Firing ranged weapons into a grapple

[Christopher Van Horn]

In 3.5 this issue was a flat 50% chance to hit either of the grappled creatures but I have not been able to figure out how it is dealt with in the pathfinder RPG. It appears to have changed since the improved precise shot no longer ignores the grappled condition. So here is the list of important questions:

- Does the grappled condition give modifiers to ranged attacks into the grapple?
- Does it grant a cover or concealment bonus or just a flat miss chance?
- Does the size of the grapplers matter?

Thanks for the help guys!

[Nethys]

There is no extra penalty or risk for firing into a grapple. As they still threaten each other, there is the -4 penalty for firing into melee (negated by Precise Shot), but nothing else.

Your God of Knowledge,
Nethys

[stardust]

Although, if you roll a critical fumble, you could possibly expect the worst. :(

[Redcelt]

Same with attacking yes? No chance to hit the wrong person or no penalties to attack a grapple if you are outside the grapple using a melee weapon?

[Githzilla]

In 3.5 the grapplers would be in the same space. I don't believe this is the case in Pathfinder.

[redcelt32]

I was trying to figure out if there were penalties involved in a third person attacking two people involved in a grapple. As it stands, it looks like they both take a -4 dex penalty and there is no chance to hit the wrong guy?

[TriOmegaZero]

I have actually not been able to find anywhere in 3.5 or PF where attacking a grappled person incurred a 50% chance of hitting the other grappler. I also cannot find where it says a 1 is anything but an automatic miss. References would be greatly appreciated.

[Count Duck]

It is just shooting in melee.

[Father Dale]

TriOmegaZero wrote:

I have actually not been able to find anywhere in 3.5 or PF where attacking a grappled person incurred a 50% chance of hitting the other grappler. I also cannot find where it says a 1 is anything but an automatic miss. References would be greatly appreciated.

In 3.5, there was an equally random chance of hitting any of the creatures in a grapple if you fired a ranged attack into a grapple. This can be found on page 151 of the PHB in footnote 3 to Table 8-6. This is not found anywhere in the text however, but I do believe it was confirmed to be accurate according to the designers.

Generally this would mean a 50% chance of striking either grappler. However, you could have more than one creature in a grapple, and thus the odds would change accordingly (i.e. 3 creatures in a grapple means a 1/3rd chance of hitting any of them, 4 means a 25% chance of hitting any of them, etc.). The Improved Precise Shot feat would, among other things, negate the chance of hitting the wrong target; you would thus hit whichever target you were aiming at.

However, in 3.5, grapplers occupied the same space. In Pathfinder they occupy adjacent spaces. And the 'concept' of grappling has changed accordingly. In 3.5, grappling was much like actual wrestling with the opponent; in Pathfinder its more like grabbing with one hand. Thus, in Pathfinder theres no chance of hitting the other target in a grapple.

The rule in 3.5 for natural 1's on an attack roll automatically missing can be found on page 134 of the PHB, under Attack Roll-automatic misses and hits. The same, identical language is found in the Pathfinder Core Rule Book on page 178, also under the section Attack Roll. If you are referring to a natural 1 being a potential 'fumble' that is a variant rule that is detailed on page 28 of the 3.5 DMG. I don't believe that a corresponding variant rule is found in the Pathfinder CRB, but I may be mistaken on that. In any event, the 3.5 optional rule was that a DC 10 Dex check would negate a fumble after a natural 1 on an attack role, and it was up to the DM to determine what it meant to 'fumble' on the attack.

[DragonBringerX]

Father Dale wrote:

If you are referring to a natural 1 being a potential 'fumble' that is a variant rule that is detailed on page 28 of the 3.5 DMG. I don't believe that a corresponding variant rule is found in the Pathfinder CRB, but I may be mistaken on that. In any event, the 3.5 optional rule was that a DC 10 Dex check would negate a fumble after a natural 1 on an attack role, and it was up to the DM to determine what it meant to 'fumble' on the attack.

You are correct on that, but my guess is that we will see said variant rule in the GMG (game masters guide).

[Sidney Kuhn]

There is a rule in the Pathfinder Core Rulebook which covers RANGED ATTACKS INTO MELEE, but this seems to be an exact copy of the 3.5 rule. 3.5 had this clarified in the Rules Compendium on page 61 which stated "If you make a ranged attack against a grappler while not engaged in the grapple, you roll randomly to see which grappler your attack hits". It would have been nice if the writers would have changed the title of RANGED ATTACKS INTO MELEE RANGED to ATTACKS INTO MELEE OR GRAPPELING.

Perhaps, grappeling is defined in the rules as melee but I haven't noticed that clarification.

It seems from the above, I was wrong about randomly hitting a target in a grapple.

My question is: "Who is the official source for an official answer to any rules question?"