One character fires a ranged spell attack down a corridor at an enemy, but halfway down that corridor between the player and the target is an ally. The enemy and the ally are medium in size, the player is small in size and the corridor is 5ft wide.
Now when this happened in our session at the weekend I couldn't think how to resolve it in the heat of the moment.
Its reasonable to say that the ally is blocking clean line of sight to the enemy so there must be some penalty to that, off the top of my head I asked the player to roll with disadvantage for the hit which I realise now is incorrect, the enemy should have had a +2 bonus to AC.
That's not the issue, the issue is that I decided that after the player missed the attack on the enemy (by a pretty big margin) they hit their ally with the spell, I made them roll for the damage and told the ally he must take that damage. Uproar ensued.
Since the session I have looked through the PHB and the DMG and I can find pretty clear statements about what happens to the target of a ranged spell (the enemy) who is behind another creature (the ally) bit nothing about what happens to the creature creating the cover (the ally).
It seems unreasonable to think there's no chance of hitting the ally when the shot was clearly suffering from inaccuracies to miss in the first place.
You're not incorrect in the heat of the moment - do whatever makes sense. But yes, the ally confers cover, which is either +2 or +5 to AC depending on the amount. And there is no RAW for hitting intervening objects. What I usually do in this kind of case is only make the attack hit the ally if the roll is a natural 1. You could also use the amount of cover to determine: either if the attack would have hit the foe if not for the +2, or make the chance for critical miss at natural 2-3 as well. A simple miss on the attack roll probably shouldn't mean an auto-hit on an ally in plate mail.
The key is to be upfront about the ruling. For example, mention to a player when they're trying to take a difficult shot that there's a person in the way who could take damage. Part of the problem is that things like grid-based combat make players think of combat as purely tactical instead of as a messy melee. Sometimes, unexpected things happen.
And, of course, since the broken Sharpshooter and Spell Sniper feats completely ignore cover, this all becomes moot if the player has those.
It seems unreasonable to think there's no chance of hitting the ally when the shot was clearly suffering from inaccuracies to miss in the first place.
What do/would you do if this comes up?
I follow the rules, and attitude, of the game being played at the time. Which in the case of 5th edition D&D means I put "It's not fun, heroic, cinematic, cool, or even all that interesting, for anyone involved if having an ally between you and your target means not just that you are more likely to not do what you wanted (i.e. hit the enemy) but also make it so that if you miss you won't just fail a little, you'll fail a lot and feel like you shouldn't even try in similar situations in the future (which the player of the character hit by your errant spell is likely to suggest, even if they are always getting their character in the way and thus completely shutting down your character)" so far ahead of "it makes a logical kind of real-world-based sense to have this incredibly un-fun, party crippling thing, happen" that the latter doesn't even appear on my list of priorities.
In a game of giants, dragons, and elves that fling spells, trying to force things to be "reasonable" is going to be inconsistent at best, and entirely ruinous if applied consistently (because it outright stops dragons and giants from even existing as they do in the game now).
I agree with Aaron. The ally gives cover (usually +2, done 4/5s is a LOT of cover for the +5).
I also agree with him on not hitting the ally for the reasons he stated... It's not fun and discourages the Ranged character from using his abilities. DisAdv is a huge penalty and does the same.
If you're looking for an explanation of why it doesn't hit the ally, assume the character is "aiming wide" to hedge there bets.
The problem with doing otherwise it's how do you roll to hit the ally? What if there Ally is in Full Plate with an AC of 20? If the Archer rolled a 16 would it still hit the Ally? Remember hitting someone and hitting their AC are different things.
What if there are enemies giving cover to the enemy wizard and you a shot the enemy wizard? On a miss will he auto hit the enemy bodyguards? Basically it's a lot of book keeping.
Rat, why do you think Sniper is a broken feat? I find them quite reasonable.
Rat, why do you think Sniper is a broken feat? I find them quite reasonable.
For the same reason I prefer to make it possible for misfires to hit intervening targets - because ranged weapons in 5e are already strong enough without needing to circumvent the few rules that make things less rosy for them. I don't think Sharpshooter and Spell Sniper are overpowered so much as they disregard an entire subset of rules. Archers already get +2 attack (which I assume was in place of ignoring light cover, for ease) and no real drawbacks compared to melee. The only real tradeoff is that foes can get cover from ranged attacks but not from someone in their face. I'm not even a big fan of the cover rules - it's one of the few places where there are situational modifiers left in the game, and DMs thus tend to forget about them anyway. But otherwise ranged attacks can get out of hand - I noticed this a lot in later episodes of Critical Role, where Mercer kept trying to impose difficulties on the party's gunslinger, rogue, and ranger, but Sharpshooter basically made them unstoppable.
