due to the nature of the game ranged combat treats every target(even one moving across ones field of vision at great range) as a static target. using a composite long bow its just as easy to hit a target sprinting from left to right across your field of vision at 100 feet as it is to hit the same target standing still and waving his arms (casting a spell) at 10 feet (except for maybe the point blank shot bonus)
ranged combat in the game does very little to take into account range, movement or environmental effects except for static penalties like -2 per incriment or -4 in wind.
This is not a complaint but an inquiry.
Im trying to gather any suggestions, ideas and house rules for making ranged combat a little more reality check compatible without making it game breakingly complicated.
anything?
One possibility would be to scale the range increment of weapons with BAB. New Recruit 1st level warrior archer might have trouble at 100 ft as opposed to saym legolas who would just as easily hit a target at 100ft as 5.
Maybe like 1/5 range increment for every point of BAB you have to a max of 5 BAB.
Git some! Git some! Git some, yeah, yeah, yeah!
Ugh. I have seen this attempted, and it usually just makes things more complicated. The ranged combat rules are fair as-is, so any changes have to be carefully balanced. You cannot just add penalties; that will make the game unfair for a ranged character. I could create justifications for leaving the rules the same, but in the spirit of discussion, I will focus on what I feel is the largest hurdle in implementing realism-based archery: there are no simple modifiers.
As you say, double moving from left to right would make a target very hard to hit, but double moving directly away from an archer would only add a slight penalty. Moving at a diagonal would make a target harder to hit, but not as much as left-to-right. Nothing would make a target harder to hit than zig-zaging, but how many turns would you require for a target to get this modifier? Would the target get a lesser bonus for a single move and standard? Could a target successfully zig-zag with a single move? You would probably need to leave the game the same for a single move, apply a to-hit penalty against double moving targets based on the pattern of their move, and grant a bonus to hit stationary targets or those that only moved 5 feet. Unless the players and GM are very like minded, prepare to argue the specifics of this with archers and those shot at by enemy archers.
Your next obstacle would be range. What you propose is not unreasonable. Sans the Point Blank feat, there is no difference between 30 feet and 100. This is unrealistic, but where do you draw the line? For balance, the archer would need to get a decreasing bonus up to a certain point and a stacking penalty after that point. This is less arguable than motion, but it is harder to pin down. Too large a bonus will reward close-quarter archers and make indoor combats a breeze. Too heavy a penalty will make outdoor combats the archer's bane. He is supposed to be a ranged character. Ten feet increments are probably your best bet. Create a "Zero Point" and give bonuses until that point and penalties after it.
I want to be clear; I am not saying this cannot be done. I am saying it is very complicated. The more realism you try to inject into combat, the more convoluted it will become. Be careful here and make sure both players and GM are on board for any rule variant you put into effect. That's just my two copper though.
What you are trying to do it bring realism and logic to a non realistic illogical abstraction.
You have a 6 second round, combat is going, people are moving, attack, dodging, parrying, hitting, and firing ranges weapons in that 6 seconds. In these 6 seconds? Abstractly this bowman is probably firing more than one shot, and those he or she is shooting at are dodging, ducking, fighting, moving. So it all balances out in the long run with simple modifiers.
Now if my Bow guy is firing at some who is intentionally trying not to get shot, and using their full movement to do it and nothing else? They target is seeking out cover, dropping prone etc?
If the target does not know the bowman is there? the Target is flat footed.
Now throwing out RAW, perhaps in the above two situations you give the shooter a circumstance bonus for aiming.
It is the way to system is designed. There are other systems that you can do what you are trying to do, but they are completely non D20 based.
I agree completely.
just wondered if people smarter than me had come up with some good quick and dirty rules that could help without being too complicated.
there are just so many 'IF's 'WHEN's and other variables in ranged combat.
for example... at a distance a prone target should get a bonus against ranged... but IF/WHEN the prone target is right next to the archer the archer should get the same +4 as any one else.
I had thought of the "ZERO POINT" idea but I had thought the idea would be more like -1 up to 30 feet (because a moving target that is too close is actually harder to hit than at short distance) 0 from 30 to 60 then further penalties after...
that would make point blank simply cancle out the initial -1 but also seems like a lot of rule for a simple 1 point modification.
I am begining to think the only thing I can do is feat ban in order to keep ranged balanced so no improved point blank, no clustered, deadly aim and manyshot only as standard actions not full round, precice only works withing the first X feet (example first 30 or first 60) etc
NOTE: I am not an archer hater... ranged ranger is my favorite class to play... but as a GM i have found the ranged character the hardest to balance without focused abilities and environmental nerfs. this would not bother me except that the archers have a tendency to make less fun for other players and also feel targeted when every encounter takes place in a blizzard or the BBEG always seems to have wind wall or the only person ever targeted with a disarm or sunder is the ranged guy.
If you want something really simple, how giving the target a 20% miss chance, which would stack with other miss chances in an additive manner? Edit: or, since I decided to change it to additive before I posted, maybe 20% is a bit much - 10% is more reasonable. The vast majority of attacks will still hit, but that element of uncertainty is present.
It's simple, but could probably get the job done. If you did this, I might also recommend adding a rule that if you spend a full round action to attack once, the 20% miss chance (specifically from the other rule, not any old miss chance) is negated. Just to have that available when it's needed.
I probably wouldn't do it (I've got too many things I'm trying out already), just helping the brainstorm.
Just as when in melee you can go on the defensive but otherwise are not doing anything out of the ordinary to avoid attacks (the ordinary being the usual dodge when swung at, use your shield to block, etc.) I would suggest that taken as a whole, it is assumed that a ranged target is considered to be "not doing anything out of the ordinary" unless they are.
In which case the GM may elect to apply a circumstance bonus or penalty based on their estimate of what is being attempted. Perhaps -1 to -5 depending on speed and agility of the target, what they are trying to do, or any other modifiers the GM sees fit.
Just remember that the players may also wish to use this. Whatever rules you set up, try to jot them down and keep them consistent.
You have the same "lack of reality" problem for ranged characters that you do for melee characters: turn-based combat means everyone is effectively frozen in place when you make your attack.
And combat doesn't actually start until the GM lets you drop a die. So all the ranged characters are standing around with itchy trigger fingers while the BBEG delivers his introductory monologue. ("Can I shoot him yet? He's just standing there talking!")
I agree with Malach--there are other systems that better represent reality in combat. (Of the ones I've played, Hero System does the best job capturing movement physics, overlapping actions, and hitting-vs-doing damage in combat.) Those systems may or may not have the content of Pathfinder or be a world you want to play in.