Range modifiers for missiles

[runequester]

Just realized this has worked differently in every version of the game.

In AD&D, short range fire is the norm, with penalties at medium range (-2) and long (-5)
In red/blue box D&D, medium range is the norm, with short range being +1 and long range -1.
And then in OD&D we get long range being the norm, with bonuses for shorter ranges. For dungeon play, almost all fire will be at short range, so this is a fairly significant benefit.

[waysoftheearth]

Jan 13, 2013 1:04:34 GMT -6 runequester said:

in OD&D we get long range being the norm, with bonuses for shorter ranges. For dungeon play, almost all fire will be at short range, so this is a fairly significant benefit.

Not only that, the range adjustment also differs in the various OD&D prints.

If you have a 1st thru 3rd print M&M then target AC is reduced by 1 at medium or short range. Whereas, if you have a 5th or 6th print M&M then then target AC is reduced by 1 at medium range, and by 2 at short range.

Also, OD&D adds +1 to missile attacks for dexterity 13+, or -1 for dexterity 8 or less. The other editions handle dexterity adjustments differently.

GH (p 68) also states that Elves attack at +1 with bows, and Halflings at +3 with slings. I don't recall AD&D including the adjustment for Halflings..?

So it's potentially plausible that you might find yourself playing a Halfling with 13 dexterity (+1) firing a sling (+3) at short range (+2) with a +6 to hit bonus!

Even if we exclude the GH adjustment it's +3; still a huge bonus in OD&D terms.

[runequester]

as an aside, I accidentally typed "ranger" instead of "range". Duh

[blackbarn]

Missile attacks do seem really generous in OD&D.

[talysman]

Jan 15, 2013 16:26:27 GMT -6 blackbarn said:

Missile attacks do seem really generous in OD&D.

I consider it to be a secret feature, like awarding more experience for treasure than for defeating enemies. Wise players will notice they have much better chances to hit with missile attacks and will change their strategy to reflect that.

[runequester]

Clever players should carry missiles. The first group of orcs with crossbows will make them regret it otherwise

[Deleted]

I think archery should allow bonuses to damage but penalties to attack rolls - and several attacks per round. Using 1d6 base weapon damage, here are some reasonable modifiers:

damage: 2d6, drop the lower (if using a crossbow, 2d6)
attacks/round: 2 per round with a bow, 1 per round with a crossbow
attack penalties: -2 if attacking chain, -4 if attacking plate, -2 at short range, -4 at medium range, -8 at long range, -2 in poor lighting, +2 if only making one attack (cumulative, of course)

[runequester]

I guess the real question is how to judge missile fire across, basically, a 20 foot room, as a bunch of orcs are rushing towards you

[waysoftheearth]

I would caution against adding complexity; it can slow the game down without necessarily adding much.

Given that a light catapult (or Giant hurling a boulder) deals 2 dice damage, should a crossbow also? More generally, adding damage but reducing the odds of a hit cancel one another out to a certain extent (in terms of damage per round over time), so you'd have to ask whether it's really worth all the additional messing about? I guess it's a matter for each individual referee to go with what works for his game...

A simpler notion is to assume that multiple shots are already represented by the one attack roll; archers can consume 1-6 missiles per attack roll if you like, unless they specifically want to fire one missile only (in which case, they conserve ammo but suffer a -2 attack penalty). FWIW -- I'd make all missiles -2 versus shields only.

Jan 16, 2013 1:18:03 GMT -6 runequester said:

the real question is how to judge missile fire across, basically, a 20 foot room, as a bunch of orcs are rushing towards you

Melee distance is 30ft, so it's considered hand to hand combat at 20ft range.

If it is the very first round I'd allow a shot if an arrow was ready on the string, or otherwise if an initiative roll was won. If the initiative roll was lost, then the attack is foiled and wasted as the orcs crash in.

If it is the second or subsequent round of fighting, then firing is not permitted in melee, so no shooting is possible until the PC breaks off from combat. Even then, firing into melee would be equally likely to hit friend or foe.

[countingwizard]

The wording is confusing.

"Missile hits will be scored by using the above tables at long range and decreasing Armor Class by 1 at medium and 2 at short range."

Does short range decrease the armor class from 4 to 2, or is the decrease a penalty to the AC that moves it from 4 to 6?

[waysoftheearth]

I assume it implies decrease the "effectiveness of armor" by 1 class at medium range, and by 2 classes at short range. So AC 4 is effectively AC 5 vs missiles at medium range, and AC 6 vs missiles at short range.

The alternative would imply it becomes harder to hit at closer range which seems counter-intuitive.

[waysoftheearth]

Jan 14, 2013 22:04:27 GMT -6 runequester said:

as an aside, I accidentally typed "ranger" instead of "range". Duh

Fixed

[retrorob]

countingwizard

I guess it's just +1 to-hit at medium and +2 at short range with missile weapon.

compare with BD&D and EPT: +1/0/-1 (short/medium/long)

[talysman]

Since we're resurrecting this thread, I might as well update my thoughts on missile fire.

