Ranged attacks while engaged in melee

[Drohem]

Hello members! This is my first post here on this community.

 

I took a look throughout the forum, but I couldn't find anything specifically pertaining to my question. I apologize if I missed it and would appreciate it if someone could direct me to the proper thread or post.

 

I'm a player home brew game where the GM has interpreted 3.5 Dungeons & Dragons using the 5e HERO System, Revised. There is one thing about the combat that irks me. He allows ranged combatants, i.e. bowmen, to fire at us even when we've engaged them in melee. He doesn't allow opportunity attacks in his game, so these bowmen can happily and gleefully reloaded and fire in our face while we're swinging melee weapons at them from an adjacent hex.

 

I finally dug out my HERO book and looked it up for myself. I found this passage under the Fighting section and How Combat Works subsection on page 370:

 

All combat can be divided into two types: Hand-To-Hand Combat (HTH) and Ranged Combat. HTH Combat is combat between characters who are standing in the same or adjacent hexes. Usually HTH Combat involves punching or melee weapons such as swords, not attacks like guns or energy bolts that can affect targets at a distance. Ranged Combat is any combat between characters who are not in the same or adjacent hexes; it requires weapons such as guns or bows, or Ranged attacks such as Energy Blasts or RKAs. Assuming special effects, common sense, and/ or dramatic sense don’t forbid it, a character can use a Ranged attack against a character in the same hex as he, or an adjacent hex.

 

I bolded the last two lines because they seem contradictory to me. Does the regular 5e HERO System, Revised allow this? Can a ranged person fire on someone in the adjacent hex that has engaged them with a melee weapon?

 

I would sincerely appreciate any clarification on this point from the members here.

[Steve Long]

Re: Ranged attacks while engaged in melee

 

I've moved this post, because the poster seems to want general feedback, and only I can respond on the Rules forum.

 

And now, my response: they're not covered in 5E/5ER, but if you check the Combat Handbook, or 6E2 43, you'll find rules for using the Concealment Combat Modifier (called "Behind Cover" in 6E) to deal with situations where Ranged attacks are being fired into a melee.

[Panpiper]

Re: Ranged attacks while engaged in melee

 

I think Steve Long missed the boat on this one. The OP is not so much asking about modifiers firing into a general melee, for which there are clear rules as Steve mentioned, but rather what the rules state for someone firing a bow at someone who is swinging "at them" as they are firing.

 

I've repeated this in many posts, but I should do it again for this one. I've been away from the game for fifteen years, am several editions out of date, and have only just begun reading 6th Ed haphazardly. So my interpretation is not quite rules lawyerish as it is more GM ruling.

 

A person firing a bow is at half DCV. A person firing a bow, a muscle powered ranged weapon, at an adjacent target that is engaged in melee with them, is going to be at half OCV as well. But I cannot point you to page numbers that would stipulate printed rules.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Ranged attacks while engaged in melee

 

I think Steve Long missed the boat on this one. The OP is not so much asking about modifiers firing into a general melee' date=' for which there are clear rules as Steve mentioned, but rather what the rules state for someone firing a bow at someone who is swinging "at them" as they are firing.[/quote']

 

That sounds like a character who has held his action to attack as the archer draws his bow, and wishes to use that opportunity to disrupt the attack. The target is at half DCV. You can certainly attempt to disarm him, strike at the bow, or what have you. But there's no penalty to his counterattack unless you cause such a penalty with your action, just as there's no penalty to your counterattack against his attack.

 

A person firing a bow is at half DCV. A person firing a bow' date=' a muscle powered ranged weapon, at an adjacent target that is engaged in melee with them, is going to be at half OCV as well. But I cannot point you to page numbers that would stipulate printed rules.[/quote']

 

There is no such rule, just as there is no rule providing that the HTH attacker takes a DCV penalty for attacking the bow weilder instead of avoiding his aim.

 

I agree with the comment that it seems much more cinematic this way. Legolas seemed to have little difficulty firing his bow in a melee.

[Fearghus]

Re: Ranged attacks while engaged in melee

 

Well I agree with what previous posters have said. The short answer to you question is...

