Offline
So a friend and I were playtesting combat to become more than just familiar, as we both plan on Refereeing this game in the near future.
A situation arose where an archer was attempting to fire through two lines of men (allies and enemies) to hit the spellcaster in the rear (who was not engaged in melee). We're no strangers to rulings on the fly so we decided that firing through one line of men would be -2 (partially concealed) and through two lines would be -5 (mostly concealed).
Cool
Then we read Indirect Fire :D It wasn't the part about firing from behind cover that messed us up. It was the part about firing over allies. You need to be a master bowman to use this option and it carries the same -2 as a non-master shooting through a line. We felt this nullified the coolness of Indirect Fire in that moment.
So is Indirect Fire set at -2 because since you're a "master" your penalty is actually a -1, all things considered, or is there something else here that we are missing?
We already have a decent enough house rule on this, but we're not totally happy with it. So I would like to hear your opinions.
Last edited by Sasquatch (8/25/2021 12:50 am)
Offline
Typing this out and then re-reading it may have helped me answer this question.
I'm currently thinking I might have missed the obvious here, that a non-master can fire through one line at -2, and two lines at -5, but a master can use indirect fire to fire over multiple obstacles at just -2?
Ain't learning a system fun? :D
I'd still like to hear your feedback though.
Last edited by Sasquatch (8/25/2021 4:07 am)
Offline
Sasquatch wrote:
a non-master can fire through one line at -2, and two lines at -5, but a master can use indirect fire to fire over multiple obstacles at just -2?
I'm thinking I may let a master use indirect fire to avoid hitting allies at medium and long range (Firing into Mêlée p251) though I'd still apply range penalties. That's just me though.
Offline
Absolutely. I just didn't bring range into the example, because the situation I described was all in short range.
Offline
Do a quick visuallization of what both types of fire look like. Direct fire is Aiming directly at (typically above due to drop over distance) and letting loose. Indirect fire is aiming up into the sky and having the arrows come back down in a Parabolic angle, (Think what goes up, must come down), If I were GMing that situation. I'd stay with the direct fire for any shot less than medium-range, and only direct fire within Short and point-blank. Only because of what you're asking the arrow to do. Also, there is no such thing as indirect fire in anything but an outside setting. The indirect fire inside would require a ceiling height of longer than the weapon's maximum range...
Offline
Thanks for that. I was thinking about that too. It seems weird to lob a shot in at short range. Depends on circumstances i guess, but definitely not indoors.
Offline
Someone who has specialized in Bows (Regular or Master), I would give a chance in certain circumstances to use Ricochet Shots. Caveats: Must be Stone/Iron that the arrows will bounce off, Must be a 90-degree angle (or less), and would be at least -2 to hit in addition to any range modifiers...
Examples:
Archer could Bank one off the ceiling of a stone keep in order to hit someone in the back lines of the enemy during Melee.
Archer could bank one off a smooth wall of cavern to hit a creature hiding behind a corner (Add Blind shot modifications if they can't be seen).
Just remember, If a character wants to do something, Think about whether it's possible and add Penalties/Bonuses as you think they should be applied. The Rule Books are just a Suggestion and Helpful guide, the Game is yours, you make the rules...
Last edited by BlackKnight (8/27/2021 8:29 am)