tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post494363865373865183..comments2024-03-26T15:35:56.004-04:00Comments on Delta's D&D Hotspot: Archery RevisitedDeltahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00705402326320853684noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-8696134681440863272017-11-03T23:31:14.155-04:002017-11-03T23:31:14.155-04:00Some interesting archery rules here by Kent:
http...Some interesting archery rules here by Kent: <br />http://somekingskentsaione.blogspot.com.au/2017/10/3-yeoman-archer.html<br />jbeltmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02264520619277158883noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-67592940166908475412012-11-21T09:22:06.992-05:002012-11-21T09:22:06.992-05:00Yeah, I'm with you on all points there.
I ke...Yeah, I'm with you on all points there. <br /><br />I keep wondering about putting penalties on medium and long range rather than bonuses on short and medium, but that does seem over-punitive.<br /><br />Reviewing my latest rules notes, I see that my prior conclusion was to just ignore range increments and have a flat effective range (well, two, one for man-to-man scale and one for mass scale). Simpler, for sure, but I'm not convinced it's better.<br /><br />One thing I'm currently contemplating is using your universal range but giving long bows the bonus you give to axes and (heavy) crossbows the bonus you give to maces. That would let thieves and clerics have basic missiles and give fighters a significant advantage with advanced weaponry.Joshua L. Lylehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03358762663581842879noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-80493970108054370802012-11-21T08:31:30.445-05:002012-11-21T08:31:30.445-05:00And I guess I should point out that it's also ...And I guess I should point out that it's also in scale with the +2 I give for axes vs. chain/plate, and +4 for a mace et. al. vs. plate.Deltahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00705402326320853684noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-67060092494938832262012-11-21T08:30:19.592-05:002012-11-21T08:30:19.592-05:00You're right of course, and sometimes when I c...You're right of course, and sometimes when I come back to this my intuition is that it needs to be tuned down. But I come back to the pros of (a) a +1/+2 situational modifier practically not worth the time to remember, (b) physically pretty realistic, (c) in line with the AD&D modifier scale, and (d) a big incentive for melee fighters to close with an archer and stop their firing. It's definitely a good thing to be aware of.Deltahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00705402326320853684noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-68615167664038509532012-11-20T16:18:24.261-05:002012-11-20T16:18:24.261-05:00The bonuses for short and medium range are pretty ...The bonuses for short and medium range are pretty intense; they make a short bow at 6" a plate-cracker equal to an OED warhammer.Joshua L. Lylehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03358762663581842879noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-20773799160100914902012-11-19T20:55:15.849-05:002012-11-19T20:55:15.849-05:00Some interesting ideas there!Some interesting ideas there!Deltahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00705402326320853684noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-29052601565076123172012-11-16T19:13:49.832-05:002012-11-16T19:13:49.832-05:00Maybe firing at a mass of men requires the mass co...Maybe firing at a mass of men requires the mass combat rules instead of man-to-man rules.<br /><br />We need to have a rule that can apply equally well to a bunch of men spaced out 5' apart from each other and men in a block with no gaps. <br /><br />How about this: <br /><br />An archer firing at Short range can choose a single man-size target. At Medium range you have to choose a 10' square (4 men-sized, 8 if you consider it to be a cube). At Long range you choose a 20' square (four 10' squares or 16 men). <br /><br />The Short range attack is a hit or a miss; he chose who he was firing at. <br /><br />The Medium range attack could hit any of those four squares. Some squares will be empty, some full. The DM should roll d4 and count across from the upper left corner, then to the left side of the next row down and across, etc. <br /><br />So the counting would look like<br />1 2<br />3 4<br /><br />This will make more sense in Long, which is a 4x4 square. You need a d16 or else roll d20 and reroll results 17-20. This counting would look like this<br /><br />1 2 3 4<br />5 6 7 8<br />9 10 11 12<br />13 14 15 16<br /><br />(The comment box might remove extra spaces or switch me to a non-monospaced font, so just realize this made a lot more visual sense to me when I typed it)<br /><br />When you figure out who the attack went to, the attack roll applies to that target. <br /><br />You could come up with another way to diffuse the targeting, but this multiplies the number of possible targets by 4 each time (technically 8 if you include airspace). It also accounts for large creatures, ships, buildings, etc. being easier to hit than small men. <br /><br />A magic item "of accuracy" could downgrade the range to the next lower, making the attack roll easier and the selection of targets more precise. <br /><br />This prevents long-range firing into melee safely, unless you manage to pick out a "safe shot zone" where there are no friends. <br /><br />You could also do this with siege weapons. <br /><br />Personally, the rule I use for grenade-like missile scatter and shot scatter for indirect fire is this: <br /><br />d8 for direction. 1=North, count clockwise. <br />dX for distance in 5' increments. I like dX-Y to allow for the chance of 0 scatter. <br /><br />d4-2 x 5' for Medium gives a 20' diameter circle of possible targets, and d8-2 x 5' for Long gives a 60' circle. <br /><br />Again, this generally prevents someone from hitting a single target at Medium or Long range, but it's not impossible. It also makes it easier to hit a packed group than a loose group than a single man. <br /><br />If you give shot scatter for long range, you might want to rethink having an attack roll penalty. Does the attack roll penalty mean the arrow is slower and less likely to deal damage at the end of its flight? Is it because the archer can't really aim for a vulnerable spot past a certain range? I always thought of the range penalty as the reduced chance to hit a single specific target. But as you say, hitting a unit of men or even an actual barn is easy to do at long ranges. That's well simulated by the shot scatter and I don't think we need a penalty to hit. <br /><br />Would be interesting to see the actual chance to hit a man-sized target given a few different methods for determining shot scatter, and compare to range penalties and the real-world test results, and see if they can be brought together. <br /><br />At that point, you're sacrificing ease of use (the penalty to hit is an EASY way to handle this while the shot scatter takes longer and has system vulnerabilities) for adaptability to multiple situations (in which the shot scatter method is superior). <br /><br />Maybe you could use shot scatter if there's something else interesting to hit in the area, or the range penalty if there's just a shot against a lone thing. But that's probably not worth the trouble. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com