Would you house rule prone x-bow attack = not disadvantage?

[Vintrastorm]

One of the benefits of a crossbow vs. a bow/sling etc would be that they are easier to fire wile prone, I believe.

Would you house rule that a character attacking from prone with a crossbow would not get disadvantage?

[Daishain]

Depends. Are we talking about our shooter hidden in a bush in a ready position with the xbow? In that case I would not only eliminate disadvantage, but give him a small bonus to hit.

Or are we talking about our shooter having been knocked flat on his ass a moment ago, is likely out of breath and in an awkward position? In that case, no. Unless we're talking about a hand crossbow, its a heavy and fairly awkward piece of junk that needs a steady hand to aim properly.

[SpawnOfMorbo]

Yeah, I wouldn't give disadvantage for a prone X-Bow shooter.

In all honesty the stability would probably make you a better shot.

I would say no disadvantage and if you buy a sniper stand you get advantage with it while shooting x-bow prone.

[D.U.P.A.]

If the shooter is voluntarily going prone (and preferably using all his movement instead of half), then I wouldn't rule as a disadvantage.

However complications may arise when wanting to reload the crossbow, but you have plenty reload methods.

[SpawnOfMorbo]

By game rules there is not difference between voluntarily going prone and being knocked prone.

Just like there is no facing (at least in the base rules).

Please don't add a level of DM jerk to this. If the character gets knocked prone then they can still just position or face themselves the way they need to to fire correctly.

This is just asking for trouble and will be as if you are picking on that specific player just for the sake of it.

[MaxWilson]

Sure. Prone is fine. (Supine is not.)

[Tvtyrant]

This is just asking for trouble and will be as if you are picking on that specific player just for the sake of it.

Or as if you are using prone as a relevant status condition, instead of simply making it into a buff. This house rule basically inverts the purpose of prone as a status.

Seriously, giving them a buff and then claiming that if you don't give them that houseruled buff you are picking on them really leaves no room here. Under that circumstance I wouldn't grant it to anyone.

[Jacob.Tyr]

Hadn't considered this before, but my off-the-cuff ruling would be:

If you go prone to shoot better- Advantage

If you were just knocked on your ass- Disadvantage

If you were knocked down, but have since moved some quantity- Advantage granted, since I'm fine with assuming that at some point in your movement you stopped in a prone shooting position before you tried to fire.

[SpawnOfMorbo]

Or as if you are using prone as a relevant status condition, instead of simply making it into a buff. This house rule basically inverts the purpose of prone as a status.

Seriously, giving them a buff and then claiming that if you don't give them that houseruled buff you are picking on them really leaves no room here. Under that circumstance I wouldn't grant it to anyone.

Don't knock a guy prone if they have a crossbow, pretty simple. That's one more thing that helps a crossbow over the bow. They need the help as is.

Giving everyone a huge houserule penalty that uses rules that don't effect any other part of the game (facing) just because crossbows can behlnifit from it is pretty jerkish.

Besides as part of their action they get to aim, which because facing doesn't exist, they can maneuver into a position to fire the cross bow.

Mage: Grease
Archer: Falls

Archer: On the ground, flips over dramatically and shoots the mage saying "It's just been revoked" even if that line isn't relevant.

(Peter Griffin)

Dropping prone already has a penalty of costing half movement to get up so that crossbow prone shooter will be hard pressed to get away. Plus if an enemy gets up on them then they will get advantage on attacks against the archer.

You don't have to give them advantage for being on the ground but if you do don't turn around and screw them over, why allow something if you are just going to jerk around and essentially take it away?

If you don't like something don't allow it to begin with instead of making a million little bull crap add one.

[charcoalninja]

I would go a step further and reverse it. Being prone gives a crossbow user advantage. The difference in ones ability to fire a crossbow or firearm in the prone position vs any other is in reality THAT big of a difference. You 100% should not be firing at disadvantage with a crossbow while prone.

[Tvtyrant]

Don't knock a guy prone if they have a crossbow, pretty simple. That's one more thing that helps a crossbow over the bow. They need the help as is.

Giving everyone a huge houserule penalty that uses rules that don't effect any other part of the game (facing) just because crossbows can behlnifit from it is pretty jerkish.

Besides as part of their action they get to aim, which because facing doesn't exist, they can maneuver into a position to fire the cross bow.

Mage: Grease
Archer: Falls

Archer: On the ground, flips over dramatically and shoots the mage saying "It's just been revoked" even if that line isn't relevant.

(Peter Griffin)

Dropping prone already has a penalty of costing half movement to get up so that crossbow prone shooter will be hard pressed to get away. Plus if an enemy gets up on them then they will get advantage on attacks against the archer.

You don't have to give them advantage for being on the ground but if you do don't turn around and screw them over, why allow something if you are just going to jerk around and essentially take it away?

If you don't like something don't allow it to begin with instead of making a million little bull crap add one.
Argument for not allowing it: Gameism
Argument for allowing it: Realism
Argument for allowing it only part of the time: Realism
Argument for allowing it all of the time: Gameism
The crossbow archer benefits from this rule some of the time and not others. They get no benefit at all if it is not allowed, and allowing it all of the time contradicts the arguments made to allow it in the first place.

