|
Post by Scott on Mar 23, 2004 16:30:36 GMT -5
I recently asked EGG about the listed RoF for missile weapons during surprise. My question: Hey Gary. A debate on the rate of fire of missile weapons during surpise has recently come up on several message boards I frequent. The rule as written states that missile fire is 3 times the normal rate. This equates to 6 arrows, or 9 darts in a single segment. I've always believed that the original intent of the rule got diluted somewhere between author and editor (similar to falling damage) and that the rate of fire should be a standard 3 per segment, but certain weapons, like a heavy crossbow, require special consideration, and must be handled on a case by case basis. Scott
Gary's Answer: Scott,
Another post I missed earlier
When that rule was written a segment of a round was six seconds long, but I can not but agree with with your assessment. Six arrows is potentailly possible, but having them arranged for such a rapid rate of fire is improbable. The same is true for nine darts. Standard rate of fire, but uninterrupted by any return, is much more logical. The same is true for special consideration on a case-by-case basis.
In all, application of comon sense needs be applied.
Cheers, Gary
|
|
Bregh
Prestidigitat
Omnipresent
Posts: 1
|
Post by Bregh on Mar 24, 2004 20:22:58 GMT -5
Here endeth the lesson.
No, seriously, its a good issue to have cleared up.
|
|
|
Post by GutboyBarrelhouse on Mar 24, 2004 22:48:54 GMT -5
Those "Ask the Col" threads are great - I really like it when he clears up A&D&D rules quirks. This issue is one of a few that have come up lately where EGG said he never used the particular rule, or that he would have written it differently. Standard ROF makes sense to me, especially in cases where there is more than one surprise segment! Now, what about those extra attacks granted by weapon speed factors?
|
|
|
Post by Axe Mental on Mar 27, 2004 19:15:59 GMT -5
GBBH: Now, what about those extra attacks granted by weapon speed factors?
I was unaware of any confusion on this issue. Is this a matter of confusion with the rule or a matter of a major problem as was rate of fire?
Axe-
|
|
ska
Prestidigitat
Posts: 6
|
Post by ska on Mar 27, 2004 23:34:36 GMT -5
Gutboy---during surprise segments non-missile weapons are used at the standard rate of attack and are not multiplied by three as missile weapons are.
|
|
|
Post by Scott on Mar 28, 2004 12:45:28 GMT -5
GBBH is talking about the extra attacks melee weapons get against opponents wielding much slower weapons, when the SF difference is double, or 5 or more, and how this would apply to surprise situations. My opinion is that you would not get those extra attacks during surprise segments. Scott
|
|
|
Post by GutboyBarrelhouse on Mar 28, 2004 13:51:07 GMT -5
That cleared it up for me, Scott - thanks.
|
|
|
Post by Scott on Mar 28, 2004 14:03:43 GMT -5
GB, I don't like any of the speed factor rules, but if I were using them, I still wouldn't give the extra attacks during surprise segments based on how the rule is written. It takes a whole round with attacks and counter-attacks into consideration. Scott
|
|
|
Post by GutboyBarrelhouse on Mar 28, 2004 16:30:13 GMT -5
I have never used the WSF rules because of the overhead, i.e., adding another level of complication to a combat system which was intentionally designed to be enjoyably abstract. Now that I understand these rules, I'm glad, but I still don't want to use them as written - for the same reason.
EGG has a great paragraph in the DMG that explains how the long combat round and the level of abstraction subsumes that there are many swings and blows going on in the round; attack roll(s) represent the ones that were good enough to actually hurt. I'd use that same rationale for WSF - in a round, or even a segment, a character can swing and ready most any weapon that common sense says can be deployed in the space available; the guy with the dagger always gets a shot in first on the guy with the bardiche - the attack that is good enough to do damage is one the attack roll represents.
|
|
|
Post by Scott on Mar 28, 2004 16:38:45 GMT -5
I agree Gutboy, which is why I don't use speed factor either. Scott
|
|
|
Post by Axe Mental on Mar 28, 2004 22:37:33 GMT -5
As I have stated at another site, we recently went to using WSF and did not find it to slow game play once we all understood it. If anything players found it refreshing and somewhat strategical (choosing a smaller faster weapon over a slow heavy weapon that does more damage...(esp. vs. spell casters). I think its worth giving it a try again, Regards Axe-
|
|
WSmith
Evoker
Warrior
Posts: 15
|
Post by WSmith on Apr 5, 2004 14:05:31 GMT -5
Thank gawd! I no longer need to think or post about this issues ever again. (Even still, as DM I might allow ROF + 1 on a case by case basis)
|
|
WSmith
Evoker
Warrior
Posts: 15
|
Post by WSmith on Jun 30, 2004 9:52:11 GMT -5
GB, I don't like any of the speed factor rules, but if I were using them, I still wouldn't give the extra attacks during surprise segments based on how the rule is written. It takes a whole round with attacks and counter-attacks into consideration. Scott I do use WSF and still I agree, in surprise, about disallowing the extra attacks due to the difference in WSF of 5 or 10 or whatever. Simply because, the surprised foe is not using any weapon as he can't act, and therefore there is nothing to compare the attacker's WSF to.
|
|