# Come again - you can't shoot bows in melee while in melee?



## Nyaricus (Sep 26, 2006)

My new Dark*Sun DM has a strange ruling which I believe is a hold-over from a 2nd edition houserule, but he is sure is in the 3.5 PHB. Here's what he says:

"If you have a bow, and are shooting into melee whilst in melee, you cannot use it and must drop your bow and pull out a melee weapon; if you do shoot it while in melee you take a -35 penalty to do so. His reasoning is that whoever you are shooting at will have dodged you by the time you have shot him, and also there will not be enough momentum behind your shot to do any damage to him. Also, if you do decide to shoot into melee whilst in melee, they get an AoO against you, since you do not threaten."

I called BS on him. I don't think I've _ever_ come across such a statement in any rulebook, and he said "okay, go onto EN World and ask them - they'll tell you the same thing I just said."

I am frankly still spinning from that ruling. I'm not even playing anyone who specializes in bows, but it's something which screams "HUH?" which I need to clarify.

So, in turn I ask ye ENnies: what are the penalties to shoot in melee whilst in melee, if any? Hyp, I'd love for your knowledge of the game right now, please


----------



## Sithobi1 (Sep 26, 2006)

Well, you take a -4 penalty for shooting into melee and provoke an AoO...but -35? And...not enough force? The maximum force would be right when the arrow is released...


----------



## Patryn of Elvenshae (Sep 26, 2006)

That's pretty far out, there.

EDIT:  I predict a lot of 5' steps in any bow-users' futures - which is pretty much what happens, anyway.


----------



## Matafuego (Sep 26, 2006)

The AoO is right, and the penalty is -4, plus anyone can try to sunder your bow and leave you weaponless... 
But -35???????
Not enough momentum??
I've been reading that word a lot lately...


----------



## 3d6 (Sep 26, 2006)

That's a really bizzare ruling. Not enough momentum? Does that mean he is claming the arrow gains speed in midair?


----------



## ElectricDragon (Sep 26, 2006)

You might possibly have a total -8 penalty (shooting into melee, and soft cover) and provoke an attack of opportunity (which can be used for sunder since you do not threaten and thus get no return AoO); but -35 is waaay out there. I would like to see the breakdown on that penalty.

Let's see, add non-proficiency for another -4, and off-sized for another -4, and entangled gets you -2, and dazzled gets -1, and shaken or frightened another -2, and sickened gets -2 for a grand total of -23. That would be a very bad day for any character; but -35? -12 for calling BS, I guess (of course that is because the penalty was readied for your BS call and thus happened first).

Ciao
Dave


----------



## Hypersmurf (Sep 26, 2006)

ElectricDragon said:
			
		

> You might possibly have a total -8 penalty (shooting into melee, and soft cover) and provoke an attack of opportunity (which can be used for sunder since you do not threaten and thus get no return AoO); but -35 is waaay out there. I would like to see the breakdown on that penalty.




You're unlikely to have soft cover if you're in melee... and I'd disagree that the AoO can be a Sunder (the Sunder action lacks footnote 7 on the Table of Action Types).

Other than that, I agree with what everyone else has said: -4 penalty for shooting a target engaged in melee (avoided with Precise Shot), and provoke an AoO.

d20 Modern has an additional -4 penalty for using a longarm (rifle, shotgun, etc) against an adjacent opponent, and I could see a DM importing this as a house rule for all D&D projectile weapons, but it's not a general D&D rule.

-Hyp.


----------



## Thanee (Sep 26, 2006)

I don't think it's either bizarre nor far out there. It's certainly not what the D&D rules say, but I would also consider it rather difficult to shoot a bow, while in melee with the target.

I wouldn't mind, if they said, it was simply impossible, because, realistically, it pretty much is.

Of course, the 5-ft. step kinda negates this issue, anyways, and unless that is taken care of as well, which might in turn rise other issues, then any such ruling is rather pointless to begin with.

Bye
Thanee


----------



## Joker (Sep 26, 2006)

No, I'm afraid I'm gonna have to disagree with everyone here.  You're DM is mostly right.  The ruling however is limited to the Dark Sun campaign setting, however.  Since most creatures either have active or passive psychic powers, a buffer of sorts is created when they enter in close proximity of each other.  In this case, when they enter melee combat.  This Buffering Supernatural Shield causes all ranged attacks, including spit, to slow to a crawl until it has exited the BS Shield which covers your entire threatened area.  It is noted that attacks affected are only done so by the Shield you and the creatures you threaten have created.

IIRC it's under the section "Ten fast ways to get kicked out of my own game."


----------



## irdeggman (Sep 26, 2006)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> d20 Modern has an additional -4 penalty for using a longarm (rifle, shotgun, etc) against an adjacent opponent, and I could see a DM importing this as a house rule for all D&D projectile weapons, but it's not a general D&D rule.
> 
> -Hyp.




In d20 Modern you also threaten with a longarm (or pistol) since both can be used as melee weapons (but you have to use the melee damage and not the ranged damage).

