In addition, a scope increases a weapon’s range increment for determining penalties to attack rolls due to range. For small arms, a scope increases the weapon’s normal range increment to 1-1/2 times its listed range for this purpose. For longarms and heavy weapons, the increase is 4 times the normal range increment.
I have a Disintegrator rifle, liquidator (range increment 30 ft.) with a Scope, Laser. I use a move action to aim using the scope. What is my range increment?
- 1. 120 ft. = 4*30 ft.
- 2. 150 ft. = 30 + 4*30 ft.
I read it as the second option since "the increase is 4 times the normal range increment". It does not say "increased to 4 times the normal range increment". However, I'm not certain.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It’s 120, but it’s always 120, including when you don’t use a move action. The move action additionally subtracts from any range penalty.
It’s the difference between aiming with cheap iron sights (unmodified weapin) and an ACOG. Even on a quick snap shot you have to look through the scope and benefit from the magnification and aiming dot. Taking more time just steadies you for extra long shots.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Also, it is worth keeping in mind that 120ft is only your range increment for determining penalties, so 300ft is still your absolute maximum range.
It’s 120, but it’s always 120, including when you don’t use a move action. The move action additionally subtracts from any range penalty.
You sure about that? I, and everyone I know, have never once read it that way.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If that were the case, wouldn't it also mean that the cones of automatic weapons outfitted with scopes would expand as well?
I very much doubt that sort of interaction was intended.
I’m reasonably sure, and it cannot interact with automatic fire. Read it again.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Regardless, it could not interact with the automatic property. Scopes change the range increment ONLY for determining penalties. That is why they don't increase maximum range.
However, in that same section near the end it states that ‘The reduction in penalties due to aiming with a scope ...’ which implies that you have to aim with the scope to get the reduction in range penalties. SO not all the time.
An extension of range increment is not a reduction in penalties. And they are different clauses.
It is sufficiently ambiguous in the way they wrote it that you’re not crazy or dumb for thinking otherwise, though.
Never considered that the range increment increase might not require the aim action. Rereading the scope rules I do think you might be onto something though.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Never considered that the range increment increase might not require the aim action. Rereading the scope rules I do think you might be onto something though.
When you can read the rules so that they're nonsensical and read them another way so that they're sensible the latter one is far often the better reading.
"I slapped a scope on my pistol now i can shoot the wings off a fly at 300 feet while shooting from my hip..." doesn't make a whole lot of sense.
"I slapped a scope on my pistol now I can shoot the wings off a fly at 300 feet by taking a few seconds to line up the rectical..." now we're talking
Wow. This is... not something I caught reading the Armory.
I think it's important we look at more than phrases here:
A scope is a telescopic sighting device with an incorporated reticle that attaches to a small arm or railed weapon’s top rail. A scope can’t be added to a weapon with a sight (see page 61). As a move action, you can aim through a scope. This can be done as part of the same move action required to aim a weapon with the sniper weapon special quality, or as part of a sneak attack where you do not take any movement even if you also aim a sniper weapon as part of that action. Aiming through a scope reduces penalties to attack rolls due to range as well as bonuses to AC from cover.
In addition, a scope increases a weapon’s range increment for determining penalties to attack rolls due to range. For small arms, a scope increases the weapon’s normal range increment to 1-1/2 times its listed range for this purpose. For longarms and heavy weapons, the increase is 4 times the normal range increment. For sniper weapons, the increase is twice the range increment of the sniper special property. The reduction in penalties due to aiming with a scope applies only to the next attack roll you make with the weapon before the end of your next turn.
This is a mess. A scope:
1. Let's you "aim" which reduces penalties due to range and over
2. In addition it increases the range increment.
3. But then it says it's only for the next attack.
It's the paragraph break that's really making this difficult to parse. If the last sentence of the second paragraph were up with the first paragraph this would be easy.
I don't think that's right, Pogiforce. That just seems way too complex to have been intended.
Looking at it right now, how I'm reading it is having a scope increases your effective range increment, but ONLY for determining range penalties. This prevents the cone from automatic weapons from expanding, and also doesn't let you shoot past the fifth range increment for your weapon.
When you take the move action to aim, the penalty to shoot past the first increment is reduced by 1 per increment.
There's one thing wrong with this. Maximum range for most ranged weapons is 10 range increments, not 5, per CRB page 245.
and also doesn't let you shoot past the fifth range increment for your weapon.
Not that it is directly related to the scope question, but normally it's ten range increments.
For most ranged weapons, the maximum range is 10 range increments, or 10× the number listed as the weapon’s range. For thrown weapons, the maximum range is 5 range increments. Some ranged weapons have different maximum ranges, but if so, their descriptions specify their maximum ranges.