I'm in favor of giving them a benefit they wouldn't normally get. Putting limits on this benefit is not jerking them around, it is adhering to a philosophy which would allow them to gain any benefit from it at all. The archer, whether crossbow or bow, is also the archetype least effected by movement. So arguing that they lose movement by standing up is irrelevant, they are already the least effected by being knocked prone.

[SpawnOfMorbo]

Argument for not allowing it: Gameism
Argument for allowing it: Realism
Argument for allowing it only part of the time: Realism
Argument for allowing it all of the time: Gameism
The crossbow archer benefits from this rule some of the time and not others. They get no benefit at all if it is not allowed, and allowing it all of the time contradicts the arguments made to allow it in the first place.

I'm in favor of giving them a benefit they wouldn't normally get. Putting limits on this benefit is not jerking them around, it is adhering to a philosophy which would allow them to gain any benefit from it at all. The archer, whether crossbow or bow, is also the archetype least effected by movement. So arguing that they lose movement by standing up is irrelevant, they are already the least effected by being knocked prone.

Actually, with a half decent DM, Archers move more than other classes.

If the DM is going to ignore you then yeah, you can stand back and plunk enemies left and right. But if the DM uses the terrain or idk a little thing called basic tactics then tour archer should need to keep out of reach or move to hit easily.

Melee tends to be the ones whose movement is more limited by mosh pit fights. Not that it is the best tactics but a lot if weaker enemies ganging up on one creature at a time works wonders. So when the fighter kills the first goblin there will most likely be another goblin close by.

Edit for clarity

[cobaltstarfire]

Sure. Prone is fine. (Supine is not.)

This.

Also really situational. If you just got knocked down, disadvantage. If you are willingly on your stomach for stability ect I'd probably actually give you an advantage to the pew pew part.

If an enemy notices you and runs up to try and hit you though they'd be getting an advantage though.

[Vogonjeltz]

Would you house rule prone x-bow attack = not disadvantage?

In general, no. Being prone restricts the shooters movement. While it might be advantageous in providing stability to steady the shot (reducing misses owing to sway), this advantage is reduced or negated by the inability to adjust the shot as quickly as someone who is standing.

In D&D combat scenarios, this translates to the character having more difficulty adjusting their shot, while prone, in response to enemy movement.

[Vintrastorm]

Thank you for the answers. It's an interesting read.

I'd like to point out that somewhere along the line (at least for some posters) being prone went from not getting disadvantage to getting advantage, and that's a huge difference. (And not exactly what I was asking about.) So now it seems we have two takes on it. :smallsmile:

I believe that I would personally be more fine with ruling that you don't get disadvantage rather than that you get advantage. If you are forced down odds are that it will most often not be in your turn and that you will not get attacks with your x-bow during your others turn by using your reaction. And once it's your turn I'd have no problem with the character switching from an awkward "oh, no, someone tripped me and now I'm lying here awkwardly"-position to a "now I've turned around and have a better shot"-position.

[Galen]

"Crossbows can be used while prone with no disadvantage" is a simple, concise, fair, and even quite realistic house rule. That's something I can easily see and agree with.

Any further modifications (such as the "advantage if you go prone intentionally, disadvantage if not" notion) is just needless rule minutia that adds absolutely nothing to the game.

[charcoalninja]

"Crossbows can be used while prone with no disadvantage" is a simple, concise, fair, and even quite realistic house rule. That's something I can easily see and agree with.

Any further modifications (such as the "advantage if you go prone intentionally, disadvantage if not" notion) is just needless rule minutia that adds absolutely nothing to the game.

I'd say that it adds a significat mechanical interplay for all crossbow characters, especially rogue crossbow snipers, in addition to aiding in verisimilatude for the mode of combat and opening up meaningful tactical choices for crossbow characters (swapping mobility for accuracy) so I completely disagree that it "adds nothing to the game".

[Rummy]

I'd say that it adds a significat mechanical interplay for all crossbow characters, especially rogue crossbow snipers, in addition to aiding in verisimilatude for the mode of combat and opening up meaningful tactical choices for crossbow characters (swapping mobility for accuracy) so I completely disagree that it "adds nothing to the game".

It's just too beneficial. No disadvantage is one thing, but giving advantage is too good for rogues.

[AugustNights]

"Crossbows can be used while prone with no disadvantage" is a simple, concise, fair, and even quite realistic house rule.

This is how I've been running my games.

[D.U.P.A.]

I wouldn't give advantage, because that's a huge bonus, but the archer already grants disadvantage to incoming ranged attacks, which is quite a bonus, while for melee of course doesn't make sense being prone.

[The Dolman]

Personally, I wouldn't give advantage, but if you're set on giving crossbow users advantage when prone, I would staple it on to crossbow expert. Something like you can willingly go prone as your entire move action to gain advantage on your crossbow attacks.