 

You are correct according to a strict interpretation of the rules there is NO PENALTY for using a ranged attack to attack someone you are in HtH with. At least not that I know of.

 

The long answer...

 

First... there are no attacks of opportunity in Hero System. That game mechanic is basically a creation of the warped minds at Wizards of the Coast (sorry... for some reason saying that name seem to have left a sour taste in my mouth). D&D uses complicated game mechanics and to use the magic term interrupts that make combat very involved. Hero intentionally tries to make combat more streamlined.

 

Second... The main difference between ranged attacks and HtH attacks is exactly that RANGE. You are free to use ranged attacks against targets within your hex if you like. the system makes no distinction. Unless the attack has restrainable or some other similar limitation applied to it you are free to use it on any target in range including someone standing right in front of you.

 

Your question approaches this like it's a problem. You have equal chance of avoiding the attack whether it is a ranged attack or a hand to hand attack. Why should you get the chance to prevent a guy with a bow from shooting you but not a chance to prevent a guy with a sword from slashing you. My advice would be to stop thinking of Hero like it's D&D. It uses different mechanics, and therefore will not play the same.

 

None of this is meant to say that GMs are not free to create their own house rules for these situations. Perfect example of something that you're game master might think of is allowing defenses against these attack that can not normally be applied to ranged attacks. If a character has CSLs that apply only to HtH combat let them apply to these attacks. or let the attacks be blocked using the block maneuver things like that but that is all GM call.

 

I hope this helps.

[bigbywolfe]

Re: Ranged attacks while engaged in melee

 

All that being said, a Long Bow will probably be bought as a Focus and you will need room to use it. Whether or not there is room comes down to how specific you're describing the combat area, and of course, comon and dramatic sense, more than game mechanics.

[tarragon]

Re: Ranged attacks while engaged in melee

 

 

First... there are no attacks of opportunity in Hero System. That game mechanic is basically a creation of the warped minds at Wizards of the Coast (sorry... for some reason saying that name seem to have left a sour taste in my mouth). D&D uses complicated game mechanics and to use the magic term interrupts that make combat very involved. Hero intentionally tries to make combat more streamlined.

 

D&D uses Attacks of opportunity to make certain actions in combat risky. Something along the lines of "Sure you can cast a spell right in front of that magic hating barbarian but he gets a free swing, are you sure you want to?"

 

Hero uses DCV penalties to make actions risky. By 6E2:206 pretty much all the muscle powered ranged weapons require concentration with is half DCV. "Sure you can fire your longbow at the guy directly in front of you but you'll be at half DCV, are you sure you want to?"

 

I like hero system better in that it allow for more finely grained and doesn't constantly interrupt the current action.

[bigbywolfe]

Re: Ranged attacks while engaged in melee

 

Hero uses DCV penalties to make actions risky. By 6E2:206 pretty much all teh muscle powered HTH weapons require concentration with is half DCV. "Sure you can fire your longbow at the guy directly in front of you but you'll be at half DCV, are you sure you want to?"

I assume by your example you mean Ranged weapons...Or do swords and such really have concentration now?

[Panpiper]

Re: Ranged attacks while engaged in melee

 

I have many years of martial arts training. I also spent seven years in the SCA, training and fighting twice a week (ours was an unusual bunch) in armor and doing melee combat. I've also participated in a few archery events, though I am far from an accomplished archer.

 

To me the idea that an archer could stand there six feet in front of me and try to fire arrows at me while I am swinging a sword at them is absolutely absurd. They could be a perfect meld of Robin Hood and Miyamoto Musashi and they would get killed 100% of the time, guaranteed. The only way they could survive wold be to stop trying to fire the bow and instead wield it as a stick (whereupon if I were fighting Miyamoto Musashi, I would stand no chance).

 

I don't care what the rule book might say. Having archers in melee at only half DCV 'and (my GM rule) half OCV, is being 'extremely' generous to the archers.

[Vondy]

Re: Ranged attacks while engaged in melee

 

I have many years of martial arts training. I also spent seven years in the SCA, training and fighting twice a week (ours was an unusual bunch) in armor and doing melee combat. I've also participated in a few archery events, though I am far from an accomplished archer.