Never considered that the range increment increase might not require the aim action. Rereading the scope rules I do think you might be onto something though.When you can read the rules so that they're nonsensical and read them another way so that they're sensible the latter one is far often the better reading.
"I slapped a scope on my pistol now i can shoot the wings off a fly at 300 feet while shooting from my hip..." doesn't make a whole lot of sense.
"I slapped a scope on my pistol now I can shoot the wings off a fly at 300 feet by taking a few seconds to line up the rectical..." now we're talking
This reads like a caveman explaining how a wheelbarrow can't possibly help move a heavy weight and you should just pick it up and carry it on your back.
That's not how shooting works. No one shoots from the hip. An aimed shot or shots in a 6 second period involve lining up your eye and your sights. If you have a scope or sight, you're going to benefit from that even with a quick snapshot. The extended range increment reflects that benefit. See here for a scope. Here for a sight.
It's ok not to confidently opine on what is nonsensical when it comes to things you don't understand!
I am very open to the idea that Paizo's developers also don't understand this and that their intent with this somewhat poorly worded item was not to reflect reality. That's also ok! But until they explain it, I'll go with reality where it matches up with a defensible reading of the text.
I agree that it doesn't extend the range of auto-cones. I still think you're overthinking it though. Scopes in Starfinder do increase the weapon's maximum range. I just don't think it was the intent of the developers for you to have to constantly cross-reference two different ranges for a single weapon just to see if you take a minor penalty to hit.
Respectfully, I disagree with your interpretation. Your own description also references two different range increments, the original, and the modified, then compares them to determine the max range and the range penalties. I just don't believe it to have been the intent of the designers to add so many unnecessary steps/rules.
Feel free to disagree with my interpretation, but throwing the same text at me ver and over isn't going to change my mind.
I don't know how much clearer it can be, when the book says it increases range increments specifically for range penalties. You may think it's too much rules, but that doesn't mean it's against the design or intent of scopes.
It's very clear what the rule actually is, he just doesn't believe they meant it.
How does a little magnifying glass glued to the tip of your rifle cause your bullet to fly farther?
Theoretically, the maximum distance could be represented by how far you have any reasonable chance of hitting something, rather than the maximum distance the bullet can fly.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
By that model, the maximum range should be the point where the spread of the weapon is too great, not the wielder's ability to line up the sights. Without weapon spread, energy dissipation and similar properties that wouldn't be affected by optics, it would be pretty hard to justify the maximum range of a rifle with standard, cheap sights being as low as they are. The disruptor rifle this started with, for example, has a maximum range of 100 yards. That's nothing. Far too low to be explained as farther than a competent shooter can aim without aftermarket sights or scopes.
On the other hand, the behavior of the sniper property does definitely affect maximum range, but, on the gripping hand, the behavior of thrown weapons in low gravity and zero g has nothing plausible to do with accuracy, so trying to make the range increment rules match up with reality in a consistent way may be far too optimistic.
Again, you guys are overthinking it. The rules are an abstraction. If the developers were trying to mimic the ranges of real world weapons, they might as well not bother with ranges at all, since it would be much farther than any battle map.
Again, you guys are overthinking it. The rules are an abstraction. If the developers were trying to mimic the ranges of real world weapons, they might as well not bother with ranges at all, since it would be much farther than any battle map.
We don’t have to think it, we just have to read plain English.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
But the range increment doesn't represent "how far your bullet flies", it represents how far away you can hit a target, which would absolutely be impacted by the sights of the weapon.I like my abstractions to at least make sense.
If I aim a rifle up, and pull the trigger, my bullet maybe flies 1000 feet up.
It shouldn't fire 2000 feet simply because of some polished glass and duct tape.
It represents elements of both. That’s why the sight/scope helps your increment only for purposes of determining range penalties and not for purposes of your maximum range.
Lets look at the 9mm Beretta.
Effective Range: 50 meters or 164 feet or about 5 30 foot range increments.
Maximum Range: 100 meters or 328 feet or about 10 30 foot increments.
This corresponds well to the Semi-Auto, Tactical Pistol.
However the Beretta's maximum projectile range is 1,800 meters or 5,905 feet or about 196 30 foot increments.
So a scope increases the range increment for determining penalties with the RAW.
So for penalty purposes only the range increment is 45 feet.
So at 90 feet you would normally have a -4 penalty but now aiming with a scope it is only -2.
In my game I absolutely allow a player to take an aimed shot with a scope out to 450 feet. It is less than 10% of the bullets maximum travel ability.
Bullets travel a long, long way. It is the limitations of the human senses and abilities that make effective and maximum ranges so short.
Wait, didn't a developer answer this in this very thread a short while ago? Where did his post go? *scratches head*
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It was in the other thread.
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs42khz?Do-scopes-increase-a-weapons-maximum-ran ge
But the result is that it was confirmed that scopes only affect penalties, not maximum range.