If things work smoothly RAW, then by all means keep going that way. I just see part of the fun of the game as trying to use the rules to represent reality when it's sensible, and also to make sure everyone feels powerful - including the tank who doesn't get all the same benefits of the arrow-slingers.
Seen as I've found the answer elsewhere I figured I'd best share it here too. An enemy that is behind cover (which a player counts as) gains the +2 to AC, using the optional "hitting cover" on Pg. 272 of the DMG, if an attack roll is of a value sufficiently high to hit a creature when they are not in cover but low enough that it will not hit the creature if it is in cover then the attack hits the cover. When the cover is a creature the original attack roll is then compared to that creatures AC and if it hits, deals the full damage to this creature instead.
So if a player shoots at an enemy of AC 12 behind an ally of AC 13, the enemies AC with cover is 14, if an attack roll plus modifier comes to 14 the enemy is hit, if the attack roll is 13 the ally is hit, if the roll is 10 it shoots completely wide. However if the allies AC is 15 then any attacks that don't hit the enemy will also be to low to hit the ally.
Seen as I've found the answer elsewhere I figured I'd best share it here too. An enemy that is behind cover (which a player counts as) gains the +2 to AC, using the optional "hitting cover" on Pg. 272 of the DMG, if an attack roll is of a value sufficiently high to hit a creature when they are not in cover but low enough that it will not hit the creature if it is in cover then the attack hits the cover. When the cover is a creature the original attack roll is then compared to that creatures AC and if it hits, deals the full damage to this creature instead.
So if a player shoots at an enemy of AC 12 behind an ally of AC 13, the enemies AC with cover is 14, if an attack roll plus modifier comes to 14 the enemy is hit, if the attack roll is 13 the ally is hit, if the roll is 10 it shoots completely wide. However if the allies AC is 15 then any attacks that don't hit the enemy will also be to low to hit the ally.
Oh hey, that's my rule! I probably accidentally appropriated it. I would still probably say you make a separate roll on the ally to hit - big difference on hitting a piece of plate mail or hitting their exposed knee joint.
I run either half cover for one ally, or 3/4 for more. If I'm feeling like i want it to be more punishing, any hit that would have hit without the penalty, but missed with it will hit the ally/cover. Make a new attack roll against the ally if that happens.
Oh hey, that's my rule! I probably accidentally appropriated it. I would still probably say you make a separate roll on the ally to hit - big difference on hitting a piece of plate mail or hitting their exposed knee joint.
I think it's better not to reroll. It's faster, and archers don't score free hits on the person providing cover if their AC is more than 2 points higher than the target's. Also, it makes sense to me that attacker shouldn't be equally likely to hit the person providing cover by accident as they are when trying to hit them deliberately.
In most situations, I try to avoid making it an issue. Usually the archer can use his movement to get a clear shot. The only time I force it is when (and this actually happens more often than it should) the lead character opens a door and is attacked, thereby blocking the doorway, and the archer wants to fire through the door to hit another creature in the room, thus making it impossible for the archer to get a clear shot not matter how he moves.
It's important to keep in mind that the attack roll is based on the enemy's AC because the armor provides protection, so it's not always the case that a "hit" is a hit and a "miss" is an actual errant shot. Many times a "miss" means that the armor deflected or absorbed the blow and the wearer avoided damage. So in many cases, even a "missed" shot still actually arrived where it was supposed to. It's only in rare cases (maybe a natural 1 on the attack roll, or some other unusual circumstance) that a miss would be so wide as to actually hit someone else, and in that case I make the archer make a dexterity check to avoid hitting the ally. Otherwise I agree with Aaron: keep things as simple as possible and as fun and epic as possible.
I couldn't find anything official on if you can hit a friendly while firing in to melee.
My house rule is this:
A natural roll of 2-5 means that a friendly gets hit, UNLESS a 2-5 actually hits the intended target (after mods of course). It will be the friendly that line of sight goes through that takes the hit, otherwise randomize who's hit if need be. A natural roll of 1 will Critically hit a friendly even if a 1 would normally hit, after mods. Follow the rule above on who gets hit.
I couldn't find anything official on if you can hit a friendly while firing in to melee.
My house rule is this:
A natural roll of 2-5 means that a friendly gets hit, UNLESS a 2-5 actually hits the intended target (after mods of course). It will be the friendly that line of sight goes through that takes the hit, otherwise randomize who's hit if need be. A natural roll of 1 will Critically hit a friendly even if a 1 would normally hit, after mods. Follow the rule above on who gets hit.
Here is an optional rule from the DMG that should help, especially if a creature is providing some amount of cover for your target.