 

To me the idea that an archer could stand there six feet in front of me and try to fire arrows at me while I am swinging a sword at them is absolutely absurd. They could be a perfect meld of Robin Hood and Miyamoto Musashi and they would get killed 100% of the time, guaranteed. The only way they could survive wold be to stop trying to fire the bow and instead wield it as a stick (whereupon if I were fighting Miyamoto Musashi, I would stand no chance).

 

I don't care what the rule book might say. Having archers in melee at only half DCV 'and (my GM rule) half OCV, is being 'extremely' generous to the archers.

 

There's more than one genre of fantasy, which means there is more than one reality distortion level. If you're running a gritty or adventurous fantasy game you're probably right. I would halve their native DCV and allow no defensive levels. This all assumes you're shooting for verisimilitude - a sense of real. If, however, you're running a cinematic fantasy game then its entirely appropriate to have archers firing point blank into melee with little, if any, penalties. In that genre archers pull that kind of stunt off all the time. Its a question of what you are trying to simulate.

[Fearghus]

Re: Ranged attacks while engaged in melee

 

There's more than one genre of fantasy' date=' which means there is more than one reality distortion level. If you're running a gritty or adventurous fantasy game you're probably right. I would halve their native DCV and allow no defensive levels. This all assumes you're shooting for verisimilitude - a sense of real. If, however, you're running a cinematic fantasy game then its entirely appropriate to have archers firing point blank into melee with little, if any, penalties. In that genre archers pull that kind of stunt off all the time. Its a question of what you are trying to simulate.[/quote']

 

Agreed... Legolas in the LOTR movies didn't seem to have any problem using his bow in very tight melee combats. This all comes down to GM call and how realistic or cinematic he wants combat to be. I see no reason why the combat system should have to simulate reality. We live in reality every day. The game is about fantasy.

[tarragon]

Re: Ranged attacks while engaged in melee

 

I assume by your example you mean Ranged weapons...Or do swords and such really have concentration now?

 

Ouch. You are correct sir.

[mkultra]

Re: Ranged attacks while engaged in melee

 

It's your game so make your actions as realistic as you or your GM like. For FH or SH I like my realism with a generous dose of "cinema." For me the game is more fun to run and play in that way. Also like what was previously posted, it's often not necessary to have to convert every mechanic. Full disclosure: I do like converting mechanics just for "proof of concept."

[Panpiper]

Re: Ranged attacks while engaged in melee

 

There's more than one genre of fantasy' date=' which means there is more than one reality distortion level. If you're running a gritty or adventurous fantasy game you're probably right. I would halve their native DCV and allow no defensive levels. This all assumes you're shooting for verisimilitude - a sense of real. If, however, you're running a cinematic fantasy game then its entirely appropriate to have archers firing point blank into melee with little, if any, penalties. In that genre archers pull that kind of stunt off all the time. Its a question of what you are trying to simulate.[/quote']

You are of course completely right Vondy, and I should have been more aware of my assumptions when I posted what I did. I 'shoot for' a fairly realistic 'low fantasy' sword & sorcery sort of game and so I am going to make calls appropriate to that setting.

[lemming]

Re: Ranged attacks while engaged in melee

 

I have many years of martial arts training. I also spent seven years in the SCA, training and fighting twice a week (ours was an unusual bunch) in armor and doing melee combat. I've also participated in a few archery events, though I am far from an accomplished archer.

 

To me the idea that an archer could stand there six feet in front of me and try to fire arrows at me while I am swinging a sword at them is absolutely absurd. They could be a perfect meld of Robin Hood and Miyamoto Musashi and they would get killed 100% of the time, guaranteed. The only way they could survive wold be to stop trying to fire the bow and instead wield it as a stick (whereupon if I were fighting Miyamoto Musashi, I would stand no chance).

 

I don't care what the rule book might say. Having archers in melee at only half DCV 'and (my GM rule) half OCV, is being 'extremely' generous to the archers.

 

This isn't the real world! THIS IS HERO!

