Crossbows in Melee? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Crossbows in Melee? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Bluebrush
05-01-06, 07:26 AM To cut a long story short, in last night's game our party faced off against a bunch of drow warriors armed with hand crossbows.
My dwarvern cleric rushed up to engage one, but found the Drow was able to shoot my cleric without provoking an attack of opportunity.

My DM cited a rule, the location of which eluded him, allowing crossbows to be fired without provoking attacks of opportunity. (Though the same was not said of reloading them.)

Has anyone seen a rule like this anywhere? Or was he just misremembering?
(He's played since the days before 3.0, so maybe it's a 1st or 2nd edition rule.)
Grievemere
05-01-06, 08:06 AM I rather think your DM was indulging in a little wishful thinking. I stand to be corrected but I've never come across any such rule (much that I'd love to).
Pegasos989
05-01-06, 08:27 AM PHB says clearly that reloading hand crossbow provokes AoO.
It also says that using ranged weapon provokes AoO.

I would say that by RAW it provokes AoO to shoot with a hand crossbow. I however think that it is okay to houserule it not giving AoO. I wouldn't make so, but I doubt it breaks the game or is even too had to understand when comparing the versatility of hand crossbow to bigger ranged weapons.

The closest thing might be comparing hand crossbow to pistol. The DMG says that firearms should be treated like any other ranged weapon (thus I would say that it provokes AoO.). Don't know how this is handled in DnD modern tho.
Dragonteuthis
05-01-06, 08:33 AM My DM cited a rule, the location of which eluded him...

Handy, that. Next time, make up a rule, the location of which eludes you, allowing you to lop off the head of an enemy creature as a standard action. No attack roll nor damage needed. This attack does not affect creatures without heads, nor does it cause instant death to creatures with multiple heads.

Then show him page 141 of the PHB where it notes that an Attack (ranged) action provokes an attack of opportunity.

When someone makes up a rule/fact/etc., the burden of proof is actually on the fictionalizing person's shoulders, not the doubters. It's a common thing to hear a liar say "Well, prove me wrong." but actually, they should prove themselves right.
Pegasos989
05-01-06, 08:38 AM Handy, that. Next time, make up a rule, the location of which eludes you, allowing you to lop off the head of an enemy creature as a standard action. No attack roll nor damage needed. This attack does not affect creatures without heads, nor does it cause instant death to creatures with multiple heads.

Then show him page 141 of the PHB where it notes that an Attack (ranged) action provokes an attack of opportunity.

When someone makes up a rule/fact/etc., the burden of proof is actually on the fictionalizing person's shoulders, not the doubters. It's a common thing to hear a liar say "Well, prove me wrong." but actually, they should prove themselves right.

Hey, it was DM who made the rule. He could have said
"Rule number 0. It no longer provokes AoO.". If he thinks so and the players still have fun, he can say that.
pres_man
05-01-06, 08:38 AM Actually the usual argument goes the other way. The usual claim is that taking rapid reload allows one to reload a light or hand crossbow as a free action, therefore since it is a free action it does not draw an AoO, but firing it still does. There may be a feat that allows this (some flick of the wrist type thing), but the official rules say when using a ranged weapon (of which a hand crossbow is) you draw an AoO. Please show your DM this thread, if he has any questions.
ClementWillowbreaker
05-01-06, 09:10 AM It is the DM's responsibility to let players know about such basic changes to the rules. Chances are, there is a rogue in your party that would have *loved* to know about that rule beforehand, if your DM just didn't make it up on the spot because you charged and "ruined" his encounter.

You are entirely justified in being annoyed at him, and he should let you take back your action/restart the battle for such a serious tactical change on the fly.
Bluebrush
05-01-06, 09:29 AM I'm not annoyed really. 1d4 damage and DC13 poison (against my mighty dwarvern cleric fortitude save) isn't much to cry about.

Just the other players were a bit confused too.
tarkin
05-01-06, 11:37 AM I would quitely tell the DM, out of the hearing of the other players that he house ruled and should either make it clear to you and the other players that the House Rule is permanent (in which case I suggest considering buying a crossbow and getting rapid reload) or making it clear that in the future you will not be using that house rule.
mvincent
05-01-06, 12:49 PM Note that it's typically easy to step back 5' (out of range of the AoO) before firing the crossbow anyway. Could that have been what your DM was thinking?
Bluebrush
05-01-06, 06:39 PM Handy, that. Next time, make up a rule, the location of which eludes you, allowing you to lop off the head of an enemy creature as a standard action. No attack roll nor damage needed. This attack does not affect creatures without heads, nor does it cause instant death to creatures with multiple heads.I'd prefer to avoid making an antagonistic encounter out of an honest and relatively inconsequential mistake.

I'm fully aware of the sky falling/volcanic eruption/cats and dogs, living together-class disasters inevitably resulting from regular melee crossbowing but this is just something that can be sorted out by referring to the rules and widening the net with the boards to see if I can find out where he may have read this.
bondious
05-01-06, 07:10 PM Does you DM play Star Wars d20? If so then he/she MIGHT be confusing the rules about using pistols in that game with the hand crossbow rules. If I'm not mistaken, somebody with a pistol can fire in melee with either no penalty OR a bonus to the attack...not sure which.
Orion Polaris
05-01-06, 07:29 PM Is there not a feat/prestige class feature that allows one to fire ranged weapons without attacks of opportunities?
pres_man
05-01-06, 07:39 PM Order of the Bow?
Inigo Carmine
05-01-06, 11:10 PM Order of the Bow?

Which I believe is specifically with a bow only. Otherwise, the feat for not provoking w/ a ranged weapon is an epic level feat.

Does you DM play Star Wars d20? If so then he/she MIGHT be confusing the rules about using pistols in that game with the hand crossbow rules. If I'm not mistaken, somebody with a pistol can fire in melee with either no penalty OR a bonus to the attack...not sure which.

Both actually. Firing a pistol doesn't provoke an AoO, and *everyone* get's point blank shot at 2m (5 ft). Point blank shot the feat just moves your pointblank shot range to 10m. My first thought was he was confusing it w/ star wars as well.

I'm w/ Takin that it should be discreetly pointed out to the DM after the game when no players are around. I don't like it when DMs go against the rules during play (without having previously announced it as a house rule, or at least admitting it's a house rule right then and there). BUT, I'm there to play a game; arguing about rules is something for afterwards.

My usual gameplan when comfronting rules issue with where DM claims an on-the-spot house rule is actually RAW:

1) DM makes "incorrect" ruling
2) I politely remind DM of what I believe the actual rule is.
3) DM insists his rule is RAW
4) I say no more during game (unless character death results, which has so far never happened).
5) Later that night DM gets email with SRD quotation and usually rulebook page/paragrpah# of actual rule. Usually includes disclaimer that I don't mind house rules, I just want the DM to know that he is deviating from core rules and request he notifiy us of these things before the instant it becomes relevant in game.

Remember that DMing can be tough and making the DMs job less stressful is a nice thing to do. I've made incorrect rulings as a DM I never would have made as a player; trying to remember all rules applicable to some random fodder you're throwing up against your PCs can be difficult, where knowing every minutae of rules related to what your single continuing character can do is pretty standard for me.
bondious
05-01-06, 11:32 PM My first thought was he was confusing it w/ star wars as well.

Great minds think ALIKE, my friend. :D

And I agree. It really is just a game, after all, and unless it's something really jacked up like a bad rule causing your character to buy the farm or the destruction of a powerful/expensive item, then USUALLY it can just slide and be brought up later.

Another thing to add is that if a player gets all defensive and/or flies off the handle about a slight (perceived or not) the DM might be in a bad position, and feel like the player's trying to get everyone to "gang up" on him/her. Stuff like that can bring an otherwise fun and entertaining game to a screeching halt...and nobody likes THAT!
Bluebrush
05-02-06, 02:39 AM Order of the Bow?Nah. These were just some random goons with hand crossbows.
Besides, they drew their rapiers once they'd fired at me.
Malachus
05-02-06, 08:46 PM What about the feat Defensive Archery from Races of the Wild?
Bluebrush
05-03-06, 03:25 AM I don't think it's a feat or a class ability.

It's pretty much something the DM thought was innate to the crossbow/handcrossbow.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Bluebrush 05-01-06, 07:26 AM	To cut a long story short, in last night's game our party faced off against a bunch of drow warriors armed with hand crossbows. My dwarvern cleric rushed up to engage one, but found the Drow was able to shoot my cleric without provoking an attack of opportunity. My DM cited a rule, the location of which eluded him, allowing crossbows to be fired without provoking attacks of opportunity. (Though the same was not said of reloading them.) Has anyone seen a rule like this anywhere? Or was he just misremembering? (He's played since the days before 3.0, so maybe it's a 1st or 2nd edition rule.)
Grievemere 05-01-06, 08:06 AM	I rather think your DM was indulging in a little wishful thinking. I stand to be corrected but I've never come across any such rule (much that I'd love to).
Pegasos989 05-01-06, 08:27 AM	PHB says clearly that reloading hand crossbow provokes AoO. It also says that using ranged weapon provokes AoO. I would say that by RAW it provokes AoO to shoot with a hand crossbow. I however think that it is okay to houserule it not giving AoO. I wouldn't make so, but I doubt it breaks the game or is even too had to understand when comparing the versatility of hand crossbow to bigger ranged weapons. The closest thing might be comparing hand crossbow to pistol. The DMG says that firearms should be treated like any other ranged weapon (thus I would say that it provokes AoO.). Don't know how this is handled in DnD modern tho.
Dragonteuthis 05-01-06, 08:33 AM	My DM cited a rule, the location of which eluded him... Handy, that. Next time, make up a rule, the location of which eludes you, allowing you to lop off the head of an enemy creature as a standard action. No attack roll nor damage needed. This attack does not affect creatures without heads, nor does it cause instant death to creatures with multiple heads. Then show him page 141 of the PHB where it notes that an Attack (ranged) action provokes an attack of opportunity. When someone makes up a rule/fact/etc., the burden of proof is actually on the fictionalizing person's shoulders, not the doubters. It's a common thing to hear a liar say "Well, prove me wrong." but actually, they should prove themselves right.
Pegasos989 05-01-06, 08:38 AM	Handy, that. Next time, make up a rule, the location of which eludes you, allowing you to lop off the head of an enemy creature as a standard action. No attack roll nor damage needed. This attack does not affect creatures without heads, nor does it cause instant death to creatures with multiple heads. Then show him page 141 of the PHB where it notes that an Attack (ranged) action provokes an attack of opportunity. When someone makes up a rule/fact/etc., the burden of proof is actually on the fictionalizing person's shoulders, not the doubters. It's a common thing to hear a liar say "Well, prove me wrong." but actually, they should prove themselves right. Hey, it was DM who made the rule. He could have said "Rule number 0. It no longer provokes AoO.". If he thinks so and the players still have fun, he can say that.
pres_man 05-01-06, 08:38 AM	Actually the usual argument goes the other way. The usual claim is that taking rapid reload allows one to reload a light or hand crossbow as a free action, therefore since it is a free action it does not draw an AoO, but firing it still does. There may be a feat that allows this (some flick of the wrist type thing), but the official rules say when using a ranged weapon (of which a hand crossbow is) you draw an AoO. Please show your DM this thread, if he has any questions.
ClementWillowbreaker 05-01-06, 09:10 AM	It is the DM's responsibility to let players know about such basic changes to the rules. Chances are, there is a rogue in your party that would have loved to know about that rule beforehand, if your DM just didn't make it up on the spot because you charged and "ruined" his encounter. You are entirely justified in being annoyed at him, and he should let you take back your action/restart the battle for such a serious tactical change on the fly.
Bluebrush 05-01-06, 09:29 AM	I'm not annoyed really. 1d4 damage and DC13 poison (against my mighty dwarvern cleric fortitude save) isn't much to cry about. Just the other players were a bit confused too.
tarkin 05-01-06, 11:37 AM	I would quitely tell the DM, out of the hearing of the other players that he house ruled and should either make it clear to you and the other players that the House Rule is permanent (in which case I suggest considering buying a crossbow and getting rapid reload) or making it clear that in the future you will not be using that house rule.
mvincent 05-01-06, 12:49 PM	Note that it's typically easy to step back 5' (out of range of the AoO) before firing the crossbow anyway. Could that have been what your DM was thinking?
Bluebrush 05-01-06, 06:39 PM	Handy, that. Next time, make up a rule, the location of which eludes you, allowing you to lop off the head of an enemy creature as a standard action. No attack roll nor damage needed. This attack does not affect creatures without heads, nor does it cause instant death to creatures with multiple heads.I'd prefer to avoid making an antagonistic encounter out of an honest and relatively inconsequential mistake. I'm fully aware of the sky falling/volcanic eruption/cats and dogs, living together-class disasters inevitably resulting from regular melee crossbowing but this is just something that can be sorted out by referring to the rules and widening the net with the boards to see if I can find out where he may have read this.
bondious 05-01-06, 07:10 PM	Does you DM play Star Wars d20? If so then he/she MIGHT be confusing the rules about using pistols in that game with the hand crossbow rules. If I'm not mistaken, somebody with a pistol can fire in melee with either no penalty OR a bonus to the attack...not sure which.
Orion Polaris 05-01-06, 07:29 PM	Is there not a feat/prestige class feature that allows one to fire ranged weapons without attacks of opportunities?
pres_man 05-01-06, 07:39 PM	Order of the Bow?
Inigo Carmine 05-01-06, 11:10 PM	Order of the Bow? Which I believe is specifically with a bow only. Otherwise, the feat for not provoking w/ a ranged weapon is an epic level feat. Does you DM play Star Wars d20? If so then he/she MIGHT be confusing the rules about using pistols in that game with the hand crossbow rules. If I'm not mistaken, somebody with a pistol can fire in melee with either no penalty OR a bonus to the attack...not sure which. Both actually. Firing a pistol doesn't provoke an AoO, and everyone get's point blank shot at 2m (5 ft). Point blank shot the feat just moves your pointblank shot range to 10m. My first thought was he was confusing it w/ star wars as well. I'm w/ Takin that it should be discreetly pointed out to the DM after the game when no players are around. I don't like it when DMs go against the rules during play (without having previously announced it as a house rule, or at least admitting it's a house rule right then and there). BUT, I'm there to play a game; arguing about rules is something for afterwards. My usual gameplan when comfronting rules issue with where DM claims an on-the-spot house rule is actually RAW: 1) DM makes "incorrect" ruling 2) I politely remind DM of what I believe the actual rule is. 3) DM insists his rule is RAW 4) I say no more during game (unless character death results, which has so far never happened). 5) Later that night DM gets email with SRD quotation and usually rulebook page/paragrpah# of actual rule. Usually includes disclaimer that I don't mind house rules, I just want the DM to know that he is deviating from core rules and request he notifiy us of these things before the instant it becomes relevant in game. Remember that DMing can be tough and making the DMs job less stressful is a nice thing to do. I've made incorrect rulings as a DM I never would have made as a player; trying to remember all rules applicable to some random fodder you're throwing up against your PCs can be difficult, where knowing every minutae of rules related to what your single continuing character can do is pretty standard for me.
bondious 05-01-06, 11:32 PM	My first thought was he was confusing it w/ star wars as well. Great minds think ALIKE, my friend. :D And I agree. It really is just a game, after all, and unless it's something really jacked up like a bad rule causing your character to buy the farm or the destruction of a powerful/expensive item, then USUALLY it can just slide and be brought up later. Another thing to add is that if a player gets all defensive and/or flies off the handle about a slight (perceived or not) the DM might be in a bad position, and feel like the player's trying to get everyone to "gang up" on him/her. Stuff like that can bring an otherwise fun and entertaining game to a screeching halt...and nobody likes THAT!
Bluebrush 05-02-06, 02:39 AM	Order of the Bow?Nah. These were just some random goons with hand crossbows. Besides, they drew their rapiers once they'd fired at me.
Malachus 05-02-06, 08:46 PM	What about the feat Defensive Archery from Races of the Wild?
Bluebrush 05-03-06, 03:25 AM	I don't think it's a feat or a class ability. It's pretty much something the DM thought was innate to the crossbow/handcrossbow.