|
I'm currently playing in a game where one of the characters has the Precise Shot feat. The way I understand it is that if you fire into melee without the feat you incur a -4 penalty on your to hit roll.
I also understood it that even if you have the feat, if there is an object/person between you and the target you incur a -2 penalty, irrespective of whether you have precise shot or not.
To better explain it:
An ogre is in melee with 3 party members. Fred the archer is 30' away shooting arrows at the ogre but doesn't have precise shot. Unfortunately for Fred his mate Bob is in melee with the ogre in direct line of sight. The way I read it, Fred incurs a -4 penalty for firing into combat and a -2 penalty for Bob being in the way bringing his total penalty to -6.
Nobby the archer is also shooting at the ogre and he does have precise shot. His mate Pedro is also in the line of sight and in melee. The way I understand that scenario is that Nobby doesn't incur -4 because he has precise shot, but does incur -2 because Pedro is between him and his target.
Is that correct? If yes, can someone please point me to the actual rule that backs this up?
Yes, without Precise Shot you incur a -4 penalty to all ranged attacks, including projectile, thrown, and spell ranged touch attacks.
You do not, however, have a -4 penalty for Soft Cover if another character is between you and your target. Instead, they get a +4 bonus to their AC for the soft cover. It is the same net effect but it is important sometimes to keep the penalties on one side and the bonuses on the other side separate and clean.
Keep in mind that if Fred can shoot part of the ogre that is 10 feet away from Bob he won't suffer the -4 penalty, and from such an angle he probably won't have to worry about Bob providings soft cover against the ogre.
Keep in mind that if Fred can shoot part of the ogre that is 10 feet away from Bob he won't suffer the -4 penalty, and from such an angle he probably won't have to worry about Bob providings soft cover against the ogre.
Actually the -4 penalty is for shooting or throwing into melee. So, even if you shoot a part of a large creature that is not adjacent to a foe in melee, you will still take the -4 penalty. If the large creature has reach and has a 5 foot space between it and a character, they are still considered in melee and the penalty would apply.
You are correct about the soft cover not applying. In fact, if a large creature was fighting a medium creature, it could be ruled that soft cover would not apply as you can shoot at the portion of the large creature that is above the medium creature. This assumes that a medium creature is included in a 5 foot cube and a large creature is included in a 10 foot cube, not just a square.
Shooting or Throwing into a Melee
If you shoot or throw a ranged weapon at a target engaged in melee with a friendly character, you take a –4 penalty on your attack roll. Two characters are engaged in melee if they are enemies of each other and either threatens the other. (An unconscious or otherwise immobilized character is not considered engaged unless he is actually being attacked.)
If your target (or the part of your target you're aiming at, if it's a big target) is at least 10 feet away from the nearest friendly character, you can avoid the –4 penalty, even if the creature you're aiming at is engaged in melee with a friendly character.
If your target is two size categories larger than the friendly characters it is engaged with, this penalty is reduced to –2. There is no penalty for firing at a creature that is three size categories larger than the friendly characters it is engaged with.
Precise Shot: If you have the Precise Shot feat, you don't take this penalty.
Precise Shot is still very useful, since battles often take place in cramped quarters where you don't have the luxury of shooting from any angle you want, and enemies of medium size or smaller will usually be adjacent to your allies. However, against large enemies in more open areas you can totally avoid this penalty.
Keep in mind that if Fred can shoot part of the ogre that is 10 feet away from Bob he won't suffer the -4 penalty, and from such an angle he probably won't have to worry about Bob providings soft cover against the ogre.Actually the -4 penalty is for shooting or throwing into melee. So, even if you shoot a part of a large creature that is not adjacent to a foe in melee, you will still take the -4 penalty. If the large creature has reach and has a 5 foot space between it and a character, they are still considered in melee and the penalty would apply.
The bold portion is false.
Shooting or Throwing into a Melee: If you shoot or throw a ranged weapon at a target engaged in melee with a friendly character, you take a –4 penalty on your attack roll. Two characters are engaged in melee if they are enemies of each other and either threatens the other. (An unconscious or otherwise immobilized character is not considered engaged unless he is actually being attacked.)
If your target (or the part of your target you're aiming at, if it's a big target) is at least 10 feet away from the nearest friendly character, you can avoid the –4 penalty, even if the creature you're aiming at is engaged in melee with a friendly character.
If your target is two size categories larger than the friendly characters it is engaged with, this penalty is reduced to –2. There is no penalty for firing at a creature that is three size categories larger than the friendly characters it is engaged with.
Precise Shot: If you have the Precise Shot feat, you don't take this penalty.
EDIT: Ninja'd
You guys are correct. I guess I had read that differently in the past.
