Sorry, I failed at using the Search function. 
Anyway, my question/statement is that the "traditional" ranged attack rules about firing into melee seem very vague or nonexistent. Am I missing something?
I can't find any rules on firing into melee. From just reading the PHB it seems that I can have my fighter shoot his bow into a crowded melee with no restrictions, penalties, or chances to strike an ally. There is one vague rule about not being able to target a creature that is fully obstructed, but that's all I can find.
Is this a deliberate thing to either (a) make ranged combat more effective or (b) make the game more streamlined?
I'm not againt it, just curious if I missed something.
Or might it be addressed in DMG?
A creature between you and your target provides the target half cover (+2 AC and Dex saves). Player Basic Rules page 74, under Cover.
That's it, that's all, full stop. No penalties to hit, no chance to hit someone else, no disadvantage on the roll. The rules aren't vague, you're looking for rules that aren't there becuase you're used to other editions of D&D.
Vicerious wrote:
There's likely optional rules for that in the DMG.
Yeah, the assumption is to 'ere on the side of "Characters are heroes who can totally do that stuff in LOTR films etc
Without needing to go out of their way to buy annoying feats or things to be able to do it.
Quite happy with it myself.
Thanks guys, makes sense! I was looking for something that isn't there.
And for the record, I'm a big fan of added simplicity - and heroism. So no complaints, I actually like it. I just wanted to be sure I understood it.
The +2 to AC and Dex Saves makes sense when combatants are in the way.
Thanks!
George
If there is a hostile creature within 5 feet you roll the attack with disadvantage. Also, if the target is roughly 3/4 cover, the 2 AC penalty becomes a 5 AC penalty. That is pretty much it I think.
It's fairly easy to fire into melee in 5e either by spell or weapon. As others have already stated, if there is a creature between you and the target, that target will be considered to have (half) cover which gives a +2 AC (or +2 Dex save). That's pretty much it.
However, if there is a hostile creature within 5' of you that's aware of you (not distracted) and not incapacitated in some way, then you make all ranged attacks (spell or weapon) at disadvantage.
The two effects do stack (so if there is a hostile monster next to you and you try to fire into melee across the room over the shoulder of your ally, the target would get +2 AC AND you'd attack at disadvantage). In no case does it draw an opportunity attack [unless the other creature has some specific ability that explicitly says otherwise].
-P:olaris
I always played that if an ally granted cover and AC bonus to an enemy, then if you missed the enemy by the amount of cover bonus granted by the ally, then you hit the ally.
Example.
Rudak the Dwarf is in melee with an orc that has a 10 AC.
Endrin the Ranger sees that Rudak is in trouble, and decides to attempt a shot at the orc with his longbow. Endrin has a +3 to hit.
Rudak grants half-cover to the orc, increasing the orc's AC to 12.
Endrin rolls a 8, for a total of 11, missing the orc's ally-modified AC by 1.
Because that 11 would have normally hit the orc, but instead is stopped within the amount of AC granted by Rudak, Endrin hits Rudak instead.
Endrin's total of 11 now weighs against Rudak's AC, which is 16, so the arrow deflects off of the dwarf's armor.
Rudak will have words with Endrin tonite in camp.
The best solution IMO is that if an attack roll misses by the value of the cover created by the obstructing character, a second attack roll should be made against the obstructing character. The question is, how obstructing is, for instance, a medium character in front of another medium character?
My call would be 3/4 cover is the guy in the way and the target are both medium. If the target is 1 size larger make it half cover. Any size differential larger than that and there is no chance of hitting the obstructing char...well maybe at DMs discretion on a critical miss.
The problem with "miss by cover, hit cover" is that it actually makes having a high attack bonus a bad thing, because you're then more likely to hit your allies.
Novacat wrote:
Novacat wrote: