Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Oofta" data-source="post: 9409559" data-attributes="member: 6801845">Some people were claiming that friendly fire rules somehow add to the balance of a game.&nbsp; To me, an arrow or a bolt effectively not stopping unless it hits a target (friendly or otherwise) is potentially a pretty big increase in combat capability for an archer.&nbsp; Large number of enemies approaching? Just fire in their general direction, you're going to hit something.&nbsp; Which under certain circumstances is what people actually do.&nbsp; Doesn't mean it makes combat more balanced.Long ago I did try a friendly fire option, but it didn't have anything to do with fumbles.&nbsp; First, because if you're a really good archer you're going to get multiple shots off in a round; it makes no sense that you're more likely to hit an ally when you're 20th level than when you're first.&nbsp; But that's an issue I have with fumbles in general, the better you supposedly are the more likely you are to roll a 1.Second, if you really fumble, who's to say the projectile went anywhere near your intended target?&nbsp; So what I did was say that if you miss your target by the amount of the cover penalty, roll again to see if you hit whoever it was providing the cover, going from target closest to the target.&nbsp; That way if the wizard using NPC fighters as a shield, you may hit that NPC standing directly in front of them, but you still have to roll to hit.&nbsp; If you miss by more than the cover penalty other creatures provide, you just miss.It was something I tried for a little bit but it just wasn't worth the overhead.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Oofta, post: 9409559, member: 6801845"] Some people were claiming that friendly fire rules somehow add to the balance of a game. To me, an arrow or a bolt effectively not stopping unless it hits a target (friendly or otherwise) is potentially a pretty big increase in combat capability for an archer. Large number of enemies approaching? Just fire in their general direction, you're going to hit something. Which under certain circumstances is what people actually do. Doesn't mean it makes combat more balanced. Long ago I did try a friendly fire option, but it didn't have anything to do with fumbles. First, because if you're a really good archer you're going to get multiple shots off in a round; it makes no sense that you're more likely to hit an ally when you're 20th level than when you're first. But that's an issue I have with fumbles in general, the better you supposedly are the more likely you are to roll a 1. Second, if you really fumble, who's to say the projectile went anywhere near your intended target? So what I did was say that if you miss your target by the amount of the cover penalty, roll again to see if you hit whoever it was providing the cover, going from target closest to the target. That way if the wizard using NPC fighters as a shield, you may hit that NPC standing directly in front of them, but you still have to roll to hit. If you miss by more than the cover penalty other creatures provide, you just miss. It was something I tried for a little bit but it just wasn't worth the overhead. [/QUOTE]

Verification