 

*kicks panpiper down well*

 

Vondy has the better serious answer.

[Drohem]

Re: Ranged attacks while engaged in melee

 

We are playing in a gritty and low fantasy setting, and are going for that feel and emulation. I know that my GM is not using the Concentration limitation which struck me as odd that bandit fodder were expert bowmen with uber concentration and could stand their like a statue and reload and fire on someone attacking them with a melee weapon.

 

Also, I know the HERO System and D&D are vastly different so I am not making one for one comparisons here. I realize that they're apples and oranges and I am totally cool with that. However, it stretches my personal limits of verisimilitude when there is no ramifications for a person trying to load and fire an arrow at someone who is swinging a melee weapon in their face. *shrug*

 

My views on the subject are similar to Panpiper's. I feel that if the Concentration limitation were applied in my game, then I would be completely satisfied. I am going to speak with my GM about it. However, I do recognize that in high fantasy games or heroic level that this might not be applicable.

[Tasha]

Re: Ranged attacks while engaged in melee

 

We are playing in a gritty and low fantasy setting, and are going for that feel and emulation. I know that my GM is not using the Concentration limitation which struck me as odd that bandit fodder were expert bowmen with uber concentration and could stand their like a statue and reload and fire on someone attacking them with a melee weapon.

 

Also, I know the HERO System and D&D are vastly different so I am not making one for one comparisons here. I realize that they're apples and oranges and I am totally cool with that. However, it stretches my personal limits of verisimilitude when there is no ramifications for a person trying to load and fire an arrow at someone who is swinging a melee weapon in their face. *shrug*

 

My views on the subject are similar to Panpiper's. I feel that if the Concentration limitation were applied in my game, then I would be completely satisfied. I am going to speak with my GM about it. However, I do recognize that in high fantasy games or heroic level that this might not be applicable.

 

Your GM may not be aware that most muscle powered Ranged weapons use Concentration and thus their wielders are at 1/2 DCV when using their bows/crossbows etc. Now Loading a bow doesn't incur the DCV penalty, only the firing of the weapon. Loading does take a half phase action (unless the archer has Quickdraw and makes their roll which only takes a 0 phase action to complete).

 

BTW the only OCV penalties come from Pulling a bow that is too heavy for you (+5 str is a -2 OCV but is optional), Range, Firing into Melee, and other forms of Cover

 

As for your GM not knowing these rules, I would recommend gently pointing them out in a non confrontational way. It may be that he is playing a more cinematic feeling game than you know.

 

Also, the 5e FH book should be fairly close to the rules that come out from the 6e FH book (when it's finally published), I really don't expect that the core will change much. Just be updated to work better with 6e (ie Spell writeups, Character writeups, will change, but I doubt that weapons will be that different).

[Sean Waters]

Re: Ranged attacks while engaged in melee

 

How about a Talent: you pay the points that you would have saved from taking 'concentration' on the use of a longbow, and can then 'neutralise' the requirement to concentrate. You might want that 'Requires a Roll (Acrobatics)'.

 

Most people can therefore not use a longbow in close combat - at least not very effectively - but those trained to do so can.

[Panpiper]

Re: Ranged attacks while engaged in melee

 

I could live with such a talent. Gotta account for that Legolas trick after all. ;-) Now, how to build such a talent...

[Hierax]

Re: Ranged attacks while engaged in melee

 

Maybe a Talent built with a Naked Advantage to buy off the Concentration Limitation and Penalty Skill Levels (PSL) to buy off the -DCV modifier.

 

You could also adapt the Weapon Length rules for OCV/Initiative bonuses/penalties and apply it to Ranged Weapons vs. Melee Weapons and use PSLs to compensate for that in the Talent.