Like waysoftheearth , I assume one attack roll but multiple arrows fired. My decision how to handle this easily: at the end of combat, each archer rolls 1d6 for every round of fire. Halve this number if they have a turn to recover arrows before leaving the area.

In theory this explains the bonus on short range rolls, but lately I've been trying to get away from adding bonuses and penalties to attack rolls. Here are some tentative ideas I thought of as replacements for bonuses and penalties while rereading this thread:

1. Short Range: Can aim at a single target for double damage. Otherwise, every opponent in the targeted area rolls 1d6. Highest roll is the target hit. If there is a tie, multiple targets are hit. The number of targets hit is the minimum number of arrows used.
   
   In Melee: If archer is next to an opponent, can't aim and fire arrows because they are too busy parrying and dodging, although someone with a crossbow that's already cocked and loaded can fire once (with a level cap of 1st level.) If an archer can somehow step back from the melee and not be targeted (invisibility, for example,) they can aim and fire, but do not get the double damage option. Also, if firing into a melee, all characters in the melee, both friend and foe, must roll as above to see if they are targeted.
   
2. Medium Range: Archer can target an individual or an area. There is no damage bonus for targeting an individual, but if aimed shots and hit location are being used, these are allowed at medium range. Targeted areas require all targets in the area to roll 1d6 as for short range.
3. Long Range Archer can't target an individual or make aimed shots at a specific hit location. Effective level is halved. All targets in area must roll 1d6 as previously described.

Untrained archers are restricted to short range and always require everyone in the direction of fire, friend and foe, to roll 1d6 as for firing into melee, with a level cap of 1st level. Using a crossbow eliminates this level cap except when in melee. Archery training for non-fighters (or their subclasses) allows normal short range and treats medium range as if it were long range. Only fighters and their subclasses can make long-range shots.

A hypothetical archer class would have some restrictions above lifted, for example able to aim into melee without hitting friends or able to make aimed hit location shots at long range.

[countingwizard]

Jan 16, 2013 1:18:03 GMT -6 runequester said:

I guess the real question is how to judge missile fire across, basically, a 20 foot room, as a bunch of orcs are rushing towards you

I ran into this situation several times when I was running the game taking into consideration the original Chainmail framework. Pretty interesting how it worked. Here are some example situations on how it shook out.


Scenario 1:

1. Players declared a sleep spell.
2. Monsters won initiative.
3. Monsters performed a charge to close into melee distance (contact/10')
4. Players gave monsters pass-through missile fire by deciding that archers would forgo movement.
5. Players chose not to move.
6. Monsters didn't perform pass-through fire.
7. Monsters didn't have any spells or further missile fire to conduct.
8. Players spell went off, putting some of the monsters to sleep. A 2nd volley of missile fire was made for the longbow wielding characters just before the charge hit.
9. Player archers refused combat by stepping back from the front rank (up to 30').
10. Monsters made their attacks, receiving the impetus bonus from charging across relatively smooth level surface while heavily armored.
11. Players made their attacks.
12. Post-melee morale was conducted to determine how the monsters would move in the following turn.

Scenario 2:

1. Players chose not to cast a spell since they would be on the move.
2. Monsters won initiative.
3. Monsters performed a charge to close into melee distance.
4. No pass-through missile fire was conducted by players.
5. Players performed normal movement to run from the charge while the elves used split move & fire to pick off monsters pursuing.
6. No pass-through missile fire was conducted by monsters.
7. No spells or further missile fire occurred for either side (split move & fire disallows 2nd attack by bows).
8. Monsters just barely caught the players in melee range by the end of the turn, but the archers were still able to refuse combat because enough allies remain to hinder enemy infiltration.
9. Monsters made their attacks, receive the impetus bonus from charging across relatively smooth level surface while heavily armored, as well as a bonus for attacking from the rear.
10. Players are unable to turn and attack due to the rule that disallows a response to attacks from the rear. They will have to decide if that is what they do next turn.
11. Post-melee morale was conducted to determine how the monsters would move in the following turn.

Scenario 3:

1. Monsters have three magic-users. One declared a spell and is out of melee range, another declared a spell but stays in melee range, but the last one decided not to because he wanted to move out of melee range this round.
2. Monsters won intiative.
3. Monsters stayed in melee range, holding their ground, with one of the magic-users moving a full movement out of melee range.
4. Players conducted pass-through fire the spell caster outside of melee and score a hit, thus disrupting their spell.
5. Players stood in melee range, holding their ground.
6. No pass-through fire was conducted by monsters.
7. The magic-user in melee had their spell go off, but because it is in melee there was a chance of friendly fire and or miscast (referee judgment).
8. Players attempted to conduct normal missile fire on the remaining spell caster who is engaged in melee from last round. They missed, and the referee accounts for friendly fire.
9. Monsters have their magic user refuse combat, and he pulls back from the front ranks out of melee range.
10. Monsters make their melee attacks.
11. Players make their melee attacks.
12. Post-melee morale was conducted to determine how the monsters would move in the following turn.