I'm standing at the end of a 5-foot-wide hallway. There was an enemy there a moment ago, but he has since turned invisible. I shoot an arrow (or a kinetic blast or whatever) down the hallway in the hopes of hitting the invisible target.
Do I really have to pick a single square for this, even though the arrow would logically keep going until gravity dragged it down to the floor or it hit something?
Not being able to pick a line of squares in this case seems totally silly to me.
yes, you really have to pick a square you're targeting to have a chance at hitting. Because it's assumed that your arrow misses everything on it's way to it's intended target.
Why?
If i shoot in an open field , why then would i also pick a square by this logic instead of a line of squares?
If your arrow goes foward until something stops it , i dont see the diference here.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There is no rules ambiguity here, you must pick a square.
If you don't like it, house rule it. But, if you do house rule it don't forget to also add in things like 'my arrow missed the target's touch AC, did it hit the guy behind him?' house rules. (The rules are not a simulation of reality, they have nothing to do with reality and thus are silly. If you want to simulate these types of things, that is what house rules are for.) :)
Perhaps your firing the arrow in an arc, so targeting a square is basically saying were the arc will end.
Perhaps he has crouched down and taken a 5' step closer to you, or is now hugging the wall or any number of other minor movements that would make you simply shooting down the hall an exercise in futility.
Seems to me this is already handled by bonuses to his AC against ranged attacks for being prone, or other bonuses for being invisible. Him stepping closer wouldn't have much effect if he is still in the path of the arrow (which he would be if stuck in a corridor as described). His hugging the wall wouldn't help him here anymore than it would if he were visible.
Perhaps your firing the arrow in an arc, so targeting a square is basically saying were the arc will end.
This makes sense in an open field at extreme ranges, not in a hallway. Unless the hallway was extremely long, and had high ceilings, the shot would be more or less straight.
An arrow shot at a target within the first range increment should have almost no arc at all.
There is no rules ambiguity here, you must pick a square.
If you don't like it, house rule it. But, if you do house rule it don't forget to also add in things like 'my arrow missed the target's touch AC, did it hit the guy behind him?' house rules. (The rules are not a simulation of reality, they have nothing to do with reality and thus are silly. If you want to simulate these types of things, that is what house rules are for.) :)
This.
If you want a rule whereby missile weapons have a trajectory/arc/ballistic path, then you'll have to invent one.
And then apply it. It adds a lot of complications and is likely (depending on how you write the rule) to lead to ranged weapons (at least on the direct fire part of their trajectories) becoming even better options than they currently are.
What would be so complicated about such a house rule?
This really should have been a distinct rule already, right under the existing invisibility rules where it discusses groping for the target or swinging one's melee weapon at a square.
It just makes no sense for my ranged attack to suddenly stop in midair.
What would be so complicated about such a house rule?
This really should have been a distinct rule already, right under the existing invisibility rules where it discusses groping for the target or swinging one's melee weapon at a square.
It just makes no sense for my ranged attack to suddenly stop in midair.
A character doesn't take up all 5ft of a 5ft square. That's where the 50% miss chance comes from, did you happen to swing in the right part of the square to hit them. Also it cheapens invisibility some, melee has no option to swing all around them and test all 8 squares to see if the guy is there, no way to swing at all 8 squares period. Same for archery. You hit a square. Otherwise you'd have to roll hit chances against everything in the line you wanted and would need to take out soft cover for ranged attacks.
but what does it matter, you have been told the rule, houserule whatever you want, and take it to the houserule section to discuss the idea.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Since this is not actually a rules question I am flagging it for wrong forum.
What would be so complicated about such a house rule?
This really should have been a distinct rule already, right under the existing invisibility rules where it discusses groping for the target or swinging one's melee weapon at a square.
It just makes no sense for my ranged attack to suddenly stop in midair.
The rules question has been answered, yes, pick a square.
If you keep complaining about it and want to discuss houserules, there is a forum for that.
If you know the rule and don't like it, the homebrew area seems more productive.
Assuming this gets moved there - an invisible, armored, moving target that takes up about 8 square feet of a 25 square foot area seems like an incredibly unlikely target for a random shot.
I wouldn't mind a feat or class ability, though, that would allow for targeting a character in such a situation (throw the martial classes a bone).
How's this for a rules question:
You're standing in a 10-foot wide hallway. You shoot at a target at the end of the hall, not knowing that there was a gelatinous cube in front of you (I think they are hard to see, but if not, assume it is invisible).
Do you hit the cube, or automatically miss it since you didn't target its square specifically? If it misses/ignores the gelatinous, does it continue on to the original target? Why or why not?
Does the game have rules for invisible cover? I can imagine the King standing out in the hall taunting an archer on the other side ... who doesn't know that between himself and the king is his loyal daughter Princess Paladin with her tower shield and Ring of Invisibility.
