This is not a rules question but a discussion about the 'Aid Another' in combat mechanic. I was looking it over and wasn't very surprised to find that in cannon it only works for adjacent allies engaged in melee but I wonder why it shouldn't work for ranged attacks as well. Given that it is an attack roll verses an AC 10 target, why can't my 3x3 block of archers rain arrows down upon a target and use their coordinated efforts to place at least 1 arrow in the target?
Now I understand that the mechanic states it doesn't work this way but I was wondering why the game as built devalues ranged combat to the point where it's uneffective en masse unless you utilize the Arrow Volley, deal from 3.5's Complete Warrior.
My take on it:
In melee you can block incoming attacks, and attack the opponent so it dodging several weapons, and that makes sense in real life. That represents the bonus to AC, and the bonus to attack rolls.
In the game if you are in melee you are lucky to not get shot by an arrow. That is what the penalties on range attacks represent for shooting into melee, and also the soft cover to AC, so being able to help the archer would be hard to do.
I think you can help an archer's AC if you stand beside him, but there is no realistic way to be able to help him hit the target with the idea in mind that the archer is taking wind direction and speed, not shooting his friends, and other variables into place. by trying to help you might make things worse.
wraithstrike wrote: My take on it:
In melee you can block incoming attacks, and attack the opponent so it dodging several weapons, and that makes sense in real life. That represents the bonus to AC, and the bonus to attack rolls.
In the game if you are in melee you are lucky to not get shot by an arrow. That is what the penalties on range attacks represent for shooting into melee, and also the soft cover to AC, so being able to help the archer would be hard to do.
I think you can help an archer's AC if you stand beside him, but there is no realistic way to be able to help him hit the target with the idea in mind that the archer is taking wind direction and speed, not shooting his friends, and other variables into place. by trying to help you might make things worse.
Understandable but given that if it were to be opened to ranged attacks, you would have the archers taking Range penalties atop the -4 penalty for shooting into melee, which would compensate for that 'difficulty' in imagining an aid. Really it comes down to a difference in training and tactics where one force might find it effective to set up Seige Lines an avoidable pattern of arrows onto a battlefield while another decides that firing upon the man with the feathered helm is more effective. Obviously the game at core similates this by making an attack roll and hoping for the 20 but that same result can be achieved by Aiding Another and still make your trained Archer units feel effective.
The argument against it is that it's difficult to imagine, well take the classical example from the Hobbit's final chapters where they are trying to bring down the dragon by placing an arrow in the weak spot of it's armor. In my mind that's an perfect example of an aid another, even with the limitations to adjacent archers assuming all my comrades succeed I could end up with a +18atk allowing me to potentially hit that dragon and on the event of a 20, I just might be able to confirm the critical hit. Thereby completing this scene effectively.
-Herald of the Vile
The way I envision aid another is that you are not really trying to hit the target, but by hitting an AC of 10 you appear threatening enough to make it look legit. If you are going to shoot arrows at someone you might as well go for a real hit. Melee attacks have feints which can represent an aid another, and therefore work in the game since you are not really attack. Ranged attacks don't to my knowledge have any feints. If you shoot it is for real.
wraithstrike wrote: The way I envision aid another is that you are not really trying to hit the target, but by hitting an AC of 10 you appear threatening enough to make it look legit. If you are going to shoot arrows at someone you might as well go for a real hit. Melee attacks have feints which can represent an aid another, and therefore work in the game since you are not really attack. Ranged attacks don't to my knowledge have any feints. If you shoot it is for real.
I did leave off the part about actually firing my ammunition didn't I? Going back to the Dragon example: 100 cr 1/2 archers verses an Elder Wyrm Red. Now playing the numbers game, the Adult Red Dragon can expect to be hit by 5 arrows routinely, and will reduce them to cinders with a few passes of his breath weapon. Red Wyrm just defeated a CR equivalent of 40-50 without an serious harm, after all unconfirmable crits can't pen its DR.
If the's 100 archers had banded together and fought effectively, they could have have potentially landed 1-11 arrows per round and potentially crit the dragon, potentially surviving the seige or driving the creature off. Experience split between all 100 of them and they're still level 1 warriors.
Which scenario would you rather be in?
-Jon
When you fight creatures so many CR's below you the numbers start not to matter, and you don't really get XP. In short those archers don't warrant XP for that dragon or anyone past 10th level most likely.
Those arrows also have to confirm so we have 100 archers. 5 will crit. 1 will confirm. Even that will be eaten up by the dragon's CR. The archers lose in Pathfinder. I will also add the popular media does not translate to Pathfinder well so even if the archers had a real chance at winning in the movie it would not matter. Now using the volley rules from Complete Battle(?) would have been a better option, but PF does not have that option. Archers are also the best damage dealers in PF.
I understand what you are trying to do though, but I don't think aid another is the right mechanic for it. It does not fir fluff-wise or mechanics wise to me. Maybe two an archer can fire a "distracting" arrow, but the chances of success are better if he just full attacks unless you have minions supporting a real threat, and the minions are unlikely to hit anyway.
wraithstrike wrote: When you fight creatures so many CR's below you the numbers start not to matter, and you don't really get XP. In short those archers don't warrant XP for that dragon or anyone past 10th level most likely.
Those arrows also have to confirm so we have 100 archers. 5 will crit. 1 will confirm. Even that will be eaten up by the dragon's CR. The archers lose in Pathfinder. I will also add the popular media does not translate to Pathfinder well so even if the archers had a real chance at winning in the movie it would not matter. Now using the volley rules from Complete Battle(?) would have been a better option, but PF does not have that option. Archers are also the best damage dealers in PF.
I understand what you are trying to do though, but I don't think aid another is the right mechanic for it. It does not fir fluff-wise or mechanics wise to me. Maybe two an archer can fire a "distracting" arrow, but the chances of success are better if he just full attacks unless you have minions supporting a real threat, and the minions are unlikely to hit anyway.
Arrow Volley, Complete Warrior Supplement, is the one that 'works' mechanically. You give up your composite quailty to make an area of effect attack that ignores cover and concealment (that's not from a canapy/roof) and the creatures must make a dc 15 reflex save to dodge. Meanwhile your Archer Squad Leader makes one attack roll for the group. That's alright but really.... 1 arrrow filling a 5ft square and a static dc. At least with the useage and limitations on the ranged aid, I could at least hit the same square.
I bring it up because I am in a more 'human' setting where you won't see anyone full attack unless they're a monk or utiziling two-weapon fighting. Aid Another becomes a useful tactic.
-Herald of the Vile
I have used aid another against PC's with a high AC, but I have never had to use it against an NPC. Are you in a low magic game? I am asking out of curiosity more than anything else.
PS:If I running a low magic game I would probably make an exception if I did not give the players other says to boost stats.
Herald of the Vile wrote: This is not a rules question but a discussion about the 'Aid Another' in combat mechanic. I was looking it over and wasn't very surprised to find that in cannon it only works for adjacent allies engaged in melee but I wonder why it shouldn't work for ranged attacks as well. Given that it is an attack roll verses an AC 10 target, why can't my 3x3 block of archers rain arrows down upon a target and use their coordinated efforts to place at least 1 arrow in the target? Some sort of 'suppressing fire' where one rains a bunch of missiles down on a foe to harry / distract them, would make some sense, but a bunch of archers 'aiding' each others attack rolls doesn't feel quite as intuitive for me.
An archer being able to use Aid Other to harry someone in melee with an ally certainly sounds plausible, 'though. The -4 penalty for firing into melee (for those without Precise Shot) would make it less useful, and perhaps limiting it to only work within 30 ft. (like using sneak attack with ranged attacks) could further tone it down, if you don't want to have people 100 ft. away granting Aid Other bonuses to allies.
It seems very much like the sort of thing one could imagine Legolas doing while Aragorn is locked in mortal combat with an Uruk-Hai or something, shooting an arrow so close between them that it grazes the orc and distracts it, allowing Aragorn to get in a clean hit.
Even if the rules don't allow it, that's what GMs are for, allowing an occasional heroic or cool action to happen, even if the writers of the core rules didn't think of that particular tidbit.
Just avoid allowing such things to stack. Even normal Aid Other can be crazy if a half-dozen people (some with reach weapons or attacks) lend their 'aid' to a single power attacking ally who has the only weapon necessary to overcome a foe's DR. Allowing potentially dozens of archers within 30 ft. to all Aid Other at the same time on the same foe is going to get even sillier.
If this is not a rules question, why did you not post in General Discussion?
I think a single aid another for a sniper with a spotter would be appropriate.
Also, a single commander yelling range to a whole group of archers could be using his command to "aid another" for everyone shooting.
Recent threads in General Discussion
|
