

If your attack roll is above your ally's flat-footed AC, then you either hit your ally or they dodge the attack at the last moment. Now compare the attack roll to your ally's full AC.

If you miss your ally because of the additional AC from their Dexterity or Dodge bonuses, then they sidestepped the shot, and it continues on to hit the original target.

If you hit your ally even with the additional AC from their Dexterity or Dodge bonuses, then they were not able to get out of the way, and the attack penetrated their armor. They take the damage.

 

[Taloras]

I agree that you should be able to ignore the -4 if you dont care who you hit. However, Id probably make up a rule similar to throwing a grenadelike weapon and missing....you hit a random 5 ft square within the area your aiming. This represents not caring where your shooting, and/or shooting hastily.

 

[Caliban]

Re: Thanks!

Thanks! That's what I was looking for, and is my current understanding of the rules.

One last clarification though, Caliban. By your phrase "If you want to say that you don't care if you hit your allies, then I would..." I assume that is your call as the DM (a House Rule, if you will) and not the official interpretation (that being that there is no "legal" way to ignore the -4 for firing into a melee with an ally). Correct?

Thanks again for the quick replies!
DrSpunj

Yes, that's a "house rule" type of suggestion. The only "legal" way to avoid the -4 for firing into melee is with the Precise Shot feat.

 

[Caliban]

Re: Thanks!

Thanks! That's what I was looking for, and is my current understanding of the rules.

One last clarification though, Caliban. By your phrase "If you want to say that you don't care if you hit your allies, then I would..." I assume that is your call as the DM (a House Rule, if you will) and not the official interpretation (that being that there is no "legal" way to ignore the -4 for firing into a melee with an ally). Correct?

Thanks again for the quick replies!
DrSpunj

Yes, that's a "house rule" type of suggestion. The only "legal" way to avoid the -4 for firing into melee is with the Precise Shot feat.

 

[Nail]

Re: Re: Thanks!

The only "legal" way to avoid the -4 for firing into melee is with the Precise Shot feat.

...And this is at least part of (our) problem. As the DM (Hey DrSpunj and Videssian!!), I'd like the combat to be fast paced, fun, and as house-rule-free as possible. This last bit is because we're a new group, and each of us has our own set of house rules coming into the game. In my opinion it's much easier to limit them for now.

On another note: If you would house rule the -4 (so that you can ignore it if you don't care who you hit), doesn't that also cause some other unintended side-effects?

• Archers become even more powerful than they already are. Changing an automatic penalty to an optional one means that archers have even more flexibility. Gee....what a good idea. <=an attempt at sarcasm.
  
• Archer PrCs become slightly less desirable. You don't need some of their special abilities if you can optionally ignore penalties.
  
• Combat becomes even less realistic. One way to interprete the -4 is that melee combat is a fluid process. (I realize the PH says differently.) Regardless of how carefully or carelessly you aim, people are constantly shifting and moving and dodging sword blows.....contrast this with shooting at someone out in the open. The calculus of the situations are completely different.
  
• Party unity can be ...err, compromised: "Thanks fer th' arrow in the butt, buddy! " "Well, it coulda been yer head, ya crazed barbarian!"
  
• Metagaming: "I know my buddy's AC is high, so..." or "I really want this kill, so....." or "My buddy can take th' hit, but the monster can't...."

YMMV

 

[DrSpunj]

Re: Re: Re: Thanks!

...And this is at least part of (our) problem. As the DM (Hey DrSpunj and Videssian!!), I'd like the combat to be fast paced, fun, and as house-rule-free as possible. This last bit is because we're a new group, and each of us has our own set of house rules coming into the game. In my opinion it's much easier to limit them for now.

I wholeheartedly agree, Nail. This thread was mostly to make sure I wasn't forgetting something and that our group does use a House Rule.

On another note: If you would house rule the -4 (so that you can ignore it if you don't care who you hit), doesn't that also cause some other unintended side-effects?

• Archers become even more powerful than they already are. Changing an automatic penalty to an optional one means that archers have even more flexibility. Gee....what a good idea. <=an attempt at sarcasm.
  
• Archer PrCs become slightly less desirable. You don't need some of their special abilities if you can optionally ignore penalties.
  
• Combat becomes even less realistic. One way to interprete the -4 is that melee combat is a fluid process. (I realize the PH says differently.) Regardless of how carefully or carelessly you aim, people are constantly shifting and moving and dodging sword blows.....contrast this with shooting at someone out in the open. The calculus of the situations are completely different.
  
• Party unity can be ...err, compromised: "Thanks fer th' arrow in the butt, buddy! " "Well, it coulda been yer head, ya crazed barbarian!"
  
• Metagaming: "I know my buddy's AC is high, so..." or "I really want this kill, so....." or "My buddy can take th' hit, but the monster can't...."

YMMV

It does, and I don't want to debate this really since you're the DM and you've made your call. I'm happy with it, but looking closely at Caliban's suggestion mitigates many of the concerns you bring up. With his suggestion you're effectively trading a -4 penalty (or +20% chance) of simply missing your target (and your ally) entirely for a flat 20% chance of nailing your ally. Not a real "gain" there IMO since the former has *no* chance of hitting your ally while the latter does.

This does support your "party unity" point but when we used it the circumstances made sense. One example is our Fighter/Wizard who was very fond of Protection from Arrows. He'd cast that and then run in to mix it up in melee, which let the remainder of our group fire with impunity (a group tactic we had worked out before hand). Another example is a Psychic Warrior who had truly tried to maximize his AC (Expertise, Fighting Defensively, Inertial Armor, high Dex, etc.) who was not immune (since a 20 could still hit him) but with Chrysalis up most of time meant he hardly ever took damage even if he was struck (when providing cover, I mean, since we didn't use Caliban's suggestion, but I like it). Since these were tactics we had worked out before hand I would be the first to defend that they were very much in the spirit of the game and not "Metagame thinking" at all. Anyone should be able to recognize that you're far less likely to hurt your ally standing there in plate mail than the kobold in rags he's fighting!

Thanks for the posts all!
DrSpunj