I shared my opinion, you are all free to disagree with it. My players like it, They haven't said anything to me about it being unfair , or mean. trust me my players are very vocal and call me out on tons of things. Bottom line is they have fun with my game and my rules in the end that's really is all that should matter.
It is true that all that should really matter is that the people playing are having fun. However, it's important to remember that a thing enjoyable as-is is not actually an indication of whether or not that thing could be made more enjoyable by making some changes.
After all, isn't that why people try out a new edition or a completely new game? To see if doing something different would also be fun (and maybe it's even more fun - like when I found this crazy-cool game named Call of Cthulhu and found it a lot more fun for horror-themed games).
The "Hitting Cover" optional rule in the DMG is perfectly reasonable. The real faux pas is changing the rules mid-game. If you're going to make changes to the core rules, you should tell your players before a session starts. Ideally, before they've even created their characters.
The "Hitting Cover" optional rule in the DMG is perfectly reasonable. The real faux pas is changing the rules mid-game. If you're going to make changes to the core rules, you should tell your players before a session starts. Ideally, before they've even created their characters.
I wouldn't call it "perfectly reasonable", although that doesn't affect your argument.
For example, consider an AC 24 heavily armored fighter standing in front of an AC 8 commoner, and someone firing at that commoner. There is no dice roll that will result in the missile hitting the fighter (unless the fighter is the shooter's ally, and the DM houserules 1s as not only automatic misses, but critical misses / fumbles, and makes them have an additional negative effect, and chooses "hitting your ally" as that effect).
While not hitting said heavily armored fighter who is being used as cover is "reasonable", I wouldn't call it "perfectly reasonable".
Again, I'm not attacking your point (with which I agree completely), just a slight bit of nitpicking. =)
For example, consider an AC 24 heavily armored fighter standing in front of an AC 8 commoner, and someone firing at that commoner. There is no dice roll that will result in the missile hitting the fighter (unless the fighter is the shooter's ally, and the DM houserules 1s as not only automatic misses, but critical misses / fumbles, and makes them have an additional negative effect, and chooses "hitting your ally" as that effect).
While not hitting said heavily armored fighter who is being used as cover is "reasonable", I wouldn't call it "perfectly reasonable".
Again, I'm not attacking your point (with which I agree completely), just a slight bit of nitpicking. =)
I'm not sure your example is good...
If the commoner is using the fighter as cover, then he clearly isn't engaged in combat with him...more like cowering behind an obstacle, and would receive a boost to AC accordingly, and if the attack roll failed to hit that AC, it could be ruled that the attack might have made contact with the fighter, but failed to cause damage.
If the commoner is in combat with the fighter, it would not receive an AC bonus against the ranged attack from the fighter's ally because combat is fluid and people can't really take cover behind people who are trying to kill them (unless the commoner is actually Jackie Chan, level 20+ monk, and the game-master is more accepting of over-the-top martial arts physics). Therefore, a miss from the ranged attack would likely be ruled just that, a miss, and it would be assumed the ammunition either managed to miss the combatants completely or dinged off an armored location and failed to do damage.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"The mongoose blew out its candle and was asleep in bed before the room went dark." —Llanowar fable
For example, consider an AC 24 heavily armored fighter standing in front of an AC 8 commoner, and someone firing at that commoner. There is no dice roll that will result in the missile hitting the fighter (unless the fighter is the shooter's ally, and the DM houserules 1s as not only automatic misses, but critical misses / fumbles, and makes them have an additional negative effect, and chooses "hitting your ally" as that effect).
Considering the attacker wasn't aiming at the fighter in the first place, and that hitting the fighter deliberately is hard, I think it's unlikely the attacker would score an accidental hit. At any rate, it's not worth slowing down the game with extra dice rolls for.
If the commoner is in combat with the fighter, it would not receive an AC bonus against the ranged attack from the fighter's ally because combat is fluid and people can't really take cover behind people who are trying to kill them
Except in the 5e rules, the fighter does provide cover in that situation... +2 to the commoner's AC to be exact.
If the commoner is in combat with the fighter, it would not receive an AC bonus against the ranged attack from the fighter's ally because combat is fluid and people can't really take cover behind people who are trying to kill them
Except in the 5e rules, the fighter does provide cover in that situation... +2 to the commoner's AC to be exact.
Half Cover
A target with half cover has a +2 bonus to AC and Dexterity saving throws. A target has half cover if an obstacle blocks at least half of its body. The obstacle might be a low wall, a large piece of furniture, a narrow tree trunk, or a creature, whether that creature is an enemy or a friend.
Huh, I guess you are right, assuming that they are both positioned in such a way as the fighter would block at least half of the commoner's body from the ranged attack. Either way, all combat would do is raise the targets AC slightly. Missing an attack on the target would still not do anything beyond having the attack avoid both combatants or glance off either one and do no damage.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"The mongoose blew out its candle and was asleep in bed before the room went dark." —Llanowar fable
I personally make this ruling whenever we encounter a normal critical failure in a similar circumstance, but it's usually a "for effect" thing, like it glances off your party member and deals 1 damage. Early on that's painful, but once you're level 4 and up 1 damage isn't a make-or-break situation, but it does add some fun flavor to critical failures.
I usually go for something funny if possible, but if I'm not quick enough or it's a situation that's just begging for friendly fire, I'll go with the 1 damage ping on an ally.
Thanks fellas! I learned quite a few things from everyone! I appreciate the detail! Also, sorry for sparking a heated debate, lol! Thanks again, and happy gaming!
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
The "Hitting Cover" optional rule in the DMG is perfectly reasonable. The real faux pas is changing the rules mid-game. If you're going to make changes to the core rules, you should tell your players before a session starts. Ideally, before they've even created their characters.
Huh, I guess you are right, assuming that they are both positioned in such a way as the fighter would block at least half of the commoner's body from the ranged attack. Either way, all combat would do is raise the targets AC slightly. Missing an attack on the target would still not do anything beyond having the attack avoid both combatants or glance off either one and do no damage.
I personally make this ruling whenever we encounter a normal critical failure in a similar circumstance, but it's usually a "for effect" thing, like it glances off your party member and deals 1 damage. Early on that's painful, but once you're level 4 and up 1 damage isn't a make-or-break situation, but it does add some fun flavor to critical failures.
I usually go for something funny if possible, but if I'm not quick enough or it's a situation that's just begging for friendly fire, I'll go with the 1 damage ping on an ally.
my west marches campaign wiki: http://solace5e.com/
Thanks fellas! I learned quite a few things from everyone! I appreciate the detail! Also, sorry for sparking a heated debate, lol! Thanks again, and happy gaming!