[dmjalund]

Re: Ranged attacks while engaged in melee

 

One could always make a house rule (if there isn't already such) that weapons that require Concentration can be foiled by a high enough Presence attack (include violent action) making the (in this case) archer fail to attack

[bigbywolfe]

Re: Ranged attacks while engaged in melee

 

I have many years of martial arts training. I also spent seven years in the SCA' date=' training and fighting twice a week (ours was an unusual bunch) in armor and doing melee combat. I've also participated in a few archery events, though I am far from an accomplished archer. [/quote']

 

To me the idea that an archer could stand there six feet in front of me and try to fire arrows at me while I am swinging a sword at them is absolutely absurd. They could be a perfect meld of Robin Hood and Miyamoto Musashi and they would get killed 100% of the time, guaranteed. The only way they could survive wold be to stop trying to fire the bow and instead wield it as a stick (whereupon if I were fighting Miyamoto Musashi, I would stand no chance).

 

I don't care what the rule book might say. Having archers in melee at only half DCV 'and (my GM rule) half OCV, is being 'extremely' generous to the archers.

 

Your problem is that you are taking a very specific situation and item (not just genre specific, but campaign specific) and then looking at the very general rule for any and all types of ranged attacks and saying Steve somehow "dropped the ball" in ruling how HtH and Range actions interact. Superman's heat-vision is Ranged. Should he not be allowed to use it in HtH range? Why? The riot cop has a Tazer and chemical spray. Should he not be able to use it in "melee" range? Why?

You need to step back and look at the whole picture before criticizing the system as a whole for not fitting your one example.

 

First, a long bow is built with Focus, it is an item that takes up space. This should be considered. Second, it is built with requires two hands. Those two things plus the SFX of “hey, it’s a bow and arrow” should indicate the room needed to use such a weapon. Then there is the Concentration, making it extremely dangerous to use in HtH range. If all that still isn’t enough for you then there is Common and Dramatic Sense and a GM to make such decisions. My point is, the fact that you are playing a game where using a particular type of bow in close range makes no sense, does not indicate a failing in how the rules handle Ranged attacks (of any type) in HtH (or ‘melee’ if you prefer) range.

 

I also have to take issue with this statement: “To me the idea that an archer could stand there six feet in front of me and try to fire arrows at me while I am swinging a sword at them is absolutely absurd.”

You seem to be making several assumptions. 1) That you already have a sword drawn and they do not already have an arrow drawn. 2) That you are already swinging your sword at them when they try to shoot. In game terms this would mean that you were taking an action and the archer would have to either abort to Dodge, Block, or just hope to not get hit. 3) That it is utterly impossible to miss a target that is not actively dodging/defending themselves. I admit it is unlikely, but it is possible. If someone was stupid enough to not dodge a sword blow, but somehow still had the presence of mind to load his bow if the attack missed, why is that “absolutely absurd”? It’s the fact that he didn’t Dodge that is absurd, not the ability to shoot. So, what if an archer is standing around, arrow in hand, and you run up (using a full move) into HtH range. You’re saying there is no possible way the archer could pull back the string and hit you at point blank range before you were able to draw you sword? I know combat is only segmented in how we play, it’s supposed to represent continuous action, but still, are you really that good? And even if you are, does that mean for some reason every mook in a game should be immune to Ranged attacks as long as they can stand close enough to you? I think you “dropped the ball” on this one.

[bigbywolfe]

Re: Ranged attacks while engaged in melee

 

Also' date=' I know the HERO System and D&D are vastly different so I am not making one for one comparisons here. I realize that they're apples and oranges and I am totally cool with that. However, it stretches my personal limits of verisimilitude when there is no ramifications for a person trying to load and fire an arrow at someone who is swinging a melee weapon in their face. *shrug*[/quote']

But it doesn't "stretch your personal limits of verisimilitude" to have a melee fighter run up to someone who has a loaded weapon ready to fire at them and take a swing, without any hesitation? Maybe if a HtH fighter has to move to be in HtH range with a Ranged fighter they should have an OCV penalty if they attack the same phase they move for focusing on not getting shot at point blank range while making their approach?

[Sean Waters]

Re: Ranged attacks while engaged in melee

 

I could live with such a talent. Gotta account for that Legolas trick after all. ;-) Now' date=' how to build such a talent...[/quote']

 

 

Well: Heavy Longbow -

 

Killing Attack - Ranged 2d6 (30 Active Points); OAF (-1), Required Hands Two-Handed (-1/2), STR Minimum 4-8 (-1/4), Cannot Be Used Whilst Mounted (-1/4), Real Weapon (-1/4), Concentration (1/2 DCV; -1/4)

 

That costs 8 points.

 

However without concentration, and real weapon (I agree - you shouldn't REALLY be able to use it as a useful bow in melee range), it costs 10, so there is an argument it should cost 2 points.

 

OR

 

Concentration (-1/4) and real weapon (-1/3) on a 30 point power (2d6 RKA) saves you 10 points, so there is an argument that should be your base cost.

 

We're off in the realm of making it up anyway...technically is SHOULD be built like a naked advantage, I suppose, so it should cost END, so make it NO END (+1/2) but require a roll (Acrobatics - you need to be able to move while you are drawing and aiming) for -1/2 and you are back to either 2 point or 10.

 

What do you think is most reasonable?

 

I'd say 2 points is 'logically' right - that is what it would cost NOT to have the limitations there, but that seems like QUITE a useful talent for such a low cost - being able to ignore the 'reality' of the game world - so I'd probably go with 10 points. It is still (probably) cheaper than buying double DCV, only when shooting longbow

[Panpiper]

Re: Ranged attacks while engaged in melee

 

...saying Steve somehow "dropped the ball" in ruling how HtH and Range actions interact.

The OP specifically asked a question referring to the situation that would exist with a bowman 'actively engaged' in melee combat with melee fighters. Steve answered as if the question was one of what modifiers one should apply if one happened to be a bowman, "standing off to one side", firing into the general melee. He did not answer the OP's question. That is what I meant when I said he had dropped the ball, not that he didn't understand his game or the rules.

 

You need to step back and look at the whole picture before criticizing the system as a whole for not fitting your one example.

Where on earth did you get the notion that I was criticizing the "system as a whole"? You are bringing baggage to the table.

 

The Hero System is the greatest game system on the face of the planet, bar none; All other systems pale to utter insignificance in comparison. That is my opinion of the Hero System.

 

You seem to be making several assumptions. 1) That you already have a sword drawn and they do not already have an arrow drawn. 2) That you are already swinging your sword at them when they try to shoot. In game terms this would mean that you were taking an action and the archer would have to either abort to Dodge, Block, or just hope to not get hit. 3) That it is utterly impossible to miss a target that is not actively dodging/defending themselves...

I am at rest but with my sword out of the scabbard. The archer has an arrow notched but not drawn and aimed. Unless the archer aborts to dodge, and never tries to draw that bow (in other words, they melee with a stick), they are dead.

 

If my sword is scabbarded and they have no arrow drawn, they have zero chance unless they abort to dodge and melee. I can draw and strike much faster than they could possibly draw an arrow, notch it, draw aim and fire.

 

Yes, an archer can abort to dodge. And they had better. But having done so, they are now in a melee against a sword fighter, and they have a stick. If an archer in that situation were to try none the less to fire his bow, while I am so engaged with them, yes, it is "absolutely impossible" short of the earth opening up and swallowing me (I roll an 18), that I would miss them.

 

But it doesn't "stretch your personal limits of verisimilitude" to have a melee fighter run up to someone who has a loaded weapon ready to fire at them and take a swing, without any hesitation? Maybe if a HtH fighter has to move to be in HtH range with a Ranged fighter they should have an OCV penalty if they attack the same phase they move for focusing on not getting shot at point blank range while making their approach?

"A loaded weapon ready to fire..." In other words a held action, already aimed. If an archer is already drawn (held action) against a melee fighter who is at range from them, and the fighter moves into range to engage them, the archer should get his full OCV against the charging melee fighter with that shot. They can then abort to dodge and proceed to melee with their stick (or more rationally draw a proper melee weapon). This is assuming however, for all intents, that the archer had a held action.

 

It is however well understood in Reality Based Self Defense circles, that if you have a knife armed opponent fifteen feet from you and you attempt to draw and fire your gun, they can close the distance and kill you with their knife before you can kill them with your gun. If you are already holding them at gun point, the situation is of course very different. But neither the OP nor I was talking about situations with archers having held actions with their arrows already aimed.