Aiming points v 5.0

[2097]

Aim Points

This is my fifth take on making aiming rules for 5e. I just keep trying at this problem, it's like my white whale of house rules...

A big thank you♥ to all who helped criticize & point out problems with the third take on aiming rules (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?587313-Aiming-ranged-attacks-amp-charging-up-spells&p=23889660&viewfull=1#post23889660). I didn't post our fourth take here because it was kinda dependent on some other house rules we use so not as universally applicable to 5e as the third version was and as I hope this fifth version is (which is why I'm posting it here).

That third version, linked above, let you gain one aim point just by spending an action, and then later convert those aim points to extra attack rolls & extra damage; it was weird. Didn't work, for many reasons as pointed out by the fine people here!♥

This new version, you make aiming rolls when you aim and each aim point on an enemy can convert to a point of damage later.

Here is the proposal:

This is only for ammunition & thrown weapons for now, not spells, at least not yet. I'm gonna use "arrow" in the description but could just as easily be dagger, sling bullet, crossbow bolt etc.

How to Aim

To aim, make an aiming roll vs the enemy's AC using your weapon proficiency (so same modifier as you'd use for an attack) and if you make the roll, roll your weapons' damage expression (for example 1d8+3 or whatever) and note that you have that many aim points on that enemy as long as you're keeping your weapon aimed at that enemy. You can only have aim points on one enemy at a time, so you only need to keep track of one pool of aim points. Aiming costs the same action econ as attacks do, so if you have extra attack or multi attack you can aim more. You can also keep aiming over multiple turns to rack up the aim points.

Once you're aiming

Once you're aiming at an enemy, you can do one of two things: shoot, or frame trap. Either choice costs all of your aim points but neither costs any action econ; that means that it does not cost a main action, a reaction, or a bonus action and is as fast as a reaction.

Shoot: Let the arrow fly

You can send the arrow flying and it's becomes an attack that bypasses AC and deals as much damage as the aim points you spent.

Perfect if you know that you could wound or kill the enemy by letting go of the arrow: "I aim at the goblin [roll roll] Oh it only has 7 hp? I let my arrow fly, killing it!"

But you could also let the arrow go earlier even when it's not a killing shot.

Frame trap: Improve a friend's attack

When your friend succeeds with an attack roll vs the enemy's AC, and deals damage to that enemy, you can spend your aim points to add to that damage. Diegetically, if the enemy is trying to avoid being shot by you, it's also harder to avoid the sword attacks.

This makes aiming cool because it's your choice if you want to kill steal (the enemy just lost a bunch of HP dealing with the a sword attack and now here's a lethal arrow to finish the job) or team up (that sword is dangerous enough because of all the aim points you poured into it, so that the sword kills the enemy).

The damage type (for the purps of resistances, vulnerabilites & immunities) of the aim points is still the damage type of the weapon you're aiming with; a monster immune to piercing doesn't care if bows are aimed at it.

Oh, no, I lost track!

You can only keep your aim points as long as you're actively & actually aiming at that one particular enemy. About to lose track of the enemy? (Maybe you need to use both hands or the enemy is leaving or whatever.) Don't worry, you have chance to let the arrow fly if you wish; sure, maybe they can afford the hit points but at least it's gonna cost them something. And maybe you don't want to shoot (maybe you're aiming from hiding at a guard and the guard is leaving because there's a guard shift.... do you let go of the arrow or do you just give up on the aim points? It's your choice. Aiming is always good because it gives you choices.)

Is aiming mandatory?

No. For the most part, aiming has (or at least is intended to have) the same math as attacking. It just looks cooler & can conserve ammo!

There is also a circumstance where it's significantly more powerful to aim and that's when you're hidden. Obv the diegetical explanation of "frame trapping" doesn't always make sense there since there is no awareness over the "threat"; you could rule that you can't frame trap when aiming from hidden, only shoot. In my own game I'm gonna be OK with that, though; justifying it as your sword-swinging pal being able to fight knowing that you have her covered from your hiding spot.

If you're concerned that it's too powerful you can add the following rule:
You roll your stealth check with one d20 for each round you spent aiming and take the lowest of those dice for your roll.
[Which has the same math as having to succeed on a bunch of stealth checks in a row.]

[JNAProductions]

So, this seems completely and utterly useless, outside of one situation where it's broken, which you kinda point out.

But in combat, there's no difference between aiming and actually shooting, except aiming is worse since you can lose it without doing damage.
Outside of combat... Just hide, and aim, aim, aim, aim... Until you're dealing 100s of points of damage in one go. Even with requiring a Stealth check every round, a Rogue with Reliable Talent can hit a floor of 23 on their Stealth checks, meaning most people won't be able to detect them at all, and those that can must roll pretty damn well.

My main critique, though, is what is this supposed to add to the game?

[2097]

So, this seems completely and utterly useless

So it’s kind of a low-impact houserule is what I’m hearing; doesn’t mess the game up too much. That’s good!


But in combat, there’s no difference between aiming and actually shooting, except aiming is worse since you can lose it without doing damage.

Not really because if you’re just about to lose it you can shoot then. (This is a big difference from the last version of the aim points which sucked because of this, and/or was overly generous which how easy it was to keep your aim.)


Outside of combat… Just hide, and aim, aim, aim, aim… Until you’re dealing 100s of points of damage in one go. Even with requiring a Stealth check every round, a Rogue with Reliable Talent can hit a floor of 23 on their Stealth checks, meaning most people won’t be able to detect them at all, and those that can must roll pretty damn well.

But not a big difference between a rogue shooting → rehiding-with-cunning-action → shooting → rehiding etc, right? The obv diff is with the latter the target can get the hell out of the house which… is why it would be dumb to be shooting → rehiding → shooting → rehiding etc in the first place so we are solving something that I want to exist in the game that didn’t really exist before. Assassination, or seriously threatening someone at gun point etc.

(Oh also magical ammunition becomes really buffed which as far as I’m concerned is a big plus!)


My main critique, though, is what is this supposed to add to the game?

A couple of things.

First of all, and the reason I keep trying to cook up a good rule for this, I really want the trope of a legendary shot. In our first 5e campaign back in 2014, they were fighting a green dragon and the archer character’s player described his shot so intensively & vividly and then in the mechanics it was just such a pointless sigh in the wind, leaving the green dragon laughing cruelly and that player quitting D&D.

Second of all, it affects the flow of the game, how we narrate what the players and monsters actually do.

If hit points are fatigue / divine luck / fate / hope points, narrating a successful bow-vs-AC roll becomes weird. You shoot them for 11 damage..? But they are still alive? In fact they have 89 hit points left? Uhh…

In my last thread Mellack pointed out that I was primarily having a visualization problem (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=23892620&postcount=29) rather than a mechanical problem. Which, well, that was spot on. So I consulted with some other DMs and I got a really cool tip (from a guy named Paul_T on another forum) that we’ve been using in our game for several sessions now and it works awesomely.

That tip was to make hit points into points you spend to negate hits on you. Incoming attacks are in the form of lingering injuries, death save failures, or death outright. But you can spend the HP to negate the attack (spending less if you have resistance & more if you have vulnerability of course).

So in our game an archer might say “I shoot an arrow at the ogre; that’s an 11-damage!” and I can say “She spends 11 hit points to just swat that puny arrow aside as if were nothing!” Which makes the ogre look cool, which is all well and good, but we also want the archer PCs to look cool. Hence aiming.

For mêlée it’s so easy because every swing with the sword is a murder attempt and each parry’s clang in response has real weight to it. But with shooting it looks so ridiculous. This has been an issue we’ve had since we first started playing D&D but… no more♥

[Composer99]

I think there is a simpler solution to the situation that led your friend to quit playing D&D and in part motivate you to create this homebrew: you, as DM, use your power to narrate results to overrule the mechanics of hit points. If everyone at the table is sufficiently invested in the outcome of the "shot heard round the world", just let it happen, and let your Bard kill his Smaug. If you want the party archer to straight-up kill someone by putting an arrow through their eye, especially when you're not in combat, just say that's what happens.

Now, if you do want an "aiming" homebrew, to have some mechanical support for your solution, I think there are two ways you could go about it.

1) A special attack option for ranged weapons, not unlike how grapples and shoves are attack options for melee attacks. This option needs to be good enough to consider using, but not so good that it's a perennial replacement for attacks. This is the path you've taken with this homebrew. I feel confident it's not too strong (the one case noted by JNAProductions notwithstanding), which is well and good, but I'm not convinced it's good enough to consider using in place of a regular attack. If you're using it in your games, see how often your PCs are making use of it. That should give you a feel for whether it needs calibrating.

2) An ability you get from a build resource such as a feat. An advantage of this approach is that you're less constrained, unless you make it usable at will. If you have some sort of usage limit, such as once per short or long rest, you can easily justify having an ability that is a serious buff. You could get advantage on an attack roll plus a damage boost - something to make the shot feel great.

[2097]

Really good posts, btw, both of you, and I appreciate the feedback a lot.♥


I think there is a simpler solution to the situation that led your friend to quit playing D&D and in part motivate you to create this homebrew: you, as DM, use your power to narrate results to overrule the mechanics of hit points. If everyone at the table is sufficiently invested in the outcome of the "shot heard round the world", just let it happen, and let your Bard kill his Smaug. If you want the party archer to straight-up kill someone by putting an arrow through their eye, especially when you're not in combat, just say that's what happens.

Thats good advice but that's a pretty big if. In this case, it was only the one guy who wanted that Smaug-killing shot. The rest of us were invested in the mechanics & in the dragon being awesome.


1) A special attack option for ranged weapons, not unlike how grapples and shoves are attack options for melee attacks. This option needs to be good enough to consider using, but not so good that it's a perennial replacement for attacks. This is the path you've taken with this homebrew. I feel confident it's not too strong (the one case noted by JNAProductions notwithstanding), which is well and good, but I'm not convinced it's good enough to consider using in place of a regular attack.

Right; the fact that you conserve ammo might be enough to tip them over; and once they get used to it and start thinking it's cool.


If you're using it in your games, see how often your PCs are making use of it. That should give you a feel for whether it needs calibrating.

Yes! This is great!

I have experience with that method of calibration although it can backfire.
I noticed a few years ago that people weren't using the Dodge action. At all. We added the houserule that you can spend your upcoming main action (spend it in advance) to dodge. It still didn't see a lot of use so I thought it was fine. But once people got wise to it they started doing it all the time. And now people online seems to have gotten hep to the power of the dodge even without the house rule. But I can't really walk back on our houserule unless it becomes a significant problem. I don't think it is really, but it's something I'm keeping an eye out for.