Ranged Attacks

[philotomy]

1. Blows/strikes in melee are abstract (i.e. one attack roll represents the PC's chance to do damage with a whole series of strikes, feints, etc), but ranged attacks are one aimed missile per roll (thus, 1 attack roll uses one of the 10 magic arrows in your quiver).

2. In OD&D w/o supplements, ranged attacks are modified by Dex, while melee attacks receive no modifier (possibly because of #1, above).

3. It does not seem unreasonable to suppose that a high-level (i.e. hero/superhero) Fighting Man (or Elf) could launch more than one aimed missile in the space of a round (note: my rounds are 12 seconds). Given #1, this would mean multiple attack rolls, unlike melee attacks.

4. It does not seem unreasonable to suppose that a PC could fire/throw more missiles if he were not aiming. For example, launching largely unaimed shots into an enemy formation.

Comments?

[Finarvyn]

Is it reasonable to assume that ranged attackes are just as abstracted as melee and that the archer is launching more than one missile that do a total damage as per the roll, rather than each arrow doing the damage? (I know that part of the melee thing is the thust-parry-counterthrust thing, and maybe we have fire-duck or some such.)

Of course the major hole in my theory is that many players count arrows and it doesn't make sense that an archer might have hundreds of arrrows for abstracted bowfire.

Just thinking out loud.

[philotomy]

admin said:

Is it reasonable to assume that ranged attackes are just as abstracted as melee and that the archer is launching more than one missile that do a total damage as per the roll, rather than each arrow doing the damage? (I know that part of the melee thing is the thust-parry-counterthrust thing, and maybe we have fire-duck or some such.)

Yes, I could see that.

Of course the major hole in my theory is that many players count arrows and it doesn't make sense that an archer might have hundreds of arrrows for abstracted bowfire.

That was my problem with that approach, too. It becomes more pronounced if you have magic arrows.

How about this (still in the brainstorming stage):

Crossbows may never fire more than once in a 12 second round.

Multiple Missiles/Single Target
- 4th level Fighter may fire 2 missiles
- 8th level Fighter may fire 3 missiles
- Dex mod. applies
- One attack roll
- Each additional missile adds +1 to hit
- Damage is unaffected
- Magic ammunition affects the roll/damage (but only once, not per arrow).
- "Mixed" ammunition (e.g. magic and normal arrows) use the lowest modifiers.
EX. 1 = 3 arrows at an ogre, +2 to hit, 1d6 dmg
EX. 2 = 2 +1 arrows = +2 to hit, 1d6+1 dmg
EX. 3 = +1 arrow and normal arrow, +1 to hit, 1d6 damage

Multiple Missiles/Multiple Targets
- 4th level Fighter may fire at 2 targets
- 8th level Fighter may fire at 3 targets
- Multiple Attack Rolls
- Dex mod. does not apply
- Shots that hit roll 2 dice of damage and take the lowest number

Unaimed Fire Into Massed Foes
- DM adjudicates situation as required (i.e. formal rules not necessary).

Too complicated/not worth the trouble? Other problems?

[coffee]

philotomy said:

Too complicated/not worth the trouble? Other problems?

I would say so, yes.

Combat in D&D is not a wargame, nor was it ever meant to be. (That's according to Gary Gygax, btw; I didn't just make that up.)

Of course, your mileage may vary.

[philotomy]

coffee said:

I would say [too complicated], yes.

Yeah, that's what I'm thinking, too. It's doesn't seem like a good fit.

[Finarvyn]

philotomy said:

How about this (still in the brainstorming stage):

Crossbows may never fire more than once in a 12 second round.

Multiple Missiles/Single Target
- 4th level Fighter may fire 2 missiles
- 8th level Fighter may fire 3 missiles
- Dex mod. applies

How about chopping your rule off halfway down the list, as shown above. Give bonus missile attacks at 4th and 8th level, add DEX mods, and scrap the rest of the system.

Seems simple and easy to work with.

[dwayanu]

Sustained "firefights" are an unusual case, I think. They tend to involve use of cover and evasion so that the frequency of clear shots is less than theoretical rate of fire.

Most often, in my experience, an initial volley is immediately followed (especially in the dungeons) by closing to hand-to-hand fighting. Referees differ on whether shots into an ongoing melee are to be discouraged.

At the close ranges at which axes, knives and spears would be hurled, there's probably no chance for more than one shot.

With bows and slings fired at longer ranges or into melee, one might roll a die to see how many missiles were used to get the one potentially telling shot. The roll could be modified for dexterity and/or experience level.

Assume that but a single magic arrow is required. This could be rationalized as the magic guiding one to the appropriate moment for loosing.

The situation in a skirmish (again, especially in a dungeon) is different from that of massed units on a battlefield.

[Stonegiant]

How about this (inspired by reading your musings)-

Drawn bow users roll 2d20 to hit, if both die score a hit than a max 6 points of damage occurred but requires the use of two arrows. If one arrow is used than roll 1d20 to hit and roll damage normally.

[Stonegiant]

Another alternative is to say that you roll 2d6 for arrow damage; 1d6 for hit points inflicted, the other d6 has its result halved and this expresses the number arrow needed to inflict that damage. Than say at 4th level they only need to use 1d2 arrows to inflict that damage and than at 8th level they can inflict 1d6 damage with one arrow on every shot.

[dwayanu]

A couple more thoughts:

To give a bonus to hit for loosing multiple missiles seems to reduce somewhat the value of magic arrows.

Missiles at short range (most common in dungeons) already get +2 to hit. If you're using Chainmail rates of fire, then non-moving archers get two attacks per round. Is more incentive to prefer ranged attacks in keeping with your view of heroic fantasy?