Ranged attacks while engaged in melee

[Vondy]

Re: Ranged attacks while engaged in melee

 

You are of course completely right Vondy' date=' 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.[/quote']

 

I generally run that kind of fantasy, too.

[Panpiper]

Re: Ranged attacks while engaged in melee

 

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

Ten points is definitely cheaper than buying DCV levels "only for when firing bows" as one would have to buy two for each DCV lost, in order to counter the halving effect from concentration.. I could not live with 2 points for such a talent, if for no other reason than because every archer would then pick it up in a weekend seminar. Becoming Legolas should represent a serious investment of time and practice, in other words, points. If there were a consensus opinion here that ten points was reasonable, I would probably allow a player to take it, but without such an acclamation from the body at large (or proclamation by Steven Long), I would require that a player buy DCV levels with a limitation and thereby spend even more than ten points for it.

 

They would be better investing in a sword to compliment their bow.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Ranged attacks while engaged in melee

 

.................................

 

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, that I would miss them.

 

 

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.

 

 

OTOH if you have a sword out and your opponent has no weapon the chances of them disabling you are pretty slight, whereas you have an excellent chance of doing them serious injury - but that is not how it pans out in Hero, necessarily, because of 'dramatic reality', even in 'gritty' games.

 

Hero does not break down time on a tick by tick basis - it is all an abstraction, even when we get down to segments, because someone who has a higher DEX can take a half move and attack before the other person can do anything.

 

If I was GMing the situation, I might suggest that, to get a shot in, the archer first needs to counter the swordsman and position himself - that sounds like a successful block (which also gives them first action next phase) - so I might suggest they need to block then attack - risky but possible.

 

Because a longbow attack requires 1/2 DCV it is a riskt strategy - a desperate one, perhaps - anyway - it the archer misses, the swordsman is almost inevitably going to hit.

 

Bear in mind also there is nothing in the build of a Longbow that prevents its use in HtH combat, unless you call 'Real Weapon'. You might want to re-define bows in your game with a limitation that requires a certain amount of space to use, or make them full phase 0 DCV concentration weapons - that should stop the problem occuring most of the time.

 

I do agree that for a realistic game, missile weapons should generally be of very limited use in HtH, even things like pistols, and bows and crossbows and thrown weapons all but useless - but the 'base weighting' of the game is toward a less realistic style of combat - there is nothing to prevent a house rule to create a more realistic sort of play. Having said that, even in the most realistic of settings, I'd generally want to be able to give a chance to any action - it might be that as the swordsman lunges forward his foot slips, and he stumbles, putting himself in the perfect position to receive an arrow - Hero does not 'do' fumbles and criticals, but if you (say) had a house rule that missile weaposn suffered a -4 OCV penalty at HtH range, and you tried it and hit anyway, presumably that was because something unusual had happened. I'd rather impose a big penalty than an absolute injunction.

[tarragon]

Re: Ranged attacks while engaged in melee

 

I could not live with 2 points for such a talent' date=' if for no other reason than because every archer would then pick it up in a weekend seminar..[/quote']

 

It's 5 Points minimum if you don't already have acrobatics, and then the roll is still only dex based which will be 11- for a mook. Five points for a 65% chance to duck under an incoming blade and fire back sounds fine to me. To get this for only 2 additional points requires that dex and acrobatics already are part of the characters shtick.

 

This brings up an interesting question. What happens if the roll on the Naked advantage fails? Do they still get to fire simply without the advantage or is the entire shot ruined and they get no shot off.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Ranged attacks while engaged in melee

 

It's 5 Points minimum if you don't already have acrobatics, and then the roll is still only dex based which will be 11- for a mook. Five points for a 65% chance to duck under an incoming blade and fire back sounds fine to me. To get this for only 2 additional points requires that dex and acrobatics already are part of the characters shtick.

 

This brings up an interesting question. What happens if the roll on the Naked advantage fails? Do they still get to fire simply without the advantage or is the entire shot ruined and they get no shot off.

 

Just applying the principles, you'd get the shot but without the advantage: you could build in some sort of additional limitation, a side effect, that if the roll fails the shot is ruined.

[Panpiper]

Re: Ranged attacks while engaged in melee

 

I should retract my reticence with a ten point talent. I forgot about the acrobatics roll. That is almost exactly the correct point cost for six 5 point DCV levels with a -1 limitation for only to counter DCV penalty when firing bows, and a -1/2 for requiring a skill roll.

[AmadanNaBriona]

Re: Ranged attacks while engaged in melee

 

A couple of additional notes of interest (coming from someone else with a background in the appropriate real life skills, including sword-fighting, archery, and some mass combat) that might help dial in the realism...

 

Concentration, as a standard limit on bows, doesn't just cult DCV in half, it also restricts ones actions to a degree and allows for "disrupting" the Concentrating Characters ability to use the Power. So the bowman is gonna be even more hosed than just taking the DCV penalty, which I see as totally apropos. And if his Concentration gets broken before his attack, the attack simply fails... no OCV penalty. Brutal enough?

 

Another point I can't recall ever seeing mentioned in this sort of discussion is the size/length of a bow... By function you have to be holding this long stick interposed between you and your target. Any attack coming in from the "sides", the way most melee weapons swing, is going to stand a very good chance of hitting the bow by my eye. I figure this one's covered under the 'Real Weapon" limit, but am not quite sure how to apply it in play.

 

Oh, and a reasonably sharp weapon catching a bowstring under tension is almost certainly gonna sever it, releasing the stored energy in a potentially ugly fashion.

[AmadanNaBriona]

Re: Ranged attacks while engaged in melee

 

I should retract my reticence with a ten point talent. I forgot about the acrobatics roll. That is almost exactly the correct point cost for six 5 point DCV levels with a -1 limitation for only to counter DCV penalty when firing bows' date=' and a -1/2 for requiring a skill roll.[/quote']

 

For my part I'd split the difference, lump it in the same rough category of Combat Skills like the Autofire Skills and call it 5 points. Expensive enough to hurt, not enough to be prohibitive. Of course, I'd also be writing it up to offset the Concentration limit, but leaving the Real Weapon part alone, as I don't think you should be able to offset any inherent structural limitations with a Talent.

[Legendsmiths]

Re: Ranged attacks while engaged in melee

 

One thing I haven't seen mentioned, and plays somewhat into the "attack of opportunity" category.

 

Block

 

If you are adjacent and someone is using a ranged weapon on you - Block. Then you get initiative on your next phase and you cut them down.

 

I have played a lot of dungeon crawl fantasy, converting D&D adventures and I can tell you everytime the archers ended up in melee, it was never pretty. 1/2 DCV and low armor tended to take care of any issues relating to making melee unfriendly to ranged attacks.

[IKerensky]

Re: Ranged attacks while engaged in melee

 

It's all come down to what you put into the "Real weapon" limitation.

 

For me, shooting a bow in close combat is totally out of question, same as using that bow as an alternative melee weapon than expecting to shoot again with it. For me, that are real weapon limitation.

 

Now in "Tolkien meet John Woo's" Legolas character that is a different things, this guy's bow is definitely not behaving like a real weapon, I am pretty sure it is so easy to use in battle that it doesnt even qualify for the two hands restriction... They emphases too much on the bow-fu, on the point you wonder why does he actually wear dual long-knives.. that's just hollywood rubish and definitely not "cool" on my book.

 

Nobody is expected to be able to use a bow at melee range and survive. The trick is that in a game with archers and melee fighters both groups cant have at it. The Archers will want to ambush and fire from afar, the melee will want to close in and have fun without getting too much friendly fired on. So there is a need for balance and devicing a way for bowmen to shoot while in melee range is a necessity.

 

I would say that it deserve a massive penalty to DCV AND OCV because there is just no way you can aim efficiently whith someone in the way to chop your head off..

[Vondy]

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']

 

Two easy ways:

 

Melee Shooter: A custom naked advantage "no concentration" offsetting the points.

Melee Shooter: A combination of DCV levels and PSLs for bow related pens.

 

Or...

 

Bowman From Hell: No Concentration (custom advantage), Fast Draw (bow), PSLs (bow related pens).

 

I'm sure there are other ways to handle it.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Ranged attacks while engaged in melee

 

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' date=' and never tries to draw that bow (in other words, they melee with a stick), they are dead.[/quote']

 

Absent some form of talent, assuming he started with a 6 DCV, the archer has a 3 DCV due to the halving for Concentration. Assuming a 6 OCV,

 

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. Assuming a 6 OCV swordsman, he gets hit on a 14-, or about 90% likely. This seems a reasonable result.

 

If he Dodges instead, he gets full CV and moves up to a 9. The Swordsman now gets a 25% chance to hit (8 or less). But the archer has used his move - he cannot fire an arrow without taking the CV penalty.

 

Now, if the archer has superior SPD (or they move next in the same phase and the archer has superior DEX), he could, by the rules, fire off his Longbow. He is now at 1/2 DCV until he gets another action.

 

I would interpret the archer's shot as "The swordsman rushes the archer, slashing at him. The archer ducks out of the sword's arc, narrowly avoiding being struck. The swordsman recovers from the miss, but the archer is faster, nocking and firing an arrow at the swordsman before he can bring his sword around to once again bear on the archer.

 

What happens next depends on relative SPD. If the archer has a phase before the swordsman, he can Abort to dodge the next sword blow. Unless his SPD is vastly superior (more than 1 point different), he will spend the rest of the turn re-Aborting to dodge in order to avoid the swordsman. If they had the same SPD, but the Archer had superior DEX, then the Swordsman can swing before the Archer can recover enough to dodge, and he is pretty certain to hit.

 

Of course, if the Swordsman aborted to Dodge the arrow, now he's on the defensive.

 

This puts a swordsman and an archer who invested equal points in their respective combat skills with their weapon of choice on a pretty even footing. That seems equitable to me. And, in a contest between "realistic" and "balanced and playable", I'm going to go with the latter every time.

 

Avoiding the halving of DCV would carry a significant cost. How much depends on the amount of extra DCV needed (+6 DCV in my example), and how great a limitation we consider "Only with bow". A 3 point Bow skill level would allow enhancing OCV, DCV or damage. Make that "only for DCV" at -1, and 6 levels would cost 18/2 = 9. The cost is at least 6 - a 3 point level does 3 things and we removed 2 of them, so even a -2 limitation leaves a cost of 6. A cost of 12 would be comparable with buying +6 OCV with the bow, so that cost also seems reasonable.

 

I'd prefer the character purchasing some form of limited skill level or limited DCV to a Talent (although a Talent could be designed around that build) to allow for the fact that different DCV's should carry different costs, and to allow for partial removal of the penalty - for example, he could buy 4 levels and be better able to avoid attacks, but not fully offset the penalty imposed by the bow.

 

I agree 2 points seems far too cheap, but I also see the appeal in that, had the character purchased the bow and left off the relevant limitations, 2 points would be the actual cost. But the fact is that most Fantasy characters don't buy the bow - they get it for free. Maybe Legolas should buy the bow with points, as signature equipment. OIF - Bow of Opportunity, but no Concentration or Real Weapon limitation. In addition to eliminating the penalties, this would also signal that it should be fairly uncommon for him to be unable to locate a bow, and more difficult for him to be disarmed (and he was rarely, if ever, disarmed).

[Ockham's Spoon]

Re: Ranged attacks while engaged in melee

 

By official rules, bows are bought with the limitation ½DCV, and it takes a full PHA to use them (half PHA to load, half to fire). On top of which, a bow is not exactly a robust weapon compared to a sword, and it is likely to be broken in melee (any miss by 2 or less hits the bow, and any hit by less than half of the needed roll hits both the archer and the bow). This is how my fantasy games operate by default.

 

Now if you want a good archer, you can buy Fast Draw with your bow so it only takes half a PHA to shoot, and you will probably have enough levels with the bow that you can even use the Rapid Fire skill to fire two arrows at once and still have a good chance of hitting.

 

If you take it to the level of Legolas in LoTR, then you must buy the power 3d6 RKA, OAF Bow (I know most bows don't do 3d6, but Legolas is deadly accurate). Now you can fire it in half a PHA with your full DCV. Not realistic, but cinematic. And even Legolas is out of luck if his bowstring gets snapped.

[Panpiper]

Re: Ranged attacks while engaged in melee

 

A beginning for Legolas (5th Ed. stats, sorry.)

 

10 Str

20 Dex 30

13 Con 6

13 Body 6

13 Int 3

10 Ego

13 Pre 3

Com NA

2 Pd

2 Ed

4 Spd 10

5 Rec

26 End

25 Stun

 

8 Combat Luck 6 PD/6 ED Does not stack with armor -1/2

30 3D6 RKA bow of opportunity -1/2

8 Offensive Combat Penalty Skill Levels w Placed Shots

6 Offensive Combat Penalty Skill Levels w Range Penalties with RKA

6 Penalty Skill Levels w Sight Range Modifiers

10 +5 OCV with RKA

3 Fastdraw: Arrows

3 Stealth

3 Concealment

2 Forest Survival

2 PS: Ranger

 

Total: 139 with room for chrome...

 

Edit: Hmm... I suppose technically, he doesn't need fastdraw, does he. His RKA is not a real weapon. He just needs to have a bow. Technically he doesn't even need arrows!

[IKerensky]

Re: Ranged attacks while engaged in melee

 

Interesting stats...

 

Except that Legolas is a Tolkien elf, even if from Mirkwood...

 

STR should be in the 15-18 range, CON and BODY in the 20 area too and he have an quasi-immunity to disease and very strong poison resistance. He also have the Incredible Balance Talent.

 

Tolkien's elves are stronger and healthier than human their size (even if usually they are taller too) and Legolas have King blood...

[Panpiper]

Re: Ranged attacks while engaged in melee

 

Interesting stats...

 

Except that Legolas is a Tolkien elf, even if from Mirkwood...

Yes, but I don't have enough 'points' as a starting character to build the 'actual' Legolas. Give me 250 experience points and maybe we can talk.

 

This is Legolas at age 20 (maybe), not age 400 or whatever he is in the books/movies.

[mayapuppies]

Re: Ranged attacks while engaged in melee

 

Don't forget floating on snow.

 

As to the archery in melee. Try it in my games and you'll have a dead archer and/or a broken bow.

[SteveZilla]

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).

 

Actually, IIRC the Attack of Opportunity predated WotC's purchase of TSR -- I am pretty sure they were in AD&D. So blame TSR.

 

D&D uses complicated game mechanics and to use the magic term interrupts that make combat very involved.

 

Agreed.

 

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.

 

Though how the (Cross)Bow is built -- specifically the limitations inherent in the weapon (and usually in its use) -- have great bearing on how they would work in combat. If it includes something like the 1/2 DCV form of Concentration, then using the bow puts the archer at 1/2 DCV. If not, then it doesn't.

 

Now, having said that, I believe it is possible to model a bow in the system to be fairly realistic, but by including Talents (like D&D 3.x Feats) the character can buy (like a Buyoff of a Limitation ), it can become much more cinematic.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Ranged attacks while engaged in melee

 

One on one, Hero rules, there is absolutely nothing to prevent an archer plugging a swordsman at melee range. If you assume that the archer probably has the higher DEX he'll go first even if he has to get an arrow out then shoot it.

 

The half DCV will be largely irrelevant if he hits and kills (or otherwise incapacitates) the swordsman.

 

So, what you need it s a house rule for bow building - it is all well and good saying 'can't happen here', but the point is it can - and will - unless you change the rules.

 

Perhaps if longbows, which are pretty difficult to draw and aim even for an experienced bowman also had 'extra time + 1 segment'. That would mean that the bowman is 1/2 DCV for a pretty long time and so likely to get snicker-snackered before that arrow takes wing, if they try to hit someone close by.

 

It also means that you can charge a bowman from short range before they can get a shot off - assuming that you both start acting at the same time.

 

I would probably also make the extra time 'activation only' and have another longbow limitation - that you can only hold a prepared arrow for a limited time, perhaps CON/5 phases, or (STR-minSTR) phases i.e. you can draw the string back and make the arrow ready for instant release, but you can only hold it there for a while.

 

I stress though, these are house rules. If you adopt them, or your own version, then you should make it very clear to the players that you have done so. Fair's fair.

 

Legolas' Bow - may I suggest this build?

 

Killing Attack - Ranged 2d6 (30 Active Points); OIF (Bow of Opportunity; -1/2), 16 clips of 1 Recoverable Charge (-1/4)

 

First off 2d6 KA is plenty - same as a heavy longbow - he can up the damage against most opponents with skill levels or aimed shots as he will generally have an enormous OCV advantage.

 

The OIF - bow of opportunity - fairy nuff.

 

The arrows I've done as 16 recoverable charges - meaning he usually has or can get get ammo for the bow but is not totally unrestricted in its use - he can run out - but will usually be able to find more arrows at short notice.

 

That works out at 30 active/17 real - leaving some room for sword skills, which even as a young elf he probably had.

 

Hmm. If you changed 'bow of opportunity' to 'weapon of opportunity' then ditched the recoverable charges I just suggested then he would be pretty deadly with any weapon - bearing in mind there is no rule restriction against using a RKA at melee range

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Ranged attacks while engaged in melee

 

Actually' date=' IIRC the Attack of Opportunity predated WotC's purchase of TSR -- I am pretty sure they were in AD&D. So blame TSR. [/quote']

 

The Attack of Opportunity was introduced in 3rd Ed, so it did not predate WoTC.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Ranged attacks while engaged in melee

 

The Attack of Opportunity was introduced in 3rd Ed' date=' so it did not predate WoTC.[/quote']

 

Controversial as this may be, I don;t think that the concept of 'Attack of Opportunity' is a bad one - but the execution was a bit muddled in DnD*. In essence we are saying the same thing here - someone trying to draw and shoot a bow in melee should have little chance of success, or at least be exposed to considerable danger in doing so - it is just a matter of sorting out the right mechanism to convey that.

 

 

*Although I didn't think it was that difficult to use in practice.

[Panpiper]

Re: Ranged attacks while engaged in melee

 

Hmm. If you changed 'bow of opportunity' to 'weapon of opportunity' then ditched the recoverable charges I just suggested then he would be pretty deadly with any weapon - bearing in mind there is no rule restriction against using a RKA at melee range

A very young Legolas

 

10 Str

20 Dex 30

13 Con 6

13 Body 6

13 Int 3

10 Ego

13 Pre 3

Com NA

3 Pd 1

3 Ed

4 Spd 10

5 Rec

26 End

25 Stun

 

3 +1 Striking Appearance (Girl Magnet)

8 Combat Luck 6 PD/6 ED Does not stack with armor -1/2

21 2D6 RKA, 1/2 Endurance +1/4, Weapon of Opportunity -1/2, Beam -1/4

("Quiver of Infinate Arrows", Arrows are a 'special effect' only.)

8 Offensive Combat Penalty Skill Levels w Placed Shots

6 Offensive Combat Penalty Skill Levels w Range Penalties with RKA

6 Penalty Skill Levels w Sight Range Modifiers

10 +5 OCV with RKA

7 +3 DCV Only in Hand to Hand -1

1 Longevity 200 Years (and climbing)

3 +1 Perception

3 Stealth

3 Concealment

3 Tracking

2 Forest Survival

2 PS: Ranger

-12 -6" Running

17 +7" Flight, No Turn Mode +1/4, Invisible Power Effects +1/4, Only In Contact With A Surface -1/4

(Must move along some at least exceedingly, remotely plausible surface.)

 

Total: 150

[Sean Waters]

Re: Ranged attacks while engaged in melee

 

Juicy

[SteveZilla]

Re: Ranged attacks while engaged in melee

 

One thing I haven't seen mentioned, and plays somewhat into the "attack of opportunity" category.

 

Block

 

If you are adjacent and someone is using a ranged weapon on you - Block. Then you get initiative on your next phase and you cut them down.

 

 

Unless 6E changed this, you can't Block (the maneuver) a Ranged Atack against you -- you'd have to have (and use) Missile Deflection. But even then MD wouldn't make you go first.

[bigbywolfe]

Re: Ranged attacks while engaged in melee

 

Actually 6E did change that. It was even one of the early "sneak peek" announcements. A lot of people argued about it.