Shooting in melee

[Arthadan]

Hi all,

I understand the dual wielding fighting style has been blamed to be unrealistic... but then we have our archers firing against enemies fighting in hand to hand combat and never hitting their friends!

And then we have a base TN 12 for firing into close combat but then it's the same for firing at long range (plus modifiers of course) or initial volleys, even if the enemy is all alone.

So, to make missile combat more realistic I'm thinking about implementing some small changes:
- Base TN for shooting is 10.
- Firing to an enemy in hand to hand combat against an ally: +2 TN plus is considered a called shot. An "eye" result means an ally has been hit by the arrow.

What do you think?

[Heilemann]

I think I like the simplicity of the existing system

[Arthadan]

Well, the existing system has the option of called shots already so I'm not adding new rules.
I just want to make more difficult firing into melee because is unrealistic and at the same time lowering a bit the difficulty for firing in other cases to balance it.

[Corvo]

Arthadan, you can rationize it this way, if you want:
In the opening volleys, opponents are hard to hit because they are far, probably running fast (charging?) and actively trying to be difficult targets.
In melee, opponents are hard to hit because you are trying to avoid hitting your companions. But, on the other hand, these same opponents are easy to hit because they are damn close and they cannot actively avoid your attention: they are busy fighting you friend.
So we can imagine these factors somehow even it out

That said, I don't see anything wrong with your house-rule (apart maybe making opening volleys more easy)

[shipwreck]

Agreed with what has been said: the RAW seem to incorporate the difficulty of aiming correctly into the high TN. I know you remark that the Defensive stance has the same TN, but again that seems to take into account the fact that you are fighting very conservatively, trying to avoid getting hit, and keeping an eye on your companions.

That said, I do like your idea. If that's the way you want to go then I see nothing wrong with the rule itself.

[Beran]

Historically speaking dual wielding is unrealistic. When you fight with "sword and board" you can attack and protect yourself effectively. With two weapons you leave yourself pretty wide open, and the second attack is seldom that powerful anyway. No where near worth the trade off in defense.

Compared to the firing into melee...I'm fine with the rules as written.