How's this for a rules question:
You're standing in a 10-foot wide hallway. You shoot at a target at the end of the hall, not knowing that there was a gelatinous cube in front of you (I think they are hard to see, but if not, assume it is invisible).
Do you hit the cube, or automatically miss it since you didn't target its square specifically? If it misses/ignores the gelatinous, does it continue on to the original target? Why or why not?
The first thing would be a DC 15 perception check to see the gelatinous cube as you aimed down the hall if the cube is motionless. If it has been moving you see the cube.
|
Technically you miss your target as the Gelatinous Cube provides Total Cover. You also don't do any damage to the Gelatinous Cube and I'd hazard to say the likely hood you don't know the Cube is present has dropped to about zero (Or your not so bright character is wondering why his arrow is hanging in mid air, "Obviously a wizard is about!!" :P).
Don't creatures normally provide only soft cover?
An arrow shot at a target within the first range increment should have almost no arc at all.
A shot where you don't have to adjust your aim to compensate for the gravitational pull on the projectile is called a point blank shot. Since we have a feat with that name, we can deduct that in Pathfinder, only the first 30 feet have or rather need no arc (apparently, in PF, this range is the same for every weapon).
The better question would be, "When do you hit a target's cover, instead of hitting the target?"
RAW, if you want to hit an invisible creature down a hallway with an arrow, you need to pick a square and make an attack roll.
But also RAW, if the invisible creature was still in the 5-ft hallway, it effectively grants soft cover to the square you are targeting.
So when, if at all, do you hit a target's cover instead of hitting the target (square, in this case)?
If you are able to hit the square's cover (the invisible creature), you then need to resolve the 50% miss chance. Bypass the miss chance, and then you need to compare your attack roll to the invisible creature's AC. Exceed the creature's AC, congrats, you have hit the invisible creature.
There are no rules stating that you hit the cover.
Again, you can make a house rule.
The better question would be, "When do you hit a target's cover, instead of hitting the target?"
RAW, if you want to hit an invisible creature down a hallway with an arrow, you need to pick a square and make an attack roll.
But also RAW, if the invisible creature was still in the 5-ft hallway, it effectively grants soft cover to the square you are targeting.
So when, if at all, do you hit a target's cover instead of hitting the target (square, in this case)?
If you are able to hit the square's cover (the invisible creature), you then need to resolve the 50% miss chance. Bypass the miss chance, and then you need to compare your attack roll to the invisible creature's AC. Exceed the creature's AC, congrats, you have hit the invisible creature.
I think I like this answer best. So let's say you have Archie the archer shooting at an invisible Princess Paladin and her dad, King Wizard, both in our 5' corridor. Archie wants the King dead and knows nothing about anyone else showing up for the battle. Pally is 15' away, the King is 30', but ... Archie picks 25' for his shot.
The arrow flies. At 15', he risks hitting soft cover. Do all the stuff above.
25', oops. Nobody's home.
But ... aren't there rules for overshooting too? If so, then at 30' King Wizard has something to worry about.
In the specific situation of a narrow hall with just an invisible enemy, I'd probably allow a single shot (*maybe* 2 with rapid/many shot feats) as a standard action to hit the invisible creature.
But that's just Rule 0, at best.
I don't think I'd worry about it unless these situations came up a lot in a campaign.
Gauss is correct on all counts. The rules are there as an abstraction to balance the game, not to mimic reality. Houserule it if you don't like it.
How's this for a rules question:
You're standing in a 10-foot wide hallway. You shoot at a target at the end of the hall, not knowing that there was a gelatinous cube in front of you (I think they are hard to see, but if not, assume it is invisible).
Do you hit the cube, or automatically miss it since you didn't target its square specifically? If it misses/ignores the gelatinous, does it continue on to the original target? Why or why not?
You are misunderstanding 'miss' in pathfinder. Miss doesn't mean that the attack doesn't interact with the target in any way, rather it means that it was insufficiently well targeted to cause damage.
I can 'miss' you if you dodge it dexterously, if the arrow bounces off your armor, if it is warped off course by your deflection bonus, if your luck bonus causes it to only cut off a lock of hair instead of flesh or even if it sticks into your thick scales but because of that natural armor it doesn't significantly wound you. All of those are misses, and most of them will stop or alter the trajectory of the arrow.
This is also why you need to aim at a particular square. If you aren't even targeting the right place at the right range, it is assume that at best one of the above will happen if the arrow interacts with the target on its course. If you are targeting the right square, and you roll well enough, there is still a 50% chance that something will go wrong, preventing a 'hit'.
How realistic all of this is is debatable. Probably it would be more realistic to not allow any targeting if you can't perceive your opponent, but in the cases where players can't overcome an opponents invisibility this becomes totally unfun, instead of just really frustrating as it is with the current system, which is doubtless why the ability to hit was added in, as long as you can at least guess the right square.
I understand 'miss' just fine.