Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Baddum12 01-16-08, 07:28 AM	Hey, just a few quick thoughts here. I'm sorry if they were covered elsewhere, but I searched terms that I felt covered these situations and found nothing. The first one is rather easy, and definitely comes down to the DMs judgement, I just want to hear what you guys think fair judgement is... When it comes to describing the events of battle and someone fails to meet or beat the AC of a target, how do you decide whether it was a miss/dodge or if the attack was deflected by armor? The way I've been doing it is I'll subtract the armor bonus from AC and if they can beat that number then the armor actually protected the target. If they still can't beat it, then it was a dodge. My next question deals with cover. _|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_| _|_|_|A|_|_|_|_|_|_| _|_|_|_|_|F|X|_|_|_| _|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_| Let A = attacker F = attacker's ally X = attacker's target When attack (A) misses his/her target (X), what are the chances that their ally (F) is accidently hit? And is this what Precise Shot protects against? My last question is another rule of judgement. A PC of mine wants to play as a 14-year-old with the class of fighter. Being as 14 isn't even considered adulthood yet, what penalties, if any, should this character suffer? I think just about the only ability that shouldn't suffer from being younger would be Dexterity, and a slight possibility for Charasima remaining in tact. But I see no reason for bumping an ability up.
UAMDB 01-16-08, 07:45 AM	However, you want to roleplay out misses is up to you. You don't need a formula to tell you if it was a miss or a dodge or if it was the Armour saving it. Just mix it up between all three and your players probly won't complain. Why does the 14yr old have to have penalties. Remember the ages in the book are averages not absolutes. Some people do start adventuring at a younger age than others.
Radijs 01-16-08, 07:51 AM	X has cover from A's attacks resulting in a +4 AC In addition X is in melee with F which means that A has to take a -4 penalty to his attack roll. A can not hit F by accident. Precise shot negates the -4 penalty A has to take.
Wheldrake 01-16-08, 08:12 AM	X has cover from A's attacks resulting in a +4 AC In addition X is in melee with F which means that A has to take a -4 penalty to his attack roll. A can not hit F by accident. Precise shot negates the -4 penalty A has to take. In my campaign, we house-rule that a character firing into melee who rolls a natural "1" has to make an attack roll against his pal. But the standard rules give a zero chance of hitting your friend in melee. YMMV, --- Wheldrake
Vermifaux 01-16-08, 08:13 AM	I have always played it as thus; if you hit their touch AC you connected, but their armor and shield bonuses then come into account. This way if the opponent is wearing Invisible Armor or somesuch, then they can figure things out.
Radijs 01-16-08, 09:14 AM	In my campaign, we house-rule that a character firing into melee who rolls a natural "1" has to make an attack roll against his pal. But the standard rules give a zero chance of hitting your friend in melee. YMMV, --- Wheldrake I don't incorporate everybody's houserules into my awnsers. Thats just too much work!
Ariakus 01-16-08, 09:31 AM	1. I don't use a formula for misses, but just kind of ad lib per the die roll. Miss by a huge amount and it's a clumsy swing, their footing was all wrong and they nearly tripped attempting such a complicated attack...miss by about 5 or so, and the guy barely sidestepped a well placed blow, miss by less than 5 or so and the weapon did not find purchase beyond the protective armor...and this depends on the armor too...if he's got full plate, he doesn't move so well, so the miss value is bigger to bounce off of the armor, say 8 or so. 2.My house rules for hitting an ally is a natural 1 is always a dead ringer for hitting someone else using a ranged attack (if someone is close enough). But much like my "miss" rule above, it depends on how bad of a miss. I have a chart for critical misses, when you get a 1, you now roll a percentage die and compare it to the chart...there are some lovely fumbles on there that throw comedy into the game as well as possibly screwing up a fight by stunning yourself when you fall prone after knocking yourself in the knee :) 3.14 year olds would be physically weaker, their wisdom would be lower, their intelligence might suffer 1 point, but IQ is usually not a factor at 14, at least not between 14 and 18 unless he/she is going to school :) Their constitution, charisma, and dexterity should probably remain the same.
Loftower 01-16-08, 10:04 AM	1. I have a house-ruled combat system which simplifies this, but your armor bonus – AC formula is close to what I do. A simple system: Attack < Touch AC = dead miss Touch AC <= Attack < AC = hit armor AC <= Attack = Hit. 3. I would attach a STR and WIS penalty to the 14-year-old, and probably a CON bonus. If you do apply any penalties or bonuses, be certain to remove them if/when the PC outgrows them.
sblaxman 01-16-08, 06:44 PM	I would play that if the Ally and Target are engaged, and you miss the target (w/ the -4 penalty), AND miss his touch AC, roll a 1d10, you hit your ally on a 1 (10%).... If the Ally and target are NOT engaged, just in adjacent squares, then on a Nat.1, roll a 1d4 and hit on a 1 (25%)... Firing into a crowd is always risky and not recomended.
Baddum12 01-17-08, 02:36 PM	Thanks everyone! I had some ideas, but I like hearing what other people have to say about it before I incorporate it into the game. You all helped a lot.
Simonides 01-17-08, 03:06 PM	1. I don't go by a strict numerical interpretation when I describe a miss. Instead, I consider the likely ways in which the target would avoid damage, what signals I want to send to the party, and whether I want to reward or encourage anything. A guy in full plate with a shield is probably deflecting a lot of attacks with his shield or his armor. A guy in light armor is probably being dodgy. A guy who has high attack rolls is blocking with his weapon. A creature with a high fort save is simply being grazed. There's no science to it, but I try to communicate something to my players about what is attacking and what is being attacked. 2. Ally provides the enemy soft cover, +4 to AC. Ally and enemy are in melee, -4 to attack. Precise Shot negates the -4 penalty to attack, not the cover bonus to AC. 3.0 actually dealt with the striking cover issue and I have kept that system for firing into melee. I actually thought it was still in 3.5, but I can't find any reference to it. If an attack against a target with cover misses by 4 or less, the attack strikes the cover instead. In other words, if it would have been a hit except for the +4 AC cover bonus, the cover gets hit. However, the attack roll (without considering the +4 to AC) must be good enough to hit the ally's AC for it to actually penetrate and do any damage. Example: Enemy is AC 16, Ally is AC 15, Attacker has +8 to attack. Attacker rolls d20 and gets 13, +8 attack, -4 firing into melee, total 17. Enemy's AC is 16 +4 for cover, total 20. Attack is a miss, but it missed by 3 points, so it hit the cover. The attacker rolled a 17 (modifiers are the same because the ally is also in melee), and the Ally's AC is 15. The ally gets hit and does damage. If the ally's AC was 18 instead, the attack would have missed (hit the ally and bounced off his armor). 3. Honestly, I would say no to the guy who wants to play a kid. Note that on the age tables to provide guidelines for starting ages, fighters are in the middle ground for required training. Your average fighter is 18 whereas the youngest fighter is 16. It takes a great deal of training, discipline, and maturity to be a fighter (unlike simply being a warrior). Remember that a fighter is an elite fighter. Soldiers aren't fighters, they are warriors, officers are. I won't say that you couldn't ever have a really young fighter, but as a DM, I need a really good reason to strain credulity like that. What good does it do the game or his character? How does it serve the plot? At that point, if he had good answers and I went along, I wouldn't penalize him at all. He isn't getting any bonuses out of being young, so why should he suffer any penalties? Penalties are for game balancing and for people who owe the DM money.
wizarddog 01-18-08, 03:42 AM	I base descriptions of misses based on the flavor of the character and or the monster. A rogue or nimble character dodges and ducks while a stout character shield blocks, bounce off the armor, or parries with their weapon. Really low rolls are complete misses. As DM, just describe the effect as what makes an interesting story/visual. As for the 14 year-old---that depends on what he wants out of it. Is he expected to use it to his advantage via no one would expect a 14 year old, an increase in an ability? There is no real advantage of still being in your adolescence, even in this day and age. :D If for simple back story, then I would allow it but offer no penalties or bonuses. If he starts playing the "no one would expect a 14 year old" card then you play the "why are we listening to a 14 year old?" response. ;)