However, I wonder about a large creature that is adjacent to a medium creature. The rule says "If your target (or the part of your target you're aiming at, if it's a big target) is at least 10 feet away from the nearest friendly character, you can avoid the –4 penalty." Is a large creature that is adjacent to a medium creature actually 10 feet away? Meaning there is at least one square that is base to base and the outer square only has a single 5 foot square between it and the medium creature. To me that seems like the target is only 5 feet away and not 10 feet.
Now, in my original post where I said even if there was a 5 foot gap between the large creature and the medium creature, I was totally wrong. In that case there would be an empty 5 foot square and then the first 5 foot square of the large creature and then an outer at least two outer 5 foot squares of the large creature. In this case there is most definitely 10 feet in-between.
Are you following what I am getting at?
To be considered "10 feet away" do I need one 5 foot square or two 5 foot squares of separation?
I was under the impression that you measured "how far away" a creature was from center of square to center of square (not necessarily center of occupied space).
Reach Weapons: Most creatures of Medium or smaller size have a reach of only 5 feet. This means that they can make melee attacks only against creatures up to 5 feet (1 square) away. However, Small and Medium creatures wielding reach weapons threaten more squares than a typical creature. In addition, most creatures larger than Medium have a natural reach of 10 feet or more.
...
Melee Attacks: With a normal melee weapon, you can strike any opponent within 5 feet. (Opponents within 5 feet are considered adjacent to you.) Some melee weapons have reach, as indicated in their descriptions. With a typical reach weapon, you can strike opponents 10 feet away, but you can't strike adjacent foes (those within 5 feet).
Ergo, adjacent creatures are 5 feet away from each other and creatures with one square* of space between them are 10 feet away from each other.
*I think horizontal or vertical but not diagonal, could be wrong though.
Hendelbolaf,
A medium creature does not need to have ANY separation between itself and a large creature to be consider 10' away from the large creatures back squares. Measuring fromt he medium creature to the back squares is 10' just like you would measure movement. 1st square = 5 feet. 2nd square = 10 feet.
Here is a representation:
12M
34
1-4 represents a large target. M represents the medium target in melee with the large target. The medium creature is 10 feet away from squares 1 and 3. An archer can aim at squares 1 or 3 without incurring the -4 attack penalty.
- Gauss
I believe, and am pretty sure, that it is only one +4 to AC no matter how many bodies are between the shooter and target.
Vod Canockers is correct; multiple instances of cover do not stack, only the greatest degree is applied (e.g. partial cover from one object and normal cover from another).
Prux, not quite.
In your example the Ogre is fighting your buddy Bob and Fred is shooting the Ogre from behind Bob. See diagram below.
Squares 1-4 are at ground level. Squares 5-8 are 10feet up. (The ogre occupies a 10x10x10 foot space.)
Diagram:
12B-->F
34
56--->F
78
Fred has a -4 penalty to attack since he cannot reasonably target the Ogre's 1 or 3 squares.
However, the Ogre does NOT get a cover bonus. Why? Because Fred can shoot squares 4, 6, or 8. None of those go through Bob.
Now, if Bob were enlarged (see below) then the Ogre would get a cover bonus.
12BB-->F
34BB
56BB-->F
78BB
Final note, and this is very important. The Ogre does not get a +4 cover bonus for each person in between. It is a one time bonus regardless of the number of bodies in the way.
But, the GM might state that after a certain number of people it becomes improved cover which is a +8 bonus. However, that is GM Fiat to determine the level of cover provided by the situation. Standard cover due to people is a +4 soft cover bonus.
- Gauss
Prux, not quite.
However, the Ogre does NOT get a cover bonus. Why? Because Fred can shoot squares 4, 6, or 8. None of those go through Bob.
- Gauss
That's not how the rules read.
"To determine whether your target has cover from your ranged attack, choose a corner of your square. If any line from this corner to any corner of the target's square passes through a square or border that blocks line of effect or provides cover, or through a square occupied by a creature, the target has cover (+4 to AC)."
In the case of the ogre, he has one "square" that is 10' x 10' x 10'. He does not have multiple 5' squares. For the ogre to have cover, or soft cover, all he needs is one line from your square that passes through some kind of cover, i.e. Bob, and now he gets (soft) cover.
Note that the large creature rule for cover applies to melee attacks but not to ranged attacks.
To negate the need for Precise Shot, you can aim at a part of the creature (note, that is a "part" of its space) as long as that part is at least 10' away from your nearest ally. This rule doesn't change the fact that the ogre's "square" is 10' x 10' x 10', nor does it have anything to do with cover or soft cover.
The rules do allow "Partial Cover" but there is no equivalent rule for "Partial Soft Cover". Which is odd. If, instead of Bob, that ogre is hiding behind a 5' x 5' wall, the wall would only give the ogre +2 partial cover AC instead of +4, but by the strictest reading of the rules, Bob still gives the ogre +4 AC of soft cover. The rules also say "Partial Cover is subject to DM's discretion" which is always true, of course, so it seems simple enough to apply this to Partial Soft Cover.