And bows only get a single shot per round with no feats that allow that RoF to be increased. {My logic on this one is that the game revolves around guns and pretty much no matter how skilled you are with a bow non-single shot guns fire quicker.}

IMO this is really one of those places where the two systems differe on fundamental such that they shouldn't be "combined".


----------



## irdeggman (Sep 26, 2006)

Thanee said:
			
		

> I don't think it's either bizarre nor far out there. It's certainly not what the D&D rules say, but I would also consider it rather difficult to shoot a bow, while in melee with the target.
> 
> Bye
> Thanee




How about a crossbow? Since that would be the next logical step to take.


----------



## Thanee (Sep 26, 2006)

Almost the same. You just ain't standing there aiming with a bow or crossbow, while ducking and dodging the blows against yourself. 

But as I said, while I consider this more realistic, it's certainly not how the D&D rules work.

Bye
Thanee


----------



## irdeggman (Sep 26, 2006)

Thanee said:
			
		

> Almost the same. You just ain't standing there aiming with a bow or crossbow, while ducking and dodging the blows against yourself.
> 
> But as I said, while I consider this more realistic, it's certainly not how the D&D rules work.
> 
> ...




This would translate into an accuracy penalty (i.e., a penalty to hit). This is already incorporated into the -4 to shoot into melee (since you are in melee this penalty applies) and then while taking the moment to aim your foe sees an opening and gets to take advantage of it (i.e., the AoO).

Seems to capture the concept fairly well, given the abstractness of the combat rules as they are.

A -4 penalty is a 20% penalty since the basis is the d20 roll (all of those other modiferes are reflections of an individual's skill and natural ability but not something that is specific to the situation).


----------



## Dingleberry (Sep 26, 2006)

Nyaricus said:
			
		

> and also there will not be enough momentum behind your shot to do any damage to him.




To paraphrase Bill Cosby: "Maybe an arrow _does _ need a running start."


----------



## Matafuego (Sep 26, 2006)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> You're unlikely to have soft cover if you're in melee... and I'd disagree that the AoO can be a Sunder (the Sunder action lacks footnote 7 on the Table of Action Types).
> -Hyp.




Are you sure?
Wow, thanks, always thought it was possible...


----------



## WolverineJon (Sep 26, 2006)

3d6 said:
			
		

> That's a really bizzare ruling. Not enough momentum? Does that mean he is claming the arrow gains speed in midair?



Sounds like kind of a cool custom bow enchantment!  "Arrows fired from this bow magically accelerate as they travel through the air, dealing an additional +1 in damage for every _x_ in distance travelled before they strike their target."


----------



## iwatt (Sep 26, 2006)

WolverineJon said:
			
		

> Sounds like kind of a cool custom bow enchantment!  "Arrows fired from this bow magically accelerate as they travel through the air, dealing an additional +1 in damage for every _x_ in distance travelled before they strike their target."




And then prepare for the fortcoming cheese of the deepwood sniper using this feat from 2000' away


----------



## Nyaricus (Sep 26, 2006)

3d6 said:
			
		

> That's a really bizzare ruling. Not enough momentum? Does that mean he is claming the arrow gains speed in midair?



Yes, that is what he claimed. I said "ummm, wha...?"

Hyp, if you take Precise Shot, does the AoO get neagted as well, or if you are in melee, do you still draw an AoO?

Thanks.


----------



## diaglo (Sep 26, 2006)

are you sure he isn't houseruling some kind of Concentration check. maybe he is setting the DC at 35 to use a bow in melee.

still that's messed up, d00d.


----------



## Infiniti2000 (Sep 26, 2006)

Nyaricus said:
			
		

> Yes, that is what he claimed. I said "ummm, wha...?"



 DM of Nyaricus, let me introduce you to Newton's Laws.  Now, please step away from the crack pipe.


----------



## Sithobi1 (Sep 26, 2006)

The AoO is still provoked, since Precise Shot does nothing about that.


----------



## Kormydigar (Sep 26, 2006)

Joker said:
			
		

> This Buffering Supernatural Shield causes all ranged attacks, including spit, to slow to a crawl until it has exited the BS Shield which covers your entire threatened area.




 BS Shield sure sounds about right.


----------



## pawsplay (Sep 26, 2006)

Anyone who would use a bow in such a way is immediately cursed.


----------



## Nail (Sep 26, 2006)

Joker had me up until the acronym.


----------



## Milkman Dan (Sep 27, 2006)

Matafuego said:
			
		

> Are you sure?
> Wow, thanks, always thought it was possible...




http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20041102a



> You can use any special attack that you can use as a melee attack as an attack of opportunity. That includes disarming, grabbing someone to grapple, sunder, or trip. In the case of a trip attack, you must make the trip attack with whatever weapon you're using to threaten the area where you're making the attack of opportunity.




According to the D&D Main FAQ, sunder is a special kind of melee attack; it can be used as an attack of opportunity for the same reason that sunder can be used as part of a full attack.


----------



## ValhallaGH (Sep 27, 2006)

Nyaricus said:
			
		

> "If you have a bow, and are shooting into melee whilst in melee, you cannot use it and must drop your bow and pull out a melee weapon; if you do shoot it while in melee you take a -35 penalty to do so. His reasoning is that whoever you are shooting at will have dodged you by the time you have shot him, and also there will not be enough momentum behind your shot to do any damage to him. Also, if you do decide to shoot into melee whilst in melee, they get an AoO against you, since you do not threaten."
> 
> I called BS on him. I don't think I've _ever_ come across such a statement in any rulebook, and he said "okay, go onto EN World and ask them - they'll tell you the same thing I just said."



The only way to prove him wrong is with empirical testing.  So go buy a bow and some arrows from your local sporting goods store, stand your DM two to five feet away from you and shoot him with said bow and arrows.  That should illustrate the situation adequately for everyone.


P.S. Following this advice may get you arrested.  You are entirely responsible for all of your choices and actions.


----------



## ValhallaGH (Sep 27, 2006)

Can we not have a repeat of the sunder thread?

Please?


----------



## Nyaricus (Sep 27, 2006)

ValhallaGH said:
			
		

> The only way to prove him wrong is with empirical testing.  So go buy a bow and some arrows from your local sporting goods store, stand your DM two to five feet away from you and shoot him with said bow and arrows.  That should illustrate the situation adequately for everyone.
> 
> 
> P.S. Following this advice may get you arrested.  You are entirely responsible for all of your choices and actions.



I have Boots of Escaping!!

Oh man, oh man 

Okay, so I take Precise Shot and shoot into melee whilst in melee. I don't take the -4 penalty to hit, but I still draw an AoO if threatened and I shoot. Sound right?


----------



## irishfast (Sep 27, 2006)

yes, though i'm not sure if you'll suffer a penalty for shooting at a target with soft cover (your buddies).


----------



## Nyaricus (Sep 27, 2006)

diaglo said:
			
		

> are you sure he isn't houseruling some kind of Concentration check. maybe he is setting the DC at 35 to use a bow in melee.
> 
> still that's messed up, d00d.



Nope, no Concentration check. He says that if you use a bow in melee, it gives them +35 AC. Period.

I told him today that EN World calls it foul, but he seems resistant to accept that, even though he asked me to ask.

This really doesn't affect my character at all, but it just doesn't make sense :\


----------



## javcs (Sep 27, 2006)

Wow, just wow.

Where's he pulling -35 to hit from?! Gah .. it's a good thing I don't know your DM.

If you're in melee with somebody, and you shoot them, they don't get soft cover, if anything, you should get a further bonus to hit and to damage, something along the lines of truly point blank shot - +2 attack, +2 damage, when within 10ft, point blank shot and precise shot are pre-reqs (if it were a feat).

Send him a link to this thread.


----------



## nittanytbone (Sep 27, 2006)

Nyaricus said:
			
		

> ...since you do not threaten."




Easily solved:  Use a spiked gauntlet (Simple Weapon, SRD), armor spikes (Martial weapon, SRD), Elvencraft bow (Races of the Wild), or Improved Unarmed Strike (feat, SRD).  Now you threaten all the time.


----------



## sukael (Sep 27, 2006)

The appropriate text from the SRD.



			
				SRD said:
			
		

> Ranged Attacks
> 
> With a ranged weapon, you can shoot or throw at any target that is within the weapon’s maximum range and in line of sight. The maximum range for a thrown weapon is five range increments. For projectile weapons, it is ten range increments. Some ranged weapons have shorter maximum ranges, as specified in their descriptions.






			
				SRD said:
			
		

> Shooting or Throwing into a Melee
> 
> If you shoot or throw a ranged weapon at a target engaged in melee with a friendly character, you take a -4 penalty on your attack roll. Two characters are engaged in melee if they are enemies of each other and either threatens the other. (An unconscious or otherwise immobilized character is not considered engaged unless he is actually being attacked.)
> 
> ...




And in the Standard Actions table, making a ranged attack is listed as provoking AoOs.


----------



## Nyaricus (Sep 27, 2006)

javcs said:
			
		

> Send him a link to this thread.



I am planning to; he told me point black to ask you guys if (t)his ruling was true or not.

*nittanytbone*, why do those allow you to threaten? Thanks.


----------



## brehobit (Sep 27, 2006)

Infiniti2000 said:
			
		

> DM of Nyaricus, let me introduce you to Newton's Laws.  Now, please step away from the crack pipe.



I'm guessing the argument _might_ be that on a long bow you are very unlikely to have the arrow finish leaving the bowstring before it hits it's target.  So it won't end up going full speed.

But I'm just guessing....


----------



## Sejs (Sep 27, 2006)

WolverineJon said:
			
		

> Sounds like kind of a cool custom bow enchantment!  "Arrows fired from this bow magically accelerate as they travel through the air, dealing an additional +1 in damage for every _x_ in distance travelled before they strike their target."




Ramjet Arrows!



			
				pawsplay said:
			
		

> Anyone who would use a bow in such a way is immediately cursed.




DM: Use your character in this way, but beware, for to do so carries with it a terrible curse.
Player: That's bad.
DM: But you get a free frogurt!
Player: That's good!
DM: The frogurt is also cursed.
Player: That's bad.
DM: But it comes with your choice of topping!
Player: That's good!
DM: The toppings contain potassium benzoate.
Player: ...
DM: That's bad.
Player: Can I go now?


----------



## Thurbane (Sep 27, 2006)

I agree that the DM is pretty far out with -35. The RAW is -4 and provoke an AoO, I believe.

As for momentum, there is some vailidity to what he says, although not exactly how I think it's being explained.

When longbows were used historically, it was generally in arced volleys rather than "direct fire". After the arrow has reached the apex of it's arc, it gains momentum from gravity as it falls. Therefore the further (higher) it is fired, the more momentum will be behind it when it hits.

Which is NOT to say that the momentum an arrow has when it first leaves the bow is not sufficient to be lethal.


----------



## Hypersmurf (Sep 27, 2006)

Thurbane said:
			
		

> When longbows were used historically, it was generally in arced volleys rather than "direct fire". After the arrow has reached the apex of it's arc, it gains momentum from gravity as it falls. Therefore the further (higher) it is fired, the more momentum will be behind it when it hits.




Um.  That's not how it works.

The momentum the arrow has at the target will be the same whether you fire a high arc, a shallow arc, or direct (discounting air resistance, etc).  The higher the arrow goes, the more momentum it _loses_.  So yes, an arrow falling from a higher arc will gain more momentum between the apex and the ground... but it lost more getting there, and the two balance out.

-Hyp.


----------



## HeapThaumaturgist (Sep 27, 2006)

I dunno, crack-head rulings like that usually distinctly turn me off a guy's game.

I mean ... -35?  That's just saying:  "You can't do that because I say so, but I'm not man enough to say it's just my say-so, so, here's a made-up number."

Might as well go Kids Next Door on it and say:

"Anybody firing a bow while in melee takes negative seventy-bajillion to their attack roll."

--fje


----------



## Thurbane (Sep 27, 2006)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> Um.  That's not how it works.
> 
> The momentum the arrow has at the target will be the same whether you fire a high arc, a shallow arc, or direct (discounting air resistance, etc).  The higher the arrow goes, the more momentum it _loses_.  So yes, an arrow falling from a higher arc will gain more momentum between the apex and the ground... but it lost more getting there, and the two balance out.
> 
> -Hyp.



Well, I was going to let this slide so as not to appear petty, but I found you've been doing this with a few of my posts.

Let me requote my whole post with some relevant bolding:



			
				Thurbane said:
			
		

> I agree that the DM is pretty far out with -35. The RAW is -4 and provoke an AoO, I believe.
> 
> As for momentum, there is *some vailidity* to what he says, although *not exactly* how I think it's being explained.
> 
> ...



If any of that is incorrect, please let me know why. Perhaps I should have added "when used in this fashion" as a caveat to the end of the third paragraph, but I thought that would be abundantly clear to the casual reader. Apparently not.

So yes, I am aware that firing an arrow into the air does not allow it to magically overcome the laws of thermodynamics. I was just posting why I thought the DM in question might be harboring the misapprehension that arrows did more damage at long range than close.

Of course, if the arrows were being fired from the top of a cliff...let's not go there...


----------



## Hypersmurf (Sep 27, 2006)

Thurbane said:
			
		

> If any of that is incorrect, please let me know why.




"Therefore the further (higher) it is fired, the more momentum will be behind it when it hits."

That's not the case.

Whatever momentum you impart to it at the instant it leaves the bow (assuming no air resistance effects) is the momentum it will have on impact.

Let's say I fire it essentially straight.  It leaves the bow travelling at (say) 100mph.  It hits the target travelling at 100mph.

Now let's say I shoot it in a shallow arc.  As it travels upward, it slows down due to gravity.  At the peak of its arc, gravity has slowed it by 30mph.  It's travelling only 70mph.  Then it continues on the downward half of the arc, and it accelerates as it travels downward.  By the time it reaches the target, it's travelling at 100mph again.

Now let's say I shoot it in a high arc.  As it travels upward, it slows down due to gravity.  At the peak of its arc, gravity has slowed it by 60mph.  It's travelling only 40mph.  Then it continues on the downward half of the arc, and it accelerates as it travels downward.  By the time it reaches the target, it's travelling at 100mph again.

Now let's say I shoot it straight up.  As it travels upward, it slows down due to gravity.  At the peak of its arc, it stops entirely; gravity has slowed it by 100mph.  Then it starts to fall, and it accelerates as it travels downward.  By the time it reaches me, it's travelling at 100mph again.

It doesn't matter how high I shoot the arrow; by the time it reaches the target, its speed (and therefore its momentum) are identical.  The height of the arc will influence my maximum _range_, but not the momentum at the target.



> Of course, if the arrows were being fired from the top of a cliff...let's not go there...




No, let's.  The arrow will be travelling faster when it reaches the target at the bottom of a cliff than if it reaches a target at the same level as the top of the cliff.  But again, how high I arc it makes no difference.  If I shoot straight down, straight out, slightly up, or a long way up... by the time the arrow gets to the bottom of the cliff in all four cases, it will be travelling at the same speed.

-Hyp.


----------



## Thurbane (Sep 27, 2006)

I'll forego the technical points of the argument for now. I'm not convinced you are 100% correct in your physics, but I need to find some sources that I don't have access to at the moment.

The cliff comment was meant as a joke, basically, but technically in that particular case an arrow does have more momentum at the end of it's flight than the beginning. You brought arcs into it, not me.


----------



## Hypersmurf (Sep 27, 2006)

Thurbane said:
			
		

> I'll forego the technical points of the argument for now. I'm not convinced you are 100% correct in your physics, but I need to find some sources that I don't have access to at the moment.




Okay 

-Hyp.


----------



## Jdvn1 (Sep 27, 2006)

Nyaricus said:
			
		

> I told him today that EN World calls it foul, but he seems resistant to accept that, even though he asked me to ask.



We're more than happy to listen to any rules citations he can provide.


----------



## Moon-Lancer (Sep 27, 2006)

as much as i want arrows to go faster the higher you shoot them (cuz of the cool factor) ex vhd:bloodlust, hyp is right on the matter. I BLAME YOU MOVIES... yeah you know the ones im talking about. 

http://library.thinkquest.org/27344/archphy.htm


omg Jdvn1, if he comes on the board.... hold me back man... NO man, hold me back... i might unsheath my dm smackdown stick that dispells bad house rules that were picked up from other bad dms.... grrrr ahhhhhhhhh let me at him     joke joke


----------



## Nyaricus (Sep 27, 2006)

Thanks for everyone's input; I'll inform him that one, per RAW, get a -4 to hit, and draws an AoO if you are being threatened in melee, are shooting into melee, and don't have Precise Shot.

With Precise Shot, the -4 to hit is negated.

The AoO is negated if you can take a 5-ft step and/or a movement action to get out of their threatened squares.

Thanks again


----------



## nittanytbone (Sep 27, 2006)

Nyaricus said:
			
		

> I am planning to; he told me point black to ask you guys if (t)his ruling was true or not.
> 
> *nittanytbone*, why do those allow you to threaten? Thanks.




Here's some quotes from the SRD:



> *Threatened Squares*
> 
> You threaten all squares into which you can make a melee attack, even when it is not your action. Generally, that means everything in all squares adjacent to your space (including diagonally). An enemy that takes certain actions while in a threatened square provokes an attack of opportunity from you. If you’re unarmed, you don’t normally threaten any squares and thus can’t make attacks of opportunity.






> *Gauntlet, Spiked*
> Your opponent cannot use a disarm action to disarm you of spiked gauntlets. The cost and weight given are for a single gauntlet. An attack with a spiked gauntlet is considered an armed attack.
> 
> *Spiked Armor*
> ...




Any of those options lets you threaten and thus make attacks of opportunity.  With the spiked gauntlet, you may technically need to take one hand off of your bow at the end of your turn (free action) and put it back on at the start of your next turn (also a free action).


----------



## mikebr99 (Sep 27, 2006)

Nyaricus said:
			
		

> Thanks for everyone's input; I'll inform him that one, per RAW, get a -4 to hit, and draws an AoO if you are being threatened in melee, are shooting into melee, and don't have Precise Shot.
> 
> With Precise Shot, the -4 to hit is negated.
> 
> ...



The Arrow Mind spell also negates the AoOs, and you threaten!...

Mike


----------



## Klaus (Sep 27, 2006)

If you're shooting into a melee:
- You suffer a -4 penalty to your attack roll if there are allies adjacent to the target.
- Your target may benefit from a +4 cover bonus to AC if there are creatures between him and you.

If you're using a ranged weapon while in a threatened area:
- Each foe that threatens you may make an Attack of Opportunity against you.

If both conditions apply, you suffer all those effects:
- -4 to hit if there are allies near the target;
- Target may benefit from cover (+4 bonus to AC)
- You provoke Attacks of Opportunity from all foes thatthreaten you.

Anything other than that is a House Rule.


----------



## irdeggman (Sep 27, 2006)

Klaus said:
			
		

> If you're shooting into a melee:
> - You suffer a -4 penalty to your attack roll if there are allies adjacent to the target.




This also applies if you are in the threatened square and shooting at the foe that threatens you - since you are now shooting into melee.


----------



## pawsplay (Sep 27, 2006)

Thurbane said:
			
		

> I'll forego the technical points of the argument for now. I'm not convinced you are 100% correct in your physics, but I need to find some sources that I don't have access to at the moment.




I recommend Aristotle's Physica.


----------



## nightjackal1977 (Sep 27, 2006)

Oh oh Techanical stuff.......

Just to comment on it.  momentum is P = M*V (M = Mass, V = Velocity)

So V = A*T (A = Acceleration and T = Time) 

In case of a Bow Fired Directly the A (result of the stored energy (potential energy) of the bow string)and T (time takes from release to arrow leaving String) is the imparted only by the Bowstring.  So V can only come from Bow.

So Newton's First Law of Motion is Every object in a state of uniform motion tends to remain in that state of motion unless an external force is applied to it. 

After all that...I would say the rules of physics don't apply when you can point your finger at someone and say die and they do.


----------



## Klaus (Sep 27, 2006)

irdeggman said:
			
		

> This also applies if you are in the threatened square and shooting at the foe that threatens you - since you are now shooting into melee.



 In that case you're not firing *into* a melee, you're firing *within* a melee...

Plus, you're not in the arrow's path, but quite behind it.


----------



## Arnwyn (Sep 27, 2006)

Joker said:
			
		

> No, I'm afraid I'm gonna have to disagree with everyone here.  You're DM is mostly right.  The ruling however is limited to the Dark Sun campaign setting, however.  Since most creatures either have active or passive psychic powers, a buffer of sorts is created when they enter in close proximity of each other.  In this case, when they enter melee combat.  This Buffering Supernatural Shield causes all ranged attacks, including spit, to slow to a crawl until it has exited the BS Shield which covers your entire threatened area.  It is noted that attacks affected are only done so by the Shield you and the creatures you threaten have created.
> 
> IIRC it's under the section "Ten fast ways to get kicked out of my own game."



I don't know whether you're being sarcastic or not... but that's only because I despise Dark Sun.


----------



## Artoomis (Sep 27, 2006)

To get really techincal and be complete, the further away you are from the target the slower the arrow will go when it hits - assuming that height above the ground at origin and target is identical.  That's because of the friction of going through the air.

I only added that for completeness, it certainly does not matter in a simplified fantasy combat system.


----------



## Hypersmurf (Sep 27, 2006)

Artoomis said:
			
		

> I only added that for completeness, it certainly does not matter in a simplified fantasy combat system.




Right - 'swhy I noted "assuming no air resistance effects" a few times 

-Hyp.


----------



## lukelightning (Sep 27, 2006)

HeapThaumaturgist said:
			
		

> That's just saying:  "You can't do that because I say so, but I'm not man enough to say it's just my say-so, so, here's a made-up number."




Coupled with "_It is so_ a real rule, it's in the book but I just forgot where!"  What the heck was he thinking! That is a bald-faced lie. Lie lie lie.

I'd never game with someone like this.  I might accept it if a DM said "I want to make firing a bow while threatened more dangerous, so I will add a further -4 penalty to hit..." or something like that (though I think that would be dumb), but a random crazy "-35" along with the rest of that kooky scenario says to me "this DM is on a power trip and is not worth playing with."


----------



## moritheil (Sep 29, 2006)

Thurbane said:
			
		

> If any of that is incorrect, please let me know why.




It's a question of conservation of energy.  The energy gained from falling from a height is the exact same (ignoring friction) as the energy lost by attaining that height.  If you factor in friction, it's actually a little less.

At any rate . . . the oddest thing about this example is the -35 which came out of nowhere.


----------



## Zaruthustran (Sep 29, 2006)

Nyaricus said:
			
		

> Also, if you do decide to shoot into melee whilst in melee, they get an AoO against you, since you do not threaten."




This DM is wrong on so many points, but no one's commented on this one yet. 

AoO activations have absolutely nothing to do with whether or not the target threatens. All that matters is whether the person potentially able to make the AoO threatens. 

In the example where you have a bow and you're adjacent to an opponent and you decide to try to shoot (shoot him or anyone else), the only thing that matters is whether the *opponent* threatens you. 

Whether or not you threaten your opponent has no bearing on whether or not your opponent gets an AoO. It does not matter. At all.

Also, the definition of "in melee" is one opponent threatening another with a melee weapon. If your opponent is unarmed and doesn't threaten you (no Unarmed Combat feat, no armor spikes, no natural weapons, etc.), and you don't threaten him, then you're not in melee. Even though you're adjacent and don't like each other.

If your buddy across the room is adjacent to an opponent, and neither threatens the other, then they aren't in melee--even though they're adjacent to each other and they're enemies. Shoot at the opponent all you want; there's no penalty*.

The whole concept of "threaten" is pretty fundamental to D&D 3.5. Your DM should really take the time to read the combat rules in a single sitting, especially the paragraph dealing with attacks of opportunity. 

-z 

* Potentially, there may be cover penalties, range penalties, etc. But there's no penalty for shooting a foe standing next to a friend unless one threatens the other/is in melee with the other.



			
				SRD said:
			
		

> Threatened Squares: You threaten all squares into which you can make a melee attack, even when it is not your action. Generally, that means everything in all squares adjacent to your space (including diagonally). An enemy that takes certain actions while in a threatened square provokes an attack of opportunity from you. If you’re unarmed, you don’t normally threaten any squares and thus can’t make attacks of opportunity.






			
				SRD said:
			
		

> Two characters are engaged in melee if they are enemies of each other and either threatens the other.


----------



## Asmor (Sep 30, 2006)

Thurbane said:
			
		

> I'll forego the technical points of the argument for now. I'm not convinced you are 100% correct in your physics, but I need to find some sources that I don't have access to at the moment.
> 
> The cliff comment was meant as a joke, basically, but technically in that particular case an arrow does have more momentum at the end of it's flight than the beginning. You brought arcs into it, not me.




If nothing else, the drag of air and the arrow's terminal velocity would probably have something to say. It sounds right that the velocity imparted as it left the bow would equal the velocity when it reached the same vertical displacement (i.e. fell to the same level as from where it was fired) in a void (with gravity...).

However, wind resistance would work with gravity to slow the arrow down faster on the way up, and it would work against gravity to keep the arrow from accelerating as quickly on the way down. Plus, I don't know much about the construction of real arrows, but I'd imagine that their terminal velocity isn't amazingly high...

So basically, I'm saying that I'd guess that an arrow fired in an arc would have much less momentum when it struck than when it was fired. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that I'd guess the arrow's momentum at impact was derived almost entirely from its horizontal velocity, and the vertical velocity from gravity would be almost neglible.

Of course, I'm just pulling this out of my ass and I don't really know much about anything relevant...


----------



## Dracorat (Sep 30, 2006)

I used to go to the archery range on a regular basis with my dad when I was growing up. I even owned my own longbow and compound bow. (Kind of the same as a composite)

An arrow has a weight at the front - the arrowhead. When fired, it drags the rest of the arrow behind it. That rest of arrow would be extremely wobbly if not for the fletching (feathers at the back). The Fletching forces the arrow to spin while in air.

It also does cause the arrow to slow down in its forward momentum.

Now, as for gravity causing an arrow to slow down or speed up, the only part that makes any difference is if you (the firing party) are at a different elevation than your target. If you are at the same elevation, gravity pays an almost zero sum difference to the final speed of your arrow and thus its firing range.

The only reason I admit that it pays some difference is that the further from your target you are, you have to fire at a higher initial firing arc, which means the measured flight path gets slightly and slighty longer, the farther out you go, over the already straight-line measured path. But the difference is again, negligable.

The larger factors of arrow flight are crosswind, fletching type, arrow tip type and overall weight (with heavier being BETTER, not worse, due to the rules of inertia).

So, to shorten this up as much as I can, arrow firing arc and the factor of gravity pays almost NO difference to the final speed of the arrow. The factors are really how far back you can pull the bow (in the case of a longbow - for compound, it is the weight class of the draw section), whether the arrow can be fully released and how far away your target is.

In a melee situation, the ONLY time an arrow would not have full effect is if for some reason, the arrow were knocked out of the bow or entered its target - before the full release. And from experience, I can tell you that is quite unlikely to happen. An arrow released from a bow releases at such velocity that you would not have time to even blink before it impacted, much less attempt to deflect it.


----------



## Dracorat (Sep 30, 2006)

Zaruthustran said:
			
		

> If your buddy across the room is adjacent to an opponent, and neither threatens the other, then they aren't in melee--even though they're adjacent to each other and they're enemies. Shoot at the opponent all you want; there's no penalty*.




Just wanting to clarify that if one does threaten, and the other does not, the rule is a bit unclear, but usually it is decided that one is in melee and one is not. The one threatening being the one in melee.


----------



## Hypersmurf (Sep 30, 2006)

Dracorat said:
			
		

> Just wanting to clarify that if one does threaten, and the other does not, the rule is a bit unclear, but usually it is decided that one is in melee and one is not. The one threatening being the one in melee.




No.

As he quoted: "Two characters are engaged in melee if they are enemies of each other and either threatens the other."

It's not unclear - if either one threatens, then both of them are engaged in melee, not just one of them.

-Hyp.


----------



## Zaruthustran (Sep 30, 2006)

Yeah, melee is not a solo activity.

The only thing that comes close is combatants with reach/if the enemies are 10' away from each other.



			
				SRD said:
			
		

> If your target (or the part of your target you’re aiming at, if it’s a big target) is at least 10 feet away from the nearest friendly character, you can avoid the -4 penalty, even if the creature you’re aiming at is engaged in melee with a friendly character.




So you can avoid the -4 "firing into melee" modifier, even though the combatants are in melee.

But again: the AoO provoked by the bowman is caused by firing the bow, not by the fact that he doesn't threaten his opponent. And that opponent can only take that AoO if he himself threatens the bowman.

-z


----------



## Dracorat (Sep 30, 2006)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> No.
> 
> As he quoted: "Two characters are engaged in melee if they are enemies of each other and either threatens the other."
> 
> ...




Twice in the same day I have been unequivocably smacked down.

Not a good day for me I guess. =)


----------



## Zaruthustran (Sep 30, 2006)

It's not a smack down; it's learning rules that can sometimes be tricky. 

-z


----------



## Nail (Sep 30, 2006)

Zaruthustran said:
			
		

> It's not a smack down; it's learning rules that can sometimes be tricky.



Amen.


----------



## Dracorat (Sep 30, 2006)

Regardless, I have answered questions for years on the Wizards boards, all about rules. I arbitrate rules discussions all the time for two other groups that are local to my area.

My wrong factor is usually something like once in a blue moon. Three times on the same day.

Well, let's just say its been a strenuous day. =)


----------



## taliesin15 (Sep 30, 2006)

in this campaign, then, let's say a character with a bow already has it out, and is readying an action to fire his longbow at an opponent who is charging him from let's say 35' away--so that at the beginning of the next round the charging opponent (with a melee weapon out) engages the bow wielder--I'm wondering whether that would change the AoO and -4? Since the bow wielder already had the bow out, arrow notched, and was aiming, while the charger was running up, but not engaged until the archer was ready to fire?


----------



## irdeggman (Sep 30, 2006)

taliesin15 said:
			
		

> in this campaign, then, let's say a character with a bow already has it out, and is readying an action to fire his longbow at an opponent who is charging him from let's say 35' away--so that at the beginning of the next round the charging opponent (with a melee weapon out) engages the bow wielder--I'm wondering whether that would change the AoO and -4? Since the bow wielder already had the bow out, arrow notched, and was aiming, while the charger was running up, but not engaged until the archer was ready to fire?





Was the readied action designed to work against the opponent charging?

If so what was the trigger?

If the trigger is met the readied action goes "before" the action that it was readied for - so there would be no AoO on the archer.


----------



## Particle_Man (Sep 30, 2006)

I think that you are not turning lemons into lemonade here.

Let your DM have his ruling.  Then research a teleport item/enchantment spell combo that magically teleports bows and arrows into your meelee opponent's hands, and forces them to use them (this is the enchantment(compel) part).

I mean, that is a free +35 AC for you.  Take advantage of your DM's stupidity!


----------



## TheEvil (Sep 30, 2006)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> No.
> 
> As he quoted: "Two characters are engaged in melee if they are enemies of each other and either threatens the other."
> 
> ...




I guess what my mother said is as true in D&D as it was in sibling brawls:  It takes two to tango...


----------



## Altamont Ravenard (Oct 1, 2006)

irdeggman said:
			
		

> This also applies if you are in the threatened square and shooting at the foe that threatens you - since you are now shooting into melee.




Could I get a confirmation on that statement? I would tend to disagree with it...



			
				SRD said:
			
		

> Shooting or Throwing into a Melee: If you shoot or throw a ranged weapon at a target engaged in melee with a friendly character, you take a –4 penalty on your attack roll.




Is a character considered his own friend?

If you shoot at an enemy that threatens and/or is threatened by an ally, you get a -4 penalty. If you shoot at an emeny that threatens you, and only you, I would not think that you'd get the -4 penalty...

Thanks in advance

AR


----------



## reanjr (Oct 1, 2006)

3d6 said:
			
		

> That's a really bizzare ruling. Not enough momentum? Does that mean he is claming the arrow gains speed in midair?




No, no no, that would just be dumb.  He's claiming it gains MASS while in midair.


----------



## RigaMortus2 (Oct 1, 2006)

Altamont Ravenard said:
			
		

> Could I get a confirmation on that statement? I would tend to disagree with it...
> 
> 
> 
> ...




I don't think you are considered your own ally unless something specifically mentions that you are, such as most of the Bard abilities.


----------



## reanjr (Oct 1, 2006)

brehobit said:
			
		

> I'm guessing the argument _might_ be that on a long bow you are very unlikely to have the arrow finish leaving the bowstring before it hits it's target.  So it won't end up going full speed.
> 
> But I'm just guessing....




Hard to say whether that would really matter or not.  Instead of the velocity of the arrow pushing it into the target, the potential energy of the bowstring would do it instead.  The initial armor/skin break would work a bit differently, but once the arrow has entered it should be about the same.


----------



## reanjr (Oct 1, 2006)

Thurbane said:
			
		

> When longbows were used historically, it was generally in arced volleys rather than "direct fire". After the arrow has reached the apex of it's arc, it gains momentum from gravity as it falls. Therefore the further (higher) it is fired, the more momentum will be behind it when it hits.




Ummm... that does not make any sense.  Conservation of energy.  We can presume the mass of the objects involved is not changing.  The is potential energy stored in the bowstring that is converted to kinetic energy in the arrow.  That's it.  Unless you can figure out some magical source of energy in the scenario described, it just doesn't work that way.


----------



## reanjr (Oct 1, 2006)

Edit: Already covered


----------

