<Topic> ranged fire attack bonus = <dex, etc> + attacker size modifier.
Why its easier for small creatures to fire bows or throw stones at distant target then
for large
creatures to do the same? </Topic>
Thanks everyone for answering, this is really helpful!
----- Original Message -----
From: Doug Meerschaert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, February 02, 2001 11:21 AM
Subject: Re: [ogf-d20-l] Simple question(s)
> Max Skibinsky wrote:
>
> > Agreed. But we use halfling and giant just as examples with <... size="Small"> and
> <..
> > size="Large"> attributes respectively, right?
> right, so far.
> > Basically we can replace 'em with human shooting from
> > his knees (or shooting while sitting) vs. human firmly standing on the ladder or
>stilts.
> No. Creatures of a different size catagory are *very* much different.
> Heck, even their visual organs are different.
Probably. However lets not stray aside - we are not discussing halfling/giants or
their visual
organs. There could be lots of reasons why small-creatures eyes are less suited for
ranged attacks
(shorter base of stereoscopic vision, shorter focal length) just as lots of reasons
they are better
suited (angular width of target ration to angular width of the scene). Thankfully D20
don't give us
any details regarding various visual organs, so lets use Occam razor and assume the
differences
cancel each other out on average. Therefore we are back to the beginning - why its
easier for
small-sized creature to hit barn with ranged fire from 200' feet then for large sized
creature to
hit same barn with same weapon from same distance? The only noticeable difference to
work with is
the size - which means only that one creature is shorter and closer to earth another
creature is
larger and higher. Why its helping short creature fire a bow?
( Note I specially removed halfling and giants from the question, because way too many
people are
getting confused in races, dexterity, str, hit points, weapons and ranges aspects.
Which all have
nothing to do with size ranged attack bonus. )
> > quite unproven gut feeling: "+ size modifier" rule will be wrong more times for
>ranged fire then
its
> > right.
> That depends on how you define "wrong."
I mean "Wrong" as results contrary to the common sense/real world results. Ranged
attacks, bows in
particular has nothing to do with magic, and can be easily emulated in real world.
> I think this is fimly in the
> "reality based things that the game ignores to be a better game," like
> the fact that a single sword-blow can kill someone, at any time.
I totally agree that game rules should be simplified if the choice is between reality
and faster
gameplay. However as I see it right now
1) current rule gives wrong results more often
2) even simplest adjustment - remove attacker size bonus from ranged attack formula
will make game
more simple AND more realistic.
Yes, that's adjustment would mean 2 halflings shooting each other from 200 feet won't
be regular
size targets to each other. Which is IMHO totally correct. Shooting something small at
the other end
of meadow is always hard no matter are you small or large. Imagine 2 gnats shooting
with sting-guns
at each other from say 10' (guess that's 10 range increments for gnats) Can't prove,
but I bet gnats
won't even see each other instead of being 'regular sized targets' to each other.
> > Larger then medium creatures attacking farther
> > then from point blank range add the inversed (i.e. positive) size modifier to
>their ranged
attacks
> > to reflect their effective higher elevation
> Bad idea. A *better* idea would be to modify the range incriment of
> different sized weapons--although I'm out of ideas.
Hmm..... If giant (or human on ladder) will shoot tiny hand crossbow from his
elevation - that will
give him some range and precession bonus, even if size of weapon remained the same.
> > the best they can do is run away screaming "Halflings! Halflings! Run for your
> > lives!". Not so gamely and not so balanced in my book.
> You forget the fact that the giants have reach, superior strength, and
> *more hit dice.*
That was negated by the deep chasm separating 2 groups - which forced them to fight
purely ranged
fire duel where str and reach did not matterd. However, that's was a joke ;) I'm not
really
interested in giants and halflings (although everything I heard so far is
fascinating), I'm
interested in only in attacker size bonus for ranged fire.
> > But will it really help you hit that remote chair or window with paperclip (rock)
>or
> > pencil (javelin)?
> I don't know. My eyes and the space between them didn't change, so I
> can't account for what effect that would have.
Just as we don't know anything at all about other creatures eyes and distance between
them. (Besides
nice illustrations on PHB background, but they are not part of D20 and they not
officially in the
rules). Lets ignore them for now, and the only thing I could find in D20 regarding
size definition,
is height and weight. IMHO creature weight don't affects ranged fire directly
(indirectly via dex
its ignored for our purposes), therefore we are left only with height. Thus, I don't
see how for
game mechanics of cross-bow fire for halfling, sitting human, human with cut off legs,
human with
legs polymorphed into flat stone disk are different. Polymorph human to the middle
torso into flat
stone disk for all I care, just leave him head and arms to shoot x-bow. Is he small
size now? Is it
easier to hit barn at 200' now? ;)
Thanks, very interesting ideas, visual organs bits was extremely helpful. Made myself
a note to tune
different sized creatures to have different view camera parameters and different
clipping planes in
our 3D software. BTW lots of stuff I'm referring too for visual things coming not from
imagination,
but just from reality - various parameters of camera view of 3D world is something i'm
tweaking just
as we speak. You have no idea how long it took us just to make 3D view on computer
that looks like
regular human would see the world!
----- Original Message -----
From: Faustus von Goethe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, February 02, 2001 3:51 PM
Subject: Re: [ogf-d20-l] Simple question(s)
> >ranged fire duel) the best they can do is run away screaming "Halflings!
> >Halflings! Run for your
> >lives!". Not so gamely and not so balanced in my book.
>
> You are leaving or blithely discounting a critical part of the rules -
> smaller creatures must use smaller weapons, and smaller weapons do less
> damage, have a lower crit multiplier, shorter range, etc.
Yep, I ignore all that. Because its has nothing to do with explaining why its easier
for small
creature to hit distant object with thrown or projectile weapons. ( Your suggestions
are relevant to
concrete example for Giant-halfling conflict, but that was more of a joke then serious
argument ;) )
> SOME POINTS
> 1. Smaller creatures simply DO present smaller targets. This is without
> question true. With equal weapons it would without question be easier for
> the halfling to hit a giant than for the giant to hit the halfling at the
> same range.
Absolutely. Reflected in size bonus to AC. Why its easier for halfling to hit our
favorite example
barn from far away then for giant? Lets forget about races and dex for now, I'm only
investigating
size part of the formula. "barn looks larger for halfling" - IMHO not true for
distances typical for
ranged fire.
> 2. Much of the BALANCING FACTOR you seem to be either unaware of or are
> discounting or ignoring. Being a small creature gives you a +1 to hit, sure
> BUT it also reduces your strength by 2, which translates into what? A -1 to
> hit AND damage on attacks that use strength.
Not relevant to ranged fire attack. Its dex based. Another point for halflings btw
(vs. giants).
> 3. The damage that a weapon does is equally important (if not more) than
> base persentage chance to hit. My halfling character has really been
Yes. But irrelevant. My question always was and is - why its easier for small
creatures to hit
remote objects, not what happens afterwards (damage dealt, total hp to survive that,
etc).
> searching long and hard for that hand crossbow that does the same damage as
> a boulder thrown by a giant. Let me know where it is to be found, ok.
> Point of fact, maybe the giant hits on average 10% more often, but the 300%
> + STRENGTH difference in damage on a successful hit might have something of
> an impact.
I agree giants are probably balanced vs. halflings. I'm not researching races right
now, just ranged
combat rule(s).
Thanks, your points are still very interesting and helpful.
- Max
