My initial common sense and experience playing AD&D is to say no, you can not use your missle weapon to someone you are engaged with in melee, i.e. an adjacent foe.
However, there is the point-blank feat which would seem to allow this, and I don't see anything in the rules to say you can't, and this feat seems to reward players to run up and shoot the monster in the head with their bow.
I would like this explained though, because if somebody was adjacent to you and hacking at you with a battleaxe, it would seem impossible and even silly to able to parry and block blows and still be able to get a bow shot in.
My understanding of the rules is that you can use a ranged attack against a foe you are in melee with, but you provoke an attack of opportunity (Table 8-2, page 183 of the core rulebook).
Indeed, yes, thanks - I hadn't noticed that. So I guess if you really wanted to use a ranged attack, you would have to take a 5-foot step back before firing to avoid the AoO.
|
Point-blank shot rewards you for putting yourself in harm's way, by getting within one charge move (unless it's a halfling or gnome in heavy armor), and for getting close enough to hit them some place a bit more important than you would typically be able to. That said, the feat still has you at 30 feet, while it's uncomfortably close for a +1hit and damage, it's not so bad when you have something between you and them besides air and ground. Like a fighter, or a lot of air in the form of a cliff.
You can shoot someone in melee with you, but as noted before it provokes, unless you built an archer fighter, which they can get something for that at later levels.
Yes you can attack an adjacent target with a ranged attack.
Just a caveat. Your ranged weapon must not have a minimum range on it. Most man portable weapons don't have a minimum range. However, siege weapons have minimum ranges, so it's always possible someone may put a minimum range on a ranged weapon that's man portable. The only one I could think of would be a grenade launcher in a d20 Modern setting (grenades fired from a grenade launcher have to fly a bit without hitting something before they arm. It's a safety feature).
A thought that just occurred to me: if attacking with a ranged attack an enemy who is in melee with me, do I have to eat the -4 penalty for not having Precise Shot?
A thought that just occurred to me: if attacking with a ranged attack an enemy who is in melee with me, do I have to eat the -4 penalty for not having Precise Shot?
You still have to eat the penalty.
A thought that just occurred to me: if attacking with a ranged attack an enemy who is in melee with me, do I have to eat the -4 penalty for not having Precise Shot?You still have to eat the penalty.
I don't know about that... The wording is Core, 184, "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.""At a target engaged in melee with a friendly character" is the key language here. I don't think you should take a penalty for shooting someone who is only in melee with you beyond the AoO you normally provoke. I believe the reason for the penalty is to avoid hitting your friend, which, in this case, is yourself. I would not apply the penalty. I think RAW is debatable to if that wording includes the character making the attack or not.
A thought that just occurred to me: if attacking with a ranged attack an enemy who is in melee with me, do I have to eat the -4 penalty for not having Precise Shot?You still have to eat the penalty.I don't know about that... The wording is Core, 184, "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.""At a target engaged in melee with a friendly character" is the key language here. I don't think you should take a penalty for shooting someone who is only in melee with you beyond the AoO you normally provoke. I believe the reason for the penalty is to avoid hitting your friend, which, in this case, is yourself. I would not apply the penalty. I think RAW is debatable to if that wording includes the character making the attack or not.
I thought they were saying the bad guy is also adjacent to your ally. If it is only you and the bad guy then I would say no.
And remember kids, you only take a -4 penalty if the size is about medium.. in other words the bigger the monster the less penalty you take.
And remember kids, you only take a -4 penalty if the size is about medium.. in other words the bigger the monster the less penalty you take.
Is there a supporting quote for that?
And remember kids, you only take a -4 penalty if the size is about medium.. in other words the bigger the monster the less penalty you take.Is there a supporting quote for that?
Core, 184, "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."
And remember kids, you only take a -4 penalty if the size is about medium.. in other words the bigger the monster the less penalty you take.Is there a supporting quote for that?Core, 184, "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."
Thanks. I remember this rule, but I understood the other poster as saying that just being bigger is good enough.
Thanks. I remember this rule, but I understood the other poster as saying that just being bigger is good enough.And remember kids, you only take a -4 penalty if the size is about medium.. in other words the bigger the monster the less penalty you take.Is there a supporting quote for that?Core, 184, "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."
so its a good thing when playing a party full of small peoples. Less penalty. :D
Its one of those secret bonuses to being small and penalties for being large.