Goodman Games

Here's a houserule I've been using.


FIRING INTO MELEE: d16 to hit. A die roll of 2-4 hits an ally for minimum damage.

The rules show a -1 modifier and then if the attack is a miss a 50% chance of hitting an ally instead.

I'm not fond of rolling the 50% thing

Hmm, I missed the -1 rule. It's not in the "text" but it's in the chart.

My group hasn't found a problem with the 50% rule, some don't ever risk it, as most shouldn't unless it's an emergency. A Warrior could use a MDoA and by-pass it all together.

I do like flat rules like 50/50, 1 on 6, or 2 in 6, for certain things. Fiddly rules are annoying sometimes. And the "possibility" of hitting an ally is a good case for a simple rule like 50/50.

I think -1 is too mild. And I like to avoid percentile dice in play, just cause.

The idea is that friendly fire hit on a 2 or 3 makes it is only one roll, and minimum damage mitigates the horror of an arrow to the back.

Mitigating horror is probably a mistake...

It is a pretty reasonable house rule. It reduces both the chance of hitting an enemy or an ally and it mitigates the penalty of hitting the ally. In total it reinforces to the player that missiles into melee are usually not worth it, while being less punitive to the player who decides to attempt it. I only posted to clarify that this is a house rule where you are changing something that exists, not "filling in" an undefined case in the base rules.

Maybe they meant -1d?
But yeah, the rule is definitely there already.

I have always preferred a variation on the %50 rule that takes relative size and number of bodies in the melee into account, and doesn't rely on archer "failure" for someone to get in the way.

Examples:
A man-sized character is in melee with a creature his size - the archer adds a d2 to his attack roll: 1 he checks his attack roll against his ally's AC; 2 he checks against the enemy.

Same man-sized character in melee with a creature twice his size - the archer adds a d3 this time: 1 still results in his ally being the target; 2 or 3 targets the enemy.

It can get a bit complicated when you have one ally surrounded by 5 smaller sized enemies though - roll a d7, 1 or 2 targets friend, results 3 through 7 are each one of the 5 enemies. Throw a large opponent into the same mix and you need a 10 - Ally is 1-2, big enemy is 3-5, and 6-10 are the little guys.

Then, there is a rule I use in conjunction with the above: If your target is 3 or more times the size of the ally you are trying not to accidentally shoot, you only have to roll to see if you avoid targeting your ally if the larger creature is actively using your ally as a shield.

My DM just follows the rules. It has only resulted in the deaths of (2) 0 level characters so far.

SYKOJAK wrote:My DM just follows the rules. It has only resulted in the deaths of (2) 0 level characters so far.

Me too, it also has resulted in the fratricide of 2 zeros. After that second one, people are hesitant shooting into crowds.

My players quickly learned not to fire into melee. More than that they leaned to fear my "50%" die, which is a two face coin I got with my copy of 'The Dark Knight'. I also use it to see if torches go out, or to see if missed ranged weapon breaks.

I did adjust the rule a little however. My players decided to try and destroy a certain huge sized trap in a certain room, So I ruled that for a huge or even a large enemy, unless the player is standing within a 5' radius of the line of fire, they are not a viable target. Allowing them to use angles to safely use ranged attacks into melee. It got them thinking more about where they could stand.


Though one of my players still managed to throw a dart into a companions neck at level 0. Thankfully the one hit was a rare 4hp peasant.

Mintaro wrote:Though one of my players still managed to throw a dart into a companions neck at level 0. Thankfully the one hit was a rare 4hp peasant.

Sounds like the start of a great character history! Hopefully "tough-neck" survived the dungeon?

DCC RPG seems to invite friendly fire at low levels for some reason. I suppose it's because of the large numbers of PCs. In playtests I went through a number of different "firing into melee" rules, including some simple ones and some complicated ones (like "there are 8 guys in combat and 3 are friends so there's a 3-in-8 chance..."). I ended up with the one in the book but this thread does have some good suggestions for house rules as well.

Just thinking about "friendly fire" at low level combat, it should be duly noted that is to be expected. First, as players are new to the game, learning that you just killed one of the party members with one shot, it really will make you rethink your next "shoot into melee action". Second, I would also state that as the party goes up in levels they become more "seasoned" players as well as characters. This is along the lines of, that is a 4th level mage fighting a goblin now. I have all the confidence in the world that he can handle a simple goblin in hand to hand with whatever means at his disposal.
My main point being, low level partys (all characters level 0 to 1,) should be somewhat clumbsy and inept. They just don't have the combat skills yet developed to be efficent. Even with veteren players playing those same toons, it will still take some playing sessions to organize thier party properly so that everyone knows who is going to do what in a typical combat encounter. That all takes time, teamwork and most importantly cooperation between the players.
So in turn, only a combat newb, or someone highly skilled, is going attempt such an act. Unless of course they really don't care whom they hit!

goodmangames wrote: DCC RPG seems to invite friendly fire at low levels for some reason.

Was it 1st edition AD&D that you rolled randomly to hit with missile fire -- thus if your fighter was up there engaged with 5 orcs and the ranger was back sniping, you rolled randomly (d6) to see who was hit? Can't remember if that was one of my bastard DM houserules or actually in the book...

We use the by-the-book method, but no one has tempted fate so far.

goodmangames wrote: DCC RPG seems to invite friendly fire at low levels for some reason.

Not all halflings are good with slings. The horror!

I think it takes players and characters alike to realize that even 1 points of damage to an ally can be the difference between life and death.

Sadly Mr "tough-neck" didn't survive the dungeon. In the end it was a cowardly tax collector (who hid behind his indentured servant), an equally cowardly tarot card reader, an Elvin stone mason (with remarkably good stats). Then finally my personal favorite a chicken farmer of average stats, who managed to eviscerate a snake daemon single handed (thanks to a pair of lucky crits).

Is the -1 a -1 die as in d16 instead of d20?

I'm not familiar with the actual DCC rule for this, so I'm not going to say anything about good/bad/indifferent with regard to that rule. However, this is what I have been using for a long time, it works great, and it's dead simple:

You may fire into melee. Sure, go ahead!
If you hit, awesome, great job!
If you miss, and the number showing on the attack die is even, then it's a regular old-fashioned miss.
If you miss, and the number showing on the attack die is odd, then you hit a random ally in the melee. Roll damage against your friend!
No chance to hit a different bad guy or anything like that; That would be too clunky!

I didn't invent the rule, but I love it! It basically integrates the 50% chance to hit an ally on a miss into the attack roll itself. (Okay, if you miss on a 1-7, then it's not exactly 50%, but so what!)

Aplus wrote: I didn't invent the rule, but I love it! It basically integrates the 50% chance to hit an ally on a miss into the attack roll itself. (Okay, if you miss on a 1-7, then it's not exactly 50%, but so what!)

I love combining die rolls. Top Secret S/I had a really good system of integrating hit location and damage into a single attack roll.

Top Secret!!! Awesome, I'm thinking of taking that and/or Boot Hill out of retirement to try and run something.

Hello guys, I am new to DCC and "judging" my first scenario on thursday. English is not my native tongue, so my question concerns the meaning of "Firing a missile weapon into melee" ?
I understand that it is when the attacker shots on a character, and the target is engaged in melee. Right ?

And if that's right, what happens if the attacker uses a missile weapon while himself is engaged in the melee ? Same malus / nothing ? Possible friendly fire ?

Thanks for your lights.

since this is being brought up again, gosh, you'd think there'd be a really nice bonus for doing missile weapons in close range. I mean... it would be easier to hit someone with a bow/arrow 10' away compared to 20', and 30', and 40', etc, not to mention there being less time for reflexive defenses against the attack.

Hello Judges, I am reactivating this discussion after having a module played yesterday. Several melee shots were taken and one player in the group suggested not applying agility bonuses in the case of a (missed) shot accidentally directed at an ally. What do you think about this ? Until now I kept all the bonuses of the shooter (this reflects in my opinion the random and dangerous aspect of this type of action). I'd love to hear your opinions !

The core rule in the rulebook has a very simple result:

Nobody (that isn't truly desperate) ever fires into melee.

Since most combat is against monsters engaged in melee (with you or your friends) this means DCC is a game where missile fire plays a rather small part.

Sure you can have a campaign where the players make a point of sneaking around taking potshots at the enemy from afar, but in general case dungeons are so small and cramped that any fight almost immediately becomes a melee fight.

And since the DCC rules actively discourage missile fire (high risk of hitting your own friend, missile fire not dealing that much damage in the first place, significantly fewer magic missile weapons compared to swords and spells and whatnot, switching from bow to sword takes valuable actions) this means that the RPG trope of playing a "missile-focused character" has little to no space in this game. Sure you can carry a bow for when the opportunity presents itself but you're almost always better off focusing on your melee combat.

I have simplified and streamlined the relevant rule in my campaign.

When you fire into melee (and care about not hitting your friend) you take a -2d penalty to the attack, but a miss stays a miss.

You can elect to fire indiscriminately (attack at no penalty) if you're prepared for a miss hitting a friend (selected randomly).

So the changes compared to the rules as written are:
* the penalty for shooting into melee is not -1. It is -2d (or no penalty at all, if you fire indiscriminately).
* the risk of hitting someone else on a miss is not 50%. It is no risk at all (or 100% if you fire indiscriminately).
* the risk of hitting a friend (as opposed to just another monster) is not depending on the nature of the melee. It is no risk at all (or 100% if you fire indiscriminately).

The part where a miss always hits a friend might surprise you. It is of course there to prevent the cheese where you fire into a mob of only monsters; where you would happily transform a miss into hitting any other monster. The rule simply focuses on the case where there is risk of friendly fire: either take the -2d or have any miss hit your friend, simple.

Remember, thieves are among the most likely users of missile fire, and they can easily transform most misses (that would otherwise hit their friends) into hits, neatly sidestepping the worst impact of this rule.

It works very well, and my players are happy I have re-enabled missile fire as a thing a hero can do on a regular basis even inside dungeons.