Personally, I use a homebrew critical fail table where you can possibly hit an ally as a random effect on a natural 1 (about 1/3rd of the time on a critical fail for ranged weapon and ranged spell attacks)
You never mentioned which spell was being used. I presume this whole situation requires a spell that needs a to-hit roll. Spells like Fireball would not need a to-hit roll and so I presume those would just be handled with a normal "save" as described in the spell description. Now Lightning Bolt says it effects everything in the line to the end of the target. In this case, you have to check your friendly.
How about archers firing at targets in the crowd?
Finally, since we would often be "firing" at the backs of our allies, should we reduce the AC of our allies when these checks are being rolled? Should a shield be considered not in play for the purpose of determining AC?
And remember, whatever is good for the goose is good for the gander too. So these same rules need to nerf the monsters too.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscript catapultas habebunt
If misses hit creatures granting cover, then you could just buff up your ally's AC, have them stand on the other side of the monster, and hit it "for free" as long as you miss your ally. Lie down for disadvantage while you're at it.
It's fun to do for a fumble or something, but trying to fit this into an everyday rule is not worth it and exploitable to boot. If you miss due to an ally's cover, it's because you were taking special precautions not to hit the ally.
In 5E what do people do in this scenario.
One character fires a ranged spell attack down a corridor at an enemy, but halfway down that corridor between the player and the target is an ally. The enemy and the ally are medium in size, the player is small in size and the corridor is 5ft wide.
Now when this happened in our session at the weekend I couldn't think how to resolve it in the heat of the moment.
Its reasonable to say that the ally is blocking clean line of sight to the enemy so there must be some penalty to that, off the top of my head I asked the player to roll with disadvantage for the hit which I realise now is incorrect, the enemy should have had a +2 bonus to AC.
That's not the issue, the issue is that I decided that after the player missed the attack on the enemy (by a pretty big margin) they hit their ally with the spell, I made them roll for the damage and told the ally he must take that damage. Uproar ensued.
Since the session I have looked through the PHB and the DMG and I can find pretty clear statements about what happens to the target of a ranged spell (the enemy) who is behind another creature (the ally) bit nothing about what happens to the creature creating the cover (the ally).
It seems unreasonable to think there's no chance of hitting the ally when the shot was clearly suffering from inaccuracies to miss in the first place.
What do/would you do if this comes up?
You're not incorrect in the heat of the moment - do whatever makes sense. But yes, the ally confers cover, which is either +2 or +5 to AC depending on the amount. And there is no RAW for hitting intervening objects. What I usually do in this kind of case is only make the attack hit the ally if the roll is a natural 1. You could also use the amount of cover to determine: either if the attack would have hit the foe if not for the +2, or make the chance for critical miss at natural 2-3 as well. A simple miss on the attack roll probably shouldn't mean an auto-hit on an ally in plate mail.
The key is to be upfront about the ruling. For example, mention to a player when they're trying to take a difficult shot that there's a person in the way who could take damage. Part of the problem is that things like grid-based combat make players think of combat as purely tactical instead of as a messy melee. Sometimes, unexpected things happen.
And, of course, since the broken Sharpshooter and Spell Sniper feats completely ignore cover, this all becomes moot if the player has those.
Even a blind squirrel finds a nut once in awhile.
I follow the rules, and attitude, of the game being played at the time. Which in the case of 5th edition D&D means I put "It's not fun, heroic, cinematic, cool, or even all that interesting, for anyone involved if having an ally between you and your target means not just that you are more likely to not do what you wanted (i.e. hit the enemy) but also make it so that if you miss you won't just fail a little, you'll fail a lot and feel like you shouldn't even try in similar situations in the future (which the player of the character hit by your errant spell is likely to suggest, even if they are always getting their character in the way and thus completely shutting down your character)" so far ahead of "it makes a logical kind of real-world-based sense to have this incredibly un-fun, party crippling thing, happen" that the latter doesn't even appear on my list of priorities.
In a game of giants, dragons, and elves that fling spells, trying to force things to be "reasonable" is going to be inconsistent at best, and entirely ruinous if applied consistently (because it outright stops dragons and giants from even existing as they do in the game now).
So,
I agree with Aaron. The ally gives cover (usually +2, done 4/5s is a LOT of cover for the +5).
I also agree with him on not hitting the ally for the reasons he stated... It's not fun and discourages the Ranged character from using his abilities. DisAdv is a huge penalty and does the same.
If you're looking for an explanation of why it doesn't hit the ally, assume the character is "aiming wide" to hedge there bets.
The problem with doing otherwise it's how do you roll to hit the ally? What if there Ally is in Full Plate with an AC of 20? If the Archer rolled a 16 would it still hit the Ally? Remember hitting someone and hitting their AC are different things.
What if there are enemies giving cover to the enemy wizard and you a shot the enemy wizard? On a miss will he auto hit the enemy bodyguards? Basically it's a lot of book keeping.
Rat, why do you think Sniper is a broken feat? I find them quite reasonable.
Even a blind squirrel finds a nut once in awhile.
Seen as I've found the answer elsewhere I figured I'd best share it here too. An enemy that is behind cover (which a player counts as) gains the +2 to AC, using the optional "hitting cover" on Pg. 272 of the DMG, if an attack roll is of a value sufficiently high to hit a creature when they are not in cover but low enough that it will not hit the creature if it is in cover then the attack hits the cover. When the cover is a creature the original attack roll is then compared to that creatures AC and if it hits, deals the full damage to this creature instead.
So if a player shoots at an enemy of AC 12 behind an ally of AC 13, the enemies AC with cover is 14, if an attack roll plus modifier comes to 14 the enemy is hit, if the attack roll is 13 the ally is hit, if the roll is 10 it shoots completely wide. However if the allies AC is 15 then any attacks that don't hit the enemy will also be to low to hit the ally.
https://www.dndbeyond.com/compendium/rules/dmg/dungeon-masters-workshop#HittingCover
For those of us with the link in DNDBeyond. Good find Cap'n!
Edit: Just want to point out this is listed as an Optional Rule in the DMG, it isn't a standard rule.
How do you get a one-armed goblin out of a tree?
Wave!
Even a blind squirrel finds a nut once in awhile.
I run either half cover for one ally, or 3/4 for more. If I'm feeling like i want it to be more punishing, any hit that would have hit without the penalty, but missed with it will hit the ally/cover. Make a new attack roll against the ally if that happens.
The Forum Infestation (TM)
In most situations, I try to avoid making it an issue. Usually the archer can use his movement to get a clear shot. The only time I force it is when (and this actually happens more often than it should) the lead character opens a door and is attacked, thereby blocking the doorway, and the archer wants to fire through the door to hit another creature in the room, thus making it impossible for the archer to get a clear shot not matter how he moves.
It's important to keep in mind that the attack roll is based on the enemy's AC because the armor provides protection, so it's not always the case that a "hit" is a hit and a "miss" is an actual errant shot. Many times a "miss" means that the armor deflected or absorbed the blow and the wearer avoided damage. So in many cases, even a "missed" shot still actually arrived where it was supposed to. It's only in rare cases (maybe a natural 1 on the attack roll, or some other unusual circumstance) that a miss would be so wide as to actually hit someone else, and in that case I make the archer make a dexterity check to avoid hitting the ally. Otherwise I agree with Aaron: keep things as simple as possible and as fun and epic as possible.
I'm sorry if I'm necro-ing this thread.
I couldn't find anything official on if you can hit a friendly while firing in to melee.
My house rule is this:
A natural roll of 2-5 means that a friendly gets hit, UNLESS a 2-5 actually hits the intended target (after mods of course). It will be the friendly that line of sight goes through that takes the hit, otherwise randomize who's hit if need be.
A natural roll of 1 will Critically hit a friendly even if a 1 would normally hit, after mods. Follow the rule above on who gets hit.
Here is an optional rule from the DMG that should help, especially if a creature is providing some amount of cover for your target.
https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/dmg/dungeon-masters-workshop#HittingCover
Personally, I use a homebrew critical fail table where you can possibly hit an ally as a random effect on a natural 1 (about 1/3rd of the time on a critical fail for ranged weapon and ranged spell attacks)
You never mentioned which spell was being used. I presume this whole situation requires a spell that needs a to-hit roll. Spells like Fireball would not need a to-hit roll and so I presume those would just be handled with a normal "save" as described in the spell description. Now Lightning Bolt says it effects everything in the line to the end of the target. In this case, you have to check your friendly.
How about archers firing at targets in the crowd?
Finally, since we would often be "firing" at the backs of our allies, should we reduce the AC of our allies when these checks are being rolled? Should a shield be considered not in play for the purpose of determining AC?
And remember, whatever is good for the goose is good for the gander too. So these same rules need to nerf the monsters too.
Cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscript catapultas habebunt
If misses hit creatures granting cover, then you could just buff up your ally's AC, have them stand on the other side of the monster, and hit it "for free" as long as you miss your ally. Lie down for disadvantage while you're at it.
It's fun to do for a fumble or something, but trying to fit this into an everyday rule is not worth it and exploitable to boot. If you miss due to an ally's cover, it's because you were taking special precautions not to hit the ally.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm