Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 Helaman Nov 15, 2014 18:05:21	There is a disadvantage firing with an enemy 5ft away but what about firing INTO a melee combat.   I was reading the rules the other day and couldnt find anything on that though the GM was applying disadvantage.
#2 iserith Nov 15, 2014 18:10:11	The rules for cover would apply here. See Basic Rules, page 74.
#3 Illithidbix Nov 15, 2014 18:12:38	Nope. It's dealt with at length in this thread: http://community.wizards.com/forum/dungeon-master-help/threads/4156451     The only reference to penalties for shooting into melee is in the cover rules: Where they might grant +2 AC if creatures are in the line of fire to the target. Basic Rules and PHB wrote:
#4 Helaman Nov 15, 2014 19:24:17	Thanks.   Page196.   It sorta worked mind you - what do you think about it as a house rule? Disadvantage for shooting into melee?
#5 MechaPilot Nov 15, 2014 19:31:02	Helaman wrote:
#6 iserith Nov 15, 2014 19:33:02	Helaman wrote:
#7 Illithidbix Nov 15, 2014 19:41:24	I agree with MechaPiolot. +2 AC from cover is fine IMO given disadvantage is roughly equal to +4/+5 AC*   Ranged attacks have obvious advantages but it has it's own concerns with having disadvantage when within 5' of an enemy.   I rather prefer ranged and melee party members supporting each other, rather than getting resentful at each other because they impede each others effectiveness. I feel it fits D&D far better as a game of party based heroic combat rather than accidentally shooting the paladin or whining that they should stay out of melee because you do better DPR than they do.   *Actual advantage/disadvantage maths here: http://http://onlinedungeonmaster.com/2012/05/24/advantage-and-disadvantage-in-dd-next-the-math/
#8 MechaPilot Nov 15, 2014 19:57:29	Illithidbix wrote:
#9 trebor_rjf Nov 15, 2014 20:08:25	i think that if you expect ranged weapons to be deadly against your enemies, they should also be deadly against your allies in the right circumstances.   trying to shoot someone while they're actively fighting your friend is probably one of the harder things to do as a marksman.
(Reply to #5) arnwolf666	MechaPilot wrote:
#11 MechaPilot Nov 15, 2014 22:37:46	arnwolf666 wrote:
#12 JohnLynch Nov 16, 2014 0:21:26	I've been getting tripped up by this rule as well. Personally I like the default rules of disadvantage when in Melee and no penalties for shooting into Melee unless there's cover.
#13 Neonflux Nov 16, 2014 0:34:52	I use disadvantage when firing into melee where there is another PC partially blocking the line of sight. I have considered applying an optional rule that if the attack is a miss and the higher number beats the blocking party members AC they are accidentally hit, my main concern is that this essentially feels like an advantage attack against the PC.  Having two halfling characters in the group though, I often hear the line 'he's a halfling though, I'll just shoot over him' which tends to result in lot of shooting through that players position.
(Reply to #11) AaronOfBarbaria	MechaPilot wrote:
#15 Illithidbix Nov 16, 2014 16:06:13	trebor_rjf wrote:
#16 joeburgos Nov 16, 2014 17:01:33	Helaman wrote:
#17 Noon Nov 16, 2014 18:52:29	JohnLynch wrote:
#18 dmgorgon Nov 17, 2014 6:53:04	arnwolf666 wrote:
#19 trebor_rjf Nov 17, 2014 10:40:53	Illithidbix wrote:
#20 FFSAA Nov 17, 2014 11:12:13	dmgorgon wrote:
#21 iserith Nov 17, 2014 11:32:08	FFSAA wrote:
#22 FFSAA Nov 17, 2014 12:54:10	iserith wrote:
#23 iserith Nov 17, 2014 13:08:06	FFSAA wrote:
#24 Sword_of_Spirit Nov 17, 2014 15:29:56	I'd discourage houseruling additional penalties for firing into melee unless you plan to houserule similarly punitive penalties system wide. The default assumption of 5e is that we don't punish things like choosing to be a ranged rather than melee combatant, or apply penalties to every little thing that might slow down combat and discourage people from trying exciting and interesting things.   Now, it's fine if you want to make it a bit more gritty and penalize things like that--just realize that by singling out this particular instance you are selectively applying a different game philosophy to a tiny component of the system. I'd wait at least until the DMG comes out and see what rules are offered to produce a grittier game, then houserule if you want something different than they give you.
#25 Lawolf Nov 17, 2014 15:49:04	Eh, most dedicated archers will have the sharpshooter feat anyway so cover doesn't even matter.
#26 DungeonKrusher Nov 17, 2014 15:56:52	We used to have a rule that melee combatants provided cover (I believe that was a -4 to hit?) and if the attack missed the target, but would hit the co-combatant sub-DEX, your ally would be struck. That's fairly lame, but there had to be some recourse. I don't like the idea of "Just fire into combat -- no way you'd hit your friend!"     Communicating during combat makes sense; we'd often resort to the archer telling his teammate to step back, then would hold the attack until the teammate did so (5' step) and then the attack would trigger. That seems to work well with the game mechanics AND realism, rather than simply expecting communication mid-fight and expecting the other person would move.   I really like the idea of re-rolling on a natural 1 to see if you hit your buddy -- coinciding with a penalty to-hit. The odds are slim, but they happen.
#27 dmgorgon Nov 17, 2014 17:55:51	FFSAA wrote:
#28 dmgorgon Nov 17, 2014 17:57:52	FFSAA wrote:
#29 MechaPilot Nov 17, 2014 17:58:05	dmgorgon wrote:
#30 dmgorgon Nov 17, 2014 18:00:25	Sword_of_Spirit wrote:
#31 dmgorgon Nov 17, 2014 18:05:51	MechaPilot wrote:
#32 MechaPilot Nov 17, 2014 18:08:23	dmgorgon wrote:
#33 FFSAA Nov 17, 2014 21:22:32	iserith wrote:
#34 bawylie Nov 17, 2014 22:56:24	Rulings > Rules.    The "Houserule" argument is bunk in this edition.
#35 Diffan Nov 18, 2014 0:15:50	My only problem with applying an additional penalty is that it only targets Ranged attackers. If I'm using a melee weapon against an opponent and I have an adjacent ally, why am I not also re-rolling for 1's to see if I accidentally hit my buddy? I just see a disconnect here that isn't reflective of "realism" but a desire for punitive measure for punitive sake alone.
#36 iserith Nov 18, 2014 5:43:28	dmgorgon wrote:
#37 iserith Nov 18, 2014 5:55:54	FFSAA wrote:
#38 dmgorgon Nov 18, 2014 5:56:49	MechaPilot wrote:
#39 dmgorgon Nov 18, 2014 6:02:00	Diffan wrote:
(Reply to #39) Timborama	dmgorgon wrote:
#41 ChrisCarlson Nov 19, 2014 6:23:21	I generally just go with the suggested cover penalty unless something funky is going on.   Though I did have one PC shoot into a grapple the other day and I assigned disadvantage.
#42 shpelley Nov 19, 2014 6:44:01	ChrisCarlson wrote:
#43 iserith Nov 19, 2014 6:53:29	ChrisCarlson wrote:
#44 ChrisCarlson Nov 19, 2014 14:25:04	BTW... I had adjudicated that, if the player (who was shooting into the grapple at disadvantage) rolled a natural '1', the other d20 result would be applied to the ally to see if it hit him instead.
(Reply to #44) Azzy1974	ChrisCarlson wrote:
#46 Noon Nov 20, 2014 0:26:23	That doubles your chances of getting a natural 1
#47 ChrisCarlson Nov 20, 2014 7:07:46	Yep
#48 Timborama Nov 20, 2014 7:56:24	"Shoot the hostage..."
(Reply to #44) Helaman	ChrisCarlson wrote:
#50 Rastapopoulos Nov 24, 2014 9:15:48	AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
#51 Synjin Nov 24, 2014 9:36:03	ChrisCarlson wrote: