1 arrow per round: is there nonetheless a penalty?

Open Discussion on all things C&C from new product to general questions to the rules, the laws, and the chaos.
Galannor
Mist Elf
Posts: 48
Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2009 7:00 am

1 arrow per round: is there nonetheless a penalty?

Post by Galannor »

P. 257 of the Castle Keepers Guide, Table 17.5 Rate of Fire: Bow: in the first columns/row there is written that 1 arrow shot per round gets a penalty of -1. What does this mean? It means that if a character fires 1 arrow in a round, he gets in any case a -1 penalty to the to hit roll?
Or does it mean that if you fire multiple arrows in a round, the first one gets a -1 penalty, the second a -2, the 3rd a -4 and the fourth a -5 (I know that some players interpret this table this way)?
Many thanks,
Galannor

User avatar
Arduin
Greater Lore Drake
Posts: 4045
Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2011 6:12 pm
Location: Granite quarry

Re: 1 arrow per round: is there nonetheless a penalty?

Post by Arduin »

It's a typo. Disregard the 1st Row.
Old age and treachery will overcome youth and skill

House Rules

Lord Dynel
Maukling
Posts: 5843
Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2008 7:00 am

Re: 1 arrow per round: is there nonetheless a penalty?

Post by Lord Dynel »

The way I read, and interpret it, is this: I also ignore the first row. If two arrows are shot, then each arrow get the -2 penalty. If three arrows are shot, then each suffers a -4, and so on.

The other way to read the table is "arrows in addition to the first," so if one arrow is shot in addition to the first, then both suffer a -1. If two arrows are shot in addition to the first, then all three suffer a -2. The "Arrows Shot" would actually be the error, not the first row (that shows a -1 penalty for shooting one arrow).

I prefer the former.
LD's C&C creations - CL Checker, a witch class, the half-ogre, skills, and 0-level rules
Troll Lord wrote:Lord D: you understand where I"m coming from.

alcyone
Greater Lore Drake
Posts: 2727
Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2007 7:00 am
Location: The Court of the Crimson King

Re: 1 arrow per round: is there nonetheless a penalty?

Post by alcyone »

Since there is no special reason to do this rate of fire rule with one arrow, I interpreted "arrows shot" to mean arrows shot when using the higher rate of fire rule. So, when doing high rate of fire from a prepared position, the first arrow is at a -1 penalty, the second at a -2, the third at a -4, the fourth at a -8.

If you are just shooting one arrow from the prepared position, it's like any other shot, no penalty, but if you shoot more than one, each one has a larger penalty, and since you are shooting the first arrow in a hurry to get to the next one, that takes a penalty as well.

Never mind that a bow is not a firearm, and thus can't be "fired", so it should be rate of shooting or something :).
My C&C stuff: www.rpggrognard.com

serleran
Mogrl
Posts: 13866
Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2008 7:00 am

Re: 1 arrow per round: is there nonetheless a penalty?

Post by serleran »

I don't use the CKG for this.

A bow can release 2 arrows per round, no penalty, other than that of range. This means damage for the attack is reduced (also by range.)

User avatar
Omote
Battle Stag
Posts: 11560
Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 7:00 am
Location: The fairest view in the park, Ohio.
Contact:

Re: 1 arrow per round: is there nonetheless a penalty?

Post by Omote »

Aergraith wrote:Since there is no special reason to do this rate of fire rule with one arrow, I interpreted "arrows shot" to mean arrows shot when using the higher rate of fire rule. So, when doing high rate of fire from a prepared position, the first arrow is at a -1 penalty, the second at a -2, the third at a -4, the fourth at a -8.

If you are just shooting one arrow from the prepared position, it's like any other shot, no penalty, but if you shoot more than one, each one has a larger penalty, and since you are shooting the first arrow in a hurry to get to the next one, that takes a penalty as well.
This right here is how it should be done IMO. This is the way I currently doos it in my games.

~O
@-Duke Omote Landwehr, Holy Order of the FPQ ~ Prince of the Castles & Crusades Society-@
VAE VICTUS!
>> Omote's Advanced C&C stuff <<

Fizz
Lore Drake
Posts: 1081
Joined: Mon Feb 19, 2007 8:00 am

Re: 1 arrow per round: is there nonetheless a penalty?

Post by Fizz »

I'm with Lord Dynal. I'd do -2 on each arrow if two total arrows are fired.

I've always thought the choice between multiple inacurate attacks vs a single attack should be dependent on the situation. If you're facing hordes of relatively easy to hit targets, you can afford to work faster and take less time on your shots. But if you've got a hard-to-hit foe, that -2 difference matters and you'd be better off taking your time with the shot.

So from that perspective, a -1 penalty isn't steep enough for a single extra attack. That is, there is hardly ever a situation where you'd not make out better with two arrows (maybe if you require a natural 20 to hit, that -1 difference matters). But otherwise, in the long run you'll do more damage with 2 arrows at -1 each than you will with a single arrow at no penalty.

So that's why i go with a -2 on each shot for two total arrows- there's no statistical reason not to always take two shots if the penalty is -1.

I know, running stats is a bit of metagaming. But such numbers do have repurccusions in play, so it's good to know.


-Fizz

Lord Dynel
Maukling
Posts: 5843
Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2008 7:00 am

Re: 1 arrow per round: is there nonetheless a penalty?

Post by Lord Dynel »

Omote wrote:
Aergraith wrote:Since there is no special reason to do this rate of fire rule with one arrow, I interpreted "arrows shot" to mean arrows shot when using the higher rate of fire rule. So, when doing high rate of fire from a prepared position, the first arrow is at a -1 penalty, the second at a -2, the third at a -4, the fourth at a -8.

If you are just shooting one arrow from the prepared position, it's like any other shot, no penalty, but if you shoot more than one, each one has a larger penalty, and since you are shooting the first arrow in a hurry to get to the next one, that takes a penalty as well.
This right here is how it should be done IMO. This is the way I currently doos it in my games.

~O
Ah. I never looked at it that way. So, I guess you could announce "I'm shooting two arrows" and the first one shot suffers a -1 while the second is at a -2 to attack. That makes sense. I guess my only issue with that (and it's minor) is why would the first arrow be any more accurate than the second? Or the fourth? I'd think that every arrow would be an equally tough shot.
Fizz wrote:I know, running stats is a bit of metagaming. But such numbers do have repurccusions in play, so it's good to know.
Haha, I know where you're coming from, boss. As long as it's the CK's running numbers, I think it's fine. When the players start doing it...well, that's when characters start dying and that's never a good thing.
LD's C&C creations - CL Checker, a witch class, the half-ogre, skills, and 0-level rules
Troll Lord wrote:Lord D: you understand where I"m coming from.

User avatar
Omote
Battle Stag
Posts: 11560
Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 7:00 am
Location: The fairest view in the park, Ohio.
Contact:

Re: 1 arrow per round: is there nonetheless a penalty?

Post by Omote »

Lord Dynel wrote:
Omote wrote:
Aergraith wrote:Since there is no special reason to do this rate of fire rule with one arrow, I interpreted "arrows shot" to mean arrows shot when using the higher rate of fire rule. So, when doing high rate of fire from a prepared position, the first arrow is at a -1 penalty, the second at a -2, the third at a -4, the fourth at a -8.

If you are just shooting one arrow from the prepared position, it's like any other shot, no penalty, but if you shoot more than one, each one has a larger penalty, and since you are shooting the first arrow in a hurry to get to the next one, that takes a penalty as well.
This right here is how it should be done IMO. This is the way I currently doos it in my games.

~O
Ah. I never looked at it that way. So, I guess you could announce "I'm shooting two arrows" and the first one shot suffers a -1 while the second is at a -2 to attack. That makes sense. I guess my only issue with that (and it's minor) is why would the first arrow be any more accurate than the second? Or the fourth? I'd think that every arrow would be an equally tough shot.
I actually am in favor of the multi-shot rule where if you are firing two arrows, each shot is at -2 -- if you were firing 4, the penalty for all 4 would be -8 on each. That methodology sort of makes sense in the way that Lord Dynel describes it. However, since the CKG clearly has that -1 on the first shot, this led me to believe that the penalty grows from -1 to -2, to -4, to -8. Since the CKG put it that way, I use it in that way.

Now, in my current campaign I have a min/max player who is the party's "bow guy." he is playing a Bard. He has a 20 DEX, and has gone out of his way to find magical bows and arrows, and used a composite bow. He is THE killer PC. He lays out more damage than all of the other PCs, including fighters with big STR. Firing 4 shots is awesome, even if the last two miss. Just getting the opportunity to have 4 potential hits is VERY powerful in C&C, so use these multi-shot rules carefully.

In order to keep in check this player with his awesome bow skills, I had to interject some rules to keep the balance a little more:

-Magical bows only give a bonus to hit and never to damage.
-Magical arrows give a bonus to damage, and never to hit.
-A PC can only fire a # of shots per round equal to his level, to a maximum of 4 shots per round (one shot at 1st level, two shots at 2nd level, etc.)
-Has to make a concentration check to fire a bow while within 5 feet of an enemy (never in melee though).

A fighter with maximum DEX and putting everything he has into being better with a bow (composite bow, magic, etc.) makes the fighter an EXTREMELY powerful class in terms of damage output.

~O
@-Duke Omote Landwehr, Holy Order of the FPQ ~ Prince of the Castles & Crusades Society-@
VAE VICTUS!
>> Omote's Advanced C&C stuff <<

User avatar
Arduin
Greater Lore Drake
Posts: 4045
Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2011 6:12 pm
Location: Granite quarry

Re: 1 arrow per round: is there nonetheless a penalty?

Post by Arduin »

Omote wrote: A fighter with maximum DEX and putting everything he has into being better with a bow (composite bow, magic, etc.) makes the fighter an EXTREMELY powerful class in terms of damage output.

~O
I had a PC do this with long bows. Got pretty upset when he tried to use in a cramped dungeon situation. :lol: It balances out.
Old age and treachery will overcome youth and skill

House Rules

Lord Dynel
Maukling
Posts: 5843
Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2008 7:00 am

Re: 1 arrow per round: is there nonetheless a penalty?

Post by Lord Dynel »

Omote wrote:I actually am in favor of the multi-shot rule where if you are firing two arrows, each shot is at -2 -- if you were firing 4, the penalty for all 4 would be -8 on each. That methodology sort of makes sense in the way that Lord Dynel describes it. However, since the CKG clearly has that -1 on the first shot, this led me to believe that the penalty grows from -1 to -2, to -4, to -8. Since the CKG put it that way, I use it in that way.

Now, in my current campaign I have a min/max player who is the party's "bow guy." he is playing a Bard. He has a 20 DEX, and has gone out of his way to find magical bows and arrows, and used a composite bow. He is THE killer PC. He lays out more damage than all of the other PCs, including fighters with big STR. Firing 4 shots is awesome, even if the last two miss. Just getting the opportunity to have 4 potential hits is VERY powerful in C&C, so use these multi-shot rules carefully.

In order to keep in check this player with his awesome bow skills, I had to interject some rules to keep the balance a little more:

-Magical bows only give a bonus to hit and never to damage.
-Magical arrows give a bonus to damage, and never to hit.
-A PC can only fire a # of shots per round equal to his level, to a maximum of 4 shots per round (one shot at 1st level, two shots at 2nd level, etc.)
-Has to make a concentration check to fire a bow while within 5 feet of an enemy (never in melee though).

A fighter with maximum DEX and putting everything he has into being better with a bow (composite bow, magic, etc.) makes the fighter an EXTREMELY powerful class in terms of damage output.

~O
That's an interesting PC you have, hoss! :P

For some reason, I never understood the table in the CKG until your earlier post, Omote. It, for some reason, went over my head. Maybe because, subconsciously, I wasn't accepting of the notion of "escalating to-hit penalties for multiple arrows fired." And for a brief time after your post, I thought it was a good idea. I had stated that the only problem I had was why weren't the penalties static, and why was the first arrow an easier hit than the next, etc.?

Then I read this post. And it got me thinking about the big strong fighters you mentioned, and then about the two-weapon fighting rules.

I started pondering an archer, firing two arrows, and a fighter attacking with two melee weapons. The archer has a distinct advantage here, all things being equal. His first arrow has a 10% better chance of hitting (over the fighter's first swing) and his second arrow enjoys a 20% advantage. And that's just base numbers - the archer has even an bigger advantage if you consider he may have a great dexterity (being an archer and all) and the fighter would need a great dexterity as well to keep that aforementioned pace behind the archer, considering if he's fighting two-handed then his penalties are offset by dexterity. Now, while I compared two-weapon fighting and not two attacks is because they both can be achieved at 1st level (and the fighter's two attacks can't happen until 10th).

Now while the arrow doesn't convey strength damage, the archer enjoys the option of adding more arrows to his attack, possibly making up for the lack of a strength modifier to the arrow attacks.

I definitively agree with Omote's interpretation of the table, but I think I'm going to keep the penalties for each arrow (1 arrow no penalties, 2 arrows each get -2, 3 arrows each get -4, 4 arrows each get -8) instead of the escalating penalties. This keeps the penalties constant, I feel, which I'm personally more comfortable with - it makes that third arrow doable (which matches up with the fighter's two weapons plus strength but four is really pushing it.
LD's C&C creations - CL Checker, a witch class, the half-ogre, skills, and 0-level rules
Troll Lord wrote:Lord D: you understand where I"m coming from.

Lord Dynel
Maukling
Posts: 5843
Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2008 7:00 am

Re: 1 arrow per round: is there nonetheless a penalty?

Post by Lord Dynel »

Arduin wrote:
Omote wrote: A fighter with maximum DEX and putting everything he has into being better with a bow (composite bow, magic, etc.) makes the fighter an EXTREMELY powerful class in terms of damage output.

~O
I had a PC do this with long bows. Got pretty upset when he tried to use in a cramped dungeon situation. :lol: It balances out.
That's a problem, though. You tell a PC that he can't do something then he'll either

a) find a way, or
b) accuse you of being a d**K GM for stifling his character concept.

;)
LD's C&C creations - CL Checker, a witch class, the half-ogre, skills, and 0-level rules
Troll Lord wrote:Lord D: you understand where I"m coming from.

User avatar
Omote
Battle Stag
Posts: 11560
Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 7:00 am
Location: The fairest view in the park, Ohio.
Contact:

Re: 1 arrow per round: is there nonetheless a penalty?

Post by Omote »

Lord Dynel wrote:That's a problem, though. You tell a PC that he can't do something then he'll either

a) find a way, or
b) accuse you of being a d**K GM for stifling his character concept.

;)
Wow. You must have played with this guy before. Troof.

~O
@-Duke Omote Landwehr, Holy Order of the FPQ ~ Prince of the Castles & Crusades Society-@
VAE VICTUS!
>> Omote's Advanced C&C stuff <<

Lord Dynel
Maukling
Posts: 5843
Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2008 7:00 am

Re: 1 arrow per round: is there nonetheless a penalty?

Post by Lord Dynel »

Omote wrote:
Lord Dynel wrote:That's a problem, though. You tell a PC that he can't do something then he'll either

a) find a way, or
b) accuse you of being a d**K GM for stifling his character concept.

;)
Wow. You must have played with this guy before. Troof.

~O
Hehe...well, I'll just say that I'm sure that archetype is more common that we'd like to admit. :)
LD's C&C creations - CL Checker, a witch class, the half-ogre, skills, and 0-level rules
Troll Lord wrote:Lord D: you understand where I"m coming from.

User avatar
Sir Ironside
Lore Drake
Posts: 1595
Joined: Sat May 02, 2009 7:00 am

Re: 1 arrow per round: is there nonetheless a penalty?

Post by Sir Ironside »

Does anyone use aimed shots? I can't find any rules for it, so I have no idea if I just read through it, without realizing it or it doesn't exist.

To keep it on topic, if there is a aimed shot, how would this affect multiple shots?
"Paranoia is just another word for ignorance." - Hunter S. Thompson

User avatar
Arduin
Greater Lore Drake
Posts: 4045
Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2011 6:12 pm
Location: Granite quarry

Re: 1 arrow per round: is there nonetheless a penalty?

Post by Arduin »

Lord Dynel wrote: That's a problem, though. You tell a PC that he can't do something then he'll either

a) find a way, or
b) accuse you of being a d**K GM for stifling his character concept.

;)
It's fun watching players trying to find work arounds to critical pronblems.

Any player that goes psycho in my game because lack of forethought on their part, no longer has a seat at the table. But, I prescreen for maturity so has never been a problem.
Old age and treachery will overcome youth and skill

House Rules

Lord Dynel
Maukling
Posts: 5843
Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2008 7:00 am

Re: 1 arrow per round: is there nonetheless a penalty?

Post by Lord Dynel »

Arduin wrote:
Lord Dynel wrote: That's a problem, though. You tell a PC that he can't do something then he'll either

a) find a way, or
b) accuse you of being a d**K GM for stifling his character concept.

;)
It's fun watching players trying to find work arounds to critical pronblems.

Any player that goes psycho in my game because lack of forethought on their part, no longer has a seat at the table. But, I prescreen for maturity so has never been a problem.
Then you are truly blessed. A lot of players will want to know where you're coming up with the ruling you're coming up with, and want a source for you to cite. Without one, they sometimes call shenanigans on the GM for disallowing it. That's one reason why we have a lot the player entitlement these days - the books work against the GM sometimes. I've had players I've gamed with for 20 years bust out with some, "show me where it says I can't do X" BS every now and then. Or try to get creative. Again, consider yourself lucky...you might prescreen, but I wouldn't bet you'll never encounter one of those types of players. Vigilance only gets you so far, boss. ;)
Sir Ironside wrote:Does anyone use aimed shots? I can't find any rules for it, so I have no idea if I just read through it, without realizing it or it doesn't exist.

To keep it on topic, if there is a aimed shot, how would this affect multiple shots?
CKG, page 256, Iron. It's a -8 and if it hits, it's an auto-crit. Nice thing, it actually has an example that uses the head AC, so I have some proof in the rules that helm AC goes on called shots to the head!! :D But as for time, it doesn't list how long it takes. Since it takes "careful aim" I'd rule it that it's one shot, no movement (much like spell casting is).
LD's C&C creations - CL Checker, a witch class, the half-ogre, skills, and 0-level rules
Troll Lord wrote:Lord D: you understand where I"m coming from.

User avatar
Sir Ironside
Lore Drake
Posts: 1595
Joined: Sat May 02, 2009 7:00 am

Re: 1 arrow per round: is there nonetheless a penalty?

Post by Sir Ironside »

Lord Dynel wrote:CKG, page 256, Iron. It's a -8 and if it hits, it's an auto-crit. Nice thing, it actually has an example that uses the head AC, so I have some proof in the rules that helm AC goes on called shots to the head!! :D But as for time, it doesn't list how long it takes. Since it takes "careful aim" I'd rule it that it's one shot, no movement (much like spell casting is).
Hrmmm. That is the exact opposite of what I expected and how most rpg's deal with it. I guess I could see it as being in the thick of the battle, but I was looking at it as aiming for a round and getting some kind of plus for the shot. (Usually +1. Each consecutive round gives another plus to hit. No called shot.) This is pretty standard in most rpg's I've played and I wonder why there was no official ruling for it.

If a magic user can spend rounds casting a spell, right in the thick of things, I don't see why an archer couldn't use the same rounds to line-up a shot. In both cases the preferred stance is at a distance while your meat-shields do the wetworks. If your archer gets into the battle where his bow is no longer a viable option, he'd drop it for a more acceptable, close combat weapon.

He still has the option of just shooting normally every round, but he should have a choice between regular shooting and aiming for a better chance to hit.

I have no idea how this would work with multiple shots (Which is why I asked.) but whatever it is, I don't think the PC is going to give-up his careful aiming to try and do two or more shots that would somehow negate his action. A simple rule would be that the archer is allowed only one shot after aiming.

This would also be a benefit if the PC is going for a surprise shot.

If it is a called shot, then you start at the negative number and usually subtract the bonuses you'd get for aiming.

Example: A called shot to the head is -8. Giving a archer +1 per round aiming, if he is able to aim for 4 rounds (His shot would then be at round 5.) his called shot is only -4. The trade-off being, like a magic user, if he is disturbed during his aiming the pluses go away.
"Paranoia is just another word for ignorance." - Hunter S. Thompson

User avatar
Arduin
Greater Lore Drake
Posts: 4045
Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2011 6:12 pm
Location: Granite quarry

Re: 1 arrow per round: is there nonetheless a penalty?

Post by Arduin »

Lord Dynel wrote: Then you are truly blessed. A lot of players will want to know where you're coming up with the ruling you're coming up with, and want a source for you to cite. Without one, they sometimes call shenanigans on the GM for disallowing it.
Not really. I just hand them a 6' long bow & have them stand under my staircase that is 6' feet tall & 5' wide and demonstrate. My players know going in, that other than magic & rules written that explicitly allow something, the physical world works the same as IRL. If their PC wants to do something like drop a rock and have it float up (without magic) it is incumbent on the player to explain how it will work.
Old age and treachery will overcome youth and skill

House Rules

Fizz
Lore Drake
Posts: 1081
Joined: Mon Feb 19, 2007 8:00 am

Re: 1 arrow per round: is there nonetheless a penalty?

Post by Fizz »

Hrmmm. That is the exact opposite of what I expected and how most rpg's deal with it. I guess I could see it as being in the thick of the battle, but I was looking at it as aiming for a round and getting some kind of plus for the shot. (Usually +1. Each consecutive round gives another plus to hit. No called shot.) This is pretty standard in most rpg's I've played and I wonder why there was no official ruling for it.
My own version of Aiming requires a full round, and gives a +2 bonus to hit. Whether extra rounds are useful depends on the situation. Sometimes aiming too long causes one's arm to begine to quiver and accuracy can go down. But maybe it could be justified if there is a stable platform to brace against (resting one's crossbow on a ledge, for example).
Sir Ironside wrote:Example: A called shot to the head is -8. Giving a archer +1 per round aiming, if he is able to aim for 4 rounds (His shot would then be at round 5.) his called shot is only -4. The trade-off being, like a magic user, if he is disturbed during his aiming the pluses go away.
Yeah, i've not been keen on the called-shot notion myself. I just give the intended target an AC and treat it like anything else. For example, if you wanted to shoot a guy in the head, i'd call it an AC of 14 since the head is a Tiny-sized object (yeah a bit of 3E influence there), plus the target's Dex modifier, and plus the AC value of any helmet worn. A "miss" might hit another part of the target (say the shoulder) depending on how much under the AC he rolled.


-Fizz

User avatar
mbeacom
Ulthal
Posts: 550
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2011 1:51 pm

Re: 1 arrow per round: is there nonetheless a penalty?

Post by mbeacom »

Aergraith is correct. If you read the paragraph that precedes the table, it explains why it works the way it does. The first line isn't a typo. The paragraph says "an archer can shoot more than one arrow in 10 seconds if they do not spend so much time to carefully aim each shot". I'm paraphrasing here, but I think the point is that you're rushed when you shoot more than one arrow on your turn. Even the first shot is rushed. That's where the -1 comes from on the first arrow. And with each additional shot that you try to force into that 10 second space you get more and more rushed. So think of it as trying to get that second shot off, is going to be harder than the first shot. And if you're crazy enough to try to rip a third shot, wow, very hard. A fourth is next to impossible to squeeze in that amount of time. You' probably not even paying attention to your aim at that point, just drawing and releasing as fast as you can. That's why the penalty escalates. I think it makes sense as far as creating a rule that addresses the situation (an archer shooting progressively faster and faster) and achieving a rule that is easy to remember.
Witty Quote Pending
-Someone

User avatar
Sir Ironside
Lore Drake
Posts: 1595
Joined: Sat May 02, 2009 7:00 am

Re: 1 arrow per round: is there nonetheless a penalty?

Post by Sir Ironside »

Lord Dynel wrote:CKG, page 256, Iron. It's a -8 and if it hits, it's an auto-crit. Nice thing, it actually has an example that uses the head AC, so I have some proof in the rules that helm AC goes on called shots to the head!! :D But as for time, it doesn't list how long it takes. Since it takes "careful aim" I'd rule it that it's one shot, no movement (much like spell casting is).
I don't mind this rule. (Which I should have stated earlier.) and is acceptable as written (Though I'm not a fan of the auto-crit.) My problem is it is too focused. My question is the aiming itself. When just aiming and not going for a called shot, there is nothing in the RAW that handles this. Like I said I figure the archer should be able to have some kind of choice/benefit on just how he is planning to launch his arrow.

The RAW for a called shot seems reasonable without overly complicating things. But, if you are going to use helmets for your AC then it makes sense to use AC for legs, arms and hands. (Though hands could be rolled into the arm called shot, dependent on how much you roll over the target number. Thus not caring what AC the hands have.)

I see that the CKG has something similar called Offensive Focus where you announce that you are going to use Offensive Focus and it gives you a +3 to hit but you suffer a -6 on AC. Which is OK with me, but because you can only announce one combat maneuver you couldn't use both Called Shot and Offensive Focus at the same time.

I know I'm kind of beating a dead horse, but to my perspective, something that is so prevalent and not directly mentioned in a clear fashion, it just seems odd to leave that out. Leaving it out devalues the archer in certain areas of play that could be very important.

Take my surprise example:

Your party gets the drop on some Goblins. The Goblin's are still 4 rounds away, thus the party can sit and wait till the Goblins get to them where the party can attack and surprise them on that 4th round. If the archer had a aimed shot he'd have three extra options other than a normal shot, multi-shot and Offensive Focus as the RAW states. (Offensive Focus is fine, but the -6 to AC shouldn't apply here.)
  1. He could use 3 rounds to take careful aim and unleash a regular to hit with bonuses for aiming.
  2. He could use 3 rounds to make a called shot with the called shot penalty still in play, with the aiming subtracting his bonus for a aiming shot.
  3. He could wait two rounds and unleash his shot before the surprised foe(s) reach the ambush site.
There are so many different scenarios where a aimed shot could benefit the group as a whole.

No aiming bonus takes away those choices.
"Paranoia is just another word for ignorance." - Hunter S. Thompson

Lord Dynel
Maukling
Posts: 5843
Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2008 7:00 am

Re: 1 arrow per round: is there nonetheless a penalty?

Post by Lord Dynel »

mbeacom wrote:Aergraith is correct. If you read the paragraph that precedes the table, it explains why it works the way it does. The first line isn't a typo. The paragraph says "an archer can shoot more than one arrow in 10 seconds if they do not spend so much time to carefully aim each shot". I'm paraphrasing here, but I think the point is that you're rushed when you shoot more than one arrow on your turn. Even the first shot is rushed. That's where the -1 comes from on the first arrow. And with each additional shot that you try to force into that 10 second space you get more and more rushed. So think of it as trying to get that second shot off, is going to be harder than the first shot. And if you're crazy enough to try to rip a third shot, wow, very hard. A fourth is next to impossible to squeeze in that amount of time. You' probably not even paying attention to your aim at that point, just drawing and releasing as fast as you can. That's why the penalty escalates. I think it makes sense as far as creating a rule that addresses the situation (an archer shooting progressively faster and faster) and achieving a rule that is easy to remember.
Yes, that I believe is the correct way to interpret it. It's just doesn't make much sense to me, in my opinion. The first shot is at -1, agreed, but why is this shot "not as rushed" as the third one? Or the fourth one? I think that the amount of arrows shot in a round should dictate how rushed the shots are, again agreed, but the amount of arrows (decided by the player during declaration) should set a blanket difficulty. My belief is that trying to fire three shots in the a 10 second span should have a set difficulty, and that difficulty should apply to all arrows shot.

I bolded a part of your post, mbeacom, because I find myself agreeing with it, to a point. In reality, that makes sense. If I fire one shot in 10 seconds, and that's all, that's not too difficult. But If I fire two shots, that's markedly more difficult. I fire off one, then rush to get the second one in the remaining seconds. Then, let's say I want to shoot four shots in that same 10-second span. That's a Herculean task!! In reality, I can shoot that first shot, then decide, "screw it," and leave it at that. Or, it might take me 13 seconds to shoot those four arrows, and I only really got three off in that 10-second span. This may be because I took my time with that first shot, and ramped up my output as my 10 second were starting to expire (this is what the penalties now represent).

But in the game, if I declare I'm shooting one shot or four shots, those shots go off. Period. No, "whoops, your time ran out because you took too much time lining up those first two shots...so you only got three instead of four arrows off." And trying to "cram" one shot (which is normal) in 10 seconds doesn't make anything more difficult, which is a normal shot and accurately represented in the rules. But firing four should make all of them all more difficult. I just don't think the first one is any more easier than the last one.
LD's C&C creations - CL Checker, a witch class, the half-ogre, skills, and 0-level rules
Troll Lord wrote:Lord D: you understand where I"m coming from.

User avatar
mbeacom
Ulthal
Posts: 550
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2011 1:51 pm

Re: 1 arrow per round: is there nonetheless a penalty?

Post by mbeacom »

@LD,
I understand your view LD, and honestly, I have no problem with it, or its rationale, which you've done a very good job of explaining. I think what the TLs are doing with this rule is simply pushing the increased difficulty into the later shots in effort to better replicate what actually happens in rapid fire situations, which I'm also ok with, and since it's the official rule will just use it as written.

Try looking at it the official rule this way to make it feel more like you want.

If you fire 1 shot, no penalty.
If you fire 2 shots, your average penalty is -1.5.
If you fire 3 shots, your average penalty is -2.33
If you fire 4 shots, your average penalty is -3.75

Having a fair bit of experience with bows and guns and rapid fire use of both, I can tell you the very first shot you aimed and fired would be the most likely to hit. Each subsequent shot would be less likely than the previous to be on target. That's just the way it is. The rule as written does a very good job of simulating the real world action IMO.

To put it simply, if I fire 4 times as quickly as possible, the first shot will generally be the most accurate and the fourth shot will be the farthest from the bullseye, almost every time.
Witty Quote Pending
-Someone

Fizz
Lore Drake
Posts: 1081
Joined: Mon Feb 19, 2007 8:00 am

Re: 1 arrow per round: is there nonetheless a penalty?

Post by Fizz »

mbeacom wrote:Having a fair bit of experience with bows and guns and rapid fire use of both, I can tell you the very first shot you aimed and fired would be the most likely to hit. Each subsequent shot would be less likely than the previous to be on target. That's just the way it is. The rule as written does a very good job of simulating the real world action IMO.

To put it simply, if I fire 4 times as quickly as possible, the first shot will generally be the most accurate and the fourth shot will be the farthest from the bullseye, almost every time.
But that would mean you're taking more time to aim the first, and progressively trying to fire faster each time taking less time to aim. It also implies that when you start the round you don't know how many you're firing. If you taking the same amount of time to aim each shot, the penalty should be the same.

If anything, progressive shots if anything should be more accurate (assuming you're aiming at the same target and can see where it lands) because you'll be able to get your eye in. You see the first one fall short and so you immediately aim a bit higher, etc.

When i take ground balls at baseball practice, field-throw-field-throw, etc, i tend to get more accurate with each throw (until my arm tires out... heh).


-Fizz

User avatar
mbeacom
Ulthal
Posts: 550
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2011 1:51 pm

Re: 1 arrow per round: is there nonetheless a penalty?

Post by mbeacom »

Fizz wrote:
mbeacom wrote:Having a fair bit of experience with bows and guns and rapid fire use of both, I can tell you the very first shot you aimed and fired would be the most likely to hit. Each subsequent shot would be less likely than the previous to be on target. That's just the way it is. The rule as written does a very good job of simulating the real world action IMO.

To put it simply, if I fire 4 times as quickly as possible, the first shot will generally be the most accurate and the fourth shot will be the farthest from the bullseye, almost every time.
But that would mean you're taking more time to aim the first, and progressively trying to fire faster each time taking less time to aim. It also implies that when you start the round you don't know how many you're firing. If you taking the same amount of time to aim each shot, the penalty should be the same.

If anything, progressive shots if anything should be more accurate (assuming you're aiming at the same target and can see where it lands) because you'll be able to get your eye in. You see the first one fall short and so you immediately aim a bit higher, etc.

When i take ground balls at baseball practice, field-throw-field-throw, etc, i tend to get more accurate with each throw (until my arm tires out... heh).


-Fizz
Not really. (or perhaps you are on a subconsious level of some sort). But, regardless, the results are the same. I'm talking about choosing to rapid fire 4 rounds, or arrows, as fast and steady as possible in a specific amount of time. Generally, the first shot is the most accurate and the last shot is the least accurate (and none are as accurate as if you chose to only shoot once). The act of firing, or drawing and releasing repeatedly gets you further and further from center, the more you do it, even if you try to keep your pace during the whole spread. Unlike throwing a ball, where the act of throwing doesn't actually impede your next throw. Plus, this rapid fire shooting means you don't see clearly whether you've hit anything until you're done with the volley.
Witty Quote Pending
-Someone

alcyone
Greater Lore Drake
Posts: 2727
Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2007 7:00 am
Location: The Court of the Crimson King

Re: 1 arrow per round: is there nonetheless a penalty?

Post by alcyone »

This is about the points where these debates die at my table, since my neighbors would call the cops if I invited my players outside to demonstrate :).

Here's a cool link, though: http://www.archerylibrary.com/books/far ... b-archery/
It's a link to a (translated) 16th century Arab treatise on archery, and if you look at the chapter (XLV) on target practice, there is a section on "Shower, or successive shooting", and the technique is different from that used in the previous chapters.

It's a fascinating book because it also talks about how archery technique changes during the arms race; corrugated armor means now facing sideways for better penetration, when a perpendicular stance was once favored, for example. Recommended for any CK!
My C&C stuff: www.rpggrognard.com

User avatar
mbeacom
Ulthal
Posts: 550
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2011 1:51 pm

Re: 1 arrow per round: is there nonetheless a penalty?

Post by mbeacom »

Awesome, thanks for that link! Suffice it to say, I agree with the trolls on this one. My experience in similar situations matches what they've attempted to do with the rules. If it doesn't feel right for you or your table, change it! C&C will handle it just fine. :)
Witty Quote Pending
-Someone

Fizz
Lore Drake
Posts: 1081
Joined: Mon Feb 19, 2007 8:00 am

Re: 1 arrow per round: is there nonetheless a penalty?

Post by Fizz »

I think my biggest problem with the successive reduction in accuracy is that it means there is effectively no reason ever to not do it. A -1 means a 5% chance to hit. But in exchange you could get 3 or extra shots. Even though those are at -2, -4 and -8, the net damage of all those will completely overshadow a single shot with no penalty.

Sure, they're not as accurate, but they're free. And if you're going to make more than one, just always make as many as the CK will allow, because there is no extra penalty. That is, if you make 2 shots, you're at -1/-2. But if you make 3 shots, you're at -1/-2/-4. Either way, you suffer that same -1/-2 on the first two shots, so you're effectively getting a free shot at -4. And similarly for the fourth shot at -8. You have that -1/-2/-4 for the first 3 either way, so no reason not to take another at -8. Statistically speaking, this is a huge difference.

So basically, there is no reason not to ever take 4 shots (or more if the CKG allows it).


-Fizz

User avatar
mbeacom
Ulthal
Posts: 550
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2011 1:51 pm

Re: 1 arrow per round: is there nonetheless a penalty?

Post by mbeacom »

Fizz wrote:I think my biggest problem with the successive reduction in accuracy is that it means there is effectively no reason ever to not do it. A -1 means a 5% chance to hit. But in exchange you could get 3 or extra shots. Even though those are at -2, -4 and -8, the net damage of all those will completely overshadow a single shot with no penalty.

Sure, they're not as accurate, but they're free. And if you're going to make more than one, just always make as many as the CK will allow, because there is no extra penalty. That is, if you make 2 shots, you're at -1/-2. But if you make 3 shots, you're at -1/-2/-4. Either way, you suffer that same -1/-2 on the first two shots, so you're effectively getting a free shot at -4. And similarly for the fourth shot at -8. You have that -1/-2/-4 for the first 3 either way, so no reason not to take another at -8. Statistically speaking, this is a huge difference.

So basically, there is no reason not to ever take 4 shots (or more if the CKG allows it).


-Fizz
I think you might be misunderstanding what this rule is actually for. This rule doesn't simply allow an archer in combat to choose to shoot more than once. Certainly, were that the case, I would agree with you. This rule requires an archer be ready and prepared in position well in advance of combat even starting, with all his arrows laid out flat in front of him on a surface for easy grabbing and smooth firing. He can do nothing else. Per the rule, this must be announced, and a location chosen before combat even begins. Not during combat in the declaration phase. He can't do this pulling arrows from a quiver for instance. Obviously, never when ambushed or surprised. Not on the move. This is basically an archer setting up a rapid fire sniping style ambush position. Of course he's going to shoot as many arrows as possible. Thats exactly why the rule is written as it is. But the reality is that he might do it for a round or two until he's swarmed or fire is returned. In my games, there would be precious few instances where it would even be possible. I would certainly say that if the archer came under fire, this attack method would simply be impossible. At the very least his AC would be severely degraded since he could not move or leave his position, or else he would sacrifice the multishot ability completely by being out of reach of his arrows. I imagine a round of this before enemy returns fire and the archer is left grabbing his remaining arrows and bolting for cover while he regains his composure and prepares to enter combat normally.
Witty Quote Pending
-Someone

Post Reply