PDA

View Full Version : Combat Distance: Another Poll without a Poll



Prometheus
2007-12-19, 09:07 PM
The DMG's (not SRD) standard spotting distance for an open plain is several hundred feet and actually not much less in areas with more mountains or wildnerness. My characters hate to start out a fight from 220 feet, so I stopped rolling and usually automatically peg it down to about 80 feet. Neither is the full spotting range a realistic time to start combat with a complete description of the target, but I don't know what spot checks should differentiate between being aware that something is there and knowing what it is. Especially with this forum's fixation with the capabilities of a spellcaster and also its penchant for house rules and homebrews. I was wondering "How do you guys handle combat distance?"

Exarch
2007-12-19, 09:22 PM
220 feet is actually a really short distance when you think about it. Much less than a football field. Archers should be able to reliably hit a target at that distance and all sorts of nasty things should happen.

Now, granted, in DnD most battles I take place in are either in buildings/dungeons or the DM declares it's 80 ft away for the sake of simplicity. Or because a spell says so. -.-

MrNexx
2007-12-19, 09:44 PM
I would keep in mind both your party's composition and your opponent's composition before deciding on encounter distance.

For example, a group that includes archers is probably going to be interested in starting combat quickly against a group that doesn't... being 200 feet away gives you a round while they're getting to you in which you can fill them full of sharp pointy sticks. Of course, this group without archers contains a wizard, he can fireball them from that range, ending the encounter.

nerulean
2007-12-19, 09:51 PM
Our combat distances are generally determined by the DM saying, "Okay, everyone stick your minis on the battlemap", and then him putting his minis down somewhere else. No one ever remembers to count squares until it's their turn, so it generally works quite well: it's fairly obvious to judge by eye "melee", "charging distance", "shooting distance" and "casting distance", but the specifics are always five feet one way or the other.

Prometheus
2007-12-19, 10:19 PM
I would keep in mind both your party's composition and your opponent's composition before deciding on encounter distance...
That's what so odd! My current party (of three) is ALL full spellcasters and/or archer builds! It's not like they are thinking its too easy, they just don't like the distance independent of other factors.

I still think that it is a problem that RAW never draws a line where unobscured sight meets a maximum or fails to recognize details that would be obvious 50 feet away. For example, a enlarged acid arrow can be shot from 800 feet +80/level for 3rd spell level, which is starting at 1200 feet (0.22 mile). I just don't know how to set a spot check DC for "is a medium, not small or large", "is just a wolf not a howler, barghest, or demon dog", "is dressed like a noblemen", "is raising a large cross not a halbert", etc... How do I trade off from the Spot from a distance mechanic and the Spot a fine detail mechanic? (Alternatively, how else do people do it?)

Matthew
2007-12-19, 10:40 PM
As I recall, the 3.5 DMG is missing some important information regarding spotting and encounter distance that the 3.0 DMG contains.

Hallavast
2007-12-19, 10:48 PM
How can you start a combat at 200 feet away? Unless you already know their an enemy (not likely unless you're in a war and they are flying the enemy flag or pillaging your home town or something), then how do you decide to start combat? You haven't even talked to them yet.

DM: "You spot what looks like ten mounted warriors riding at a brisk gallop towards your position from 220ft across the open plain. What do you guys do?"
PC1: "I paid for these masterwork arrows, and dammit their going into someone. I fire on the riders."
PC2: "I drop a fireball in the middle of their formation."
DM: ...:smallsigh: Ok roll dice... yeah. you slaughter them. Nice job. Now go play super smash bros or something while I go think up a new plot hook.

:smallconfused:

BobTheDog
2007-12-19, 10:52 PM
How can you start a combat at 200 feet away? Unless you already know their an enemy (not likely unless you're in a war and they are flying the enemy flag or pillaging your home town or something), then how do you decide to start combat? You haven't even talked to them yet.

DM: "You spot what looks like ten mounted warriors riding at a brisk gallop towards your position from 220ft across the open plain. What do you guys do?"
PC1: "I paid for these masterwork arrows, and dammit their going into someone. I fire on the riders."
PC2: "I drop a fireball in the middle of their formation."
DM: ...:smallsigh: Ok roll dice... yeah. you slaughter them. Nice job. Now go play super smash bros or something while I go think up a new plot hook.

:smallconfused:

Well, a group of riders can be a plot hook, but a pack of wolves usually can't.

Hallavast
2007-12-19, 10:56 PM
Well, a group of riders can be a plot hook, but a pack of wolves usually can't.

Why would you fire on a random pack of wolves?

MrNexx
2007-12-19, 11:04 PM
How can you start a combat at 200 feet away? Unless you already know their an enemy (not likely unless you're in a war and they are flying the enemy flag or pillaging your home town or something), then how do you decide to start combat? You haven't even talked to them yet.


It's not uncommon for someone to be an identifiable member of an enemy group. They're orcs, hobgoblins, etc. They're giants. You know that enemies are coming up this road and are preparing for them.

tyckspoon
2007-12-19, 11:10 PM
How can you start a combat at 200 feet away? Unless you already know their an enemy (not likely unless you're in a war and they are flying the enemy flag or pillaging your home town or something), then how do you decide to start combat? You haven't even talked to them yet.


It helps if they're carrying a flag or have recognizable (and bright) heraldry on their gear. Or if they're Large monsters; if you spot something big, hungry, and lethal 200 yards away, you're going to shoot the heck out of it. Or go a different direction. There are lots of things in the books that aren't worth talking to.

Hallavast
2007-12-19, 11:17 PM
It's not uncommon for someone to be an identifiable member of an enemy group. They're orcs, hobgoblins, etc. They're giants.

I've already agreed that obvious enemies are excluded from the question here. But how often does this actually occur? I suppose if you're playing a good old fashion hack n slash game where every race or species not listed in the player's handbook exists for the express purpose of dying at the hands of the PCs in the worst way imaginable, then my question wouldn't make much sense.

But in a game with any kind of actual RP content, good-or-neutral-aligned characters wouldn't start slaughtering things just because they are goblins or wolves or such. If there were a group of orcs marching towards my character, I would wait to see if they had anything to talk about before I decided to shoot things. If there were a pack of wolves traveling in the general direction of my visably healthy party of humanoids, I would know enough to simply let them veer away from us, because normal wolves aren't going to attack a group of people unless there is something compelling them.

I just don't know what kind of value the original question would hold outside a hack and slash game. But if that's the frame of reference we're working with, then don't pay any mind to what I said earlier, because I'm thinking of a different type of game.

MrNexx
2007-12-19, 11:30 PM
What if you're in a military campaign? Or there's military action going on, and you know that people of X race are going to be enemies? Or, to take it from the other side, what if you're the DM, and the ones attacking don't give a damn about this? They want the encounter to start farther away because they've tracked the PCs, and have a ton of Wands of Fireball?

Hallavast
2007-12-19, 11:47 PM
What if you're in a military campaign? Or there's military action going on, and you know that people of X race are going to be enemies?

K. Fine. If your characters are on the frontline of a war (like in the example I gave earlier as an exception), then this doesn't apply. If, however, the PCs are some kind of ambassadors or special agents, engaging in random fights on the open plain is usually a bad idea. Imagine:

PCs: "Er... sorry for killing 3 of your platoons without provocation on our way over here, General Jub Jub, but we've come to discuss a truce on behalf of our King..."
DM: *Slaps head*


Or, to take it from the other side, what if you're the DM, and the ones attacking don't give a damn about this? They want the encounter to start farther away because they've tracked the PCs, and have a ton of Wands of Fireball

Uh... if the DM plans on having something track down and blitzkrieg the party, does it really matter at what point the players want to start the combat? By this time it's pretty much out of their hands, yes?

brian c
2007-12-19, 11:59 PM
Why would you fire on a random pack of wolves?

Because they're flammable.

MrNexx
2007-12-20, 12:28 AM
K. Fine. If your characters are on the frontline of a war (like in the example I gave earlier as an exception), then this doesn't apply. If, however, the PCs are some kind of ambassadors or special agents, engaging in random fights on the open plain is usually a bad idea. Imagine:

PCs: "Er... sorry for killing 3 of your platoons without provocation on our way over here, General Jub Jub, but we've come to discuss a truce on behalf of our King..."
DM: *Slaps head*

Yes, but the fact that the encounter starts at 200 feet doesn't mean you have to start firing there. It means you have the option, and how you handle things is up to you. Do you open fire? Do you hide? Does your rogue hide, in case there's an ambush? Do you wave a white flag? How do you let them know that you're coming in peace through their pickets? There are a variety of options, and I don't appreciate your implication that people who start encounters at visual distance because it MIGHT result in combat are going to do nothing but hack and slash.


Uh... if the DM plans on having something track down and blitzkrieg the party, does it really matter at what point the players want to start the combat? By this time it's pretty much out of their hands, yes?

NPCs are characters, too. If the NPCs start the encounter with a sneak attack at 200 feet, then that's where the encounter starts.

Hallavast
2007-12-20, 12:42 AM
Yes, but the fact that the encounter starts at 200 feet doesn't mean you have to start firing there. It means you have the option, and how you handle things is up to you. Do you open fire? Do you hide? Does your rogue hide, in case there's an ambush? Do you wave a white flag? How do you let them know that you're coming in peace through their pickets? There are a variety of options, and I don't appreciate your implication that people who start encounters at visual distance because it MIGHT result in combat are going to do nothing but hack and slash.

I'm not saying that. The premise of the thread is combat distance. It was implied that starting combat at this distance was the question at heart. I will say this; people who start combat at visual distance are either foolish or are in the game for hack n slash. If you're talking starting encounters at this distance, well then of course it's more reasonable. I was questioning the reasoning behind arbitrarily starting combat at any given predetermined distance. As a DM ya gots to let the characters make the decision. That doesn't mean that's where the encounter starts though.



NPCs are characters, too. If the NPCs start the encounter with a sneak attack at 200 feet, then that's where the encounter starts.

Eh? NPCs are characters, sure. But they are also subject to the DM changing them in any way (s)he sees fit behind the scenes. So, if the DM wants to let the PCs know in no uncertain terms that combat is iminent, it wouldn't be so bad to drop a fireball on them from catapult range. But if the DM wants to let the characters choose the distance, then why are we even having this discussion?

TheOOB
2007-12-20, 12:43 AM
It only takes 2 rounds for someone with a 30ft movment speed to close 200 ft, it's not that far. Besides, the 200 ft. isn't when the combat starts, it's when you see them. If you want to close the distance to say, 80 ft before the battle starts, by all means, but thats a tactical decision you make after seeing them 200 ft away.

Talic
2007-12-20, 01:19 AM
With a 30' movement, a x4 run is 120', and a x5 is 150'. I've been known to sometimes start fights as far away as 600-800 feet, for creatures with exceptional sight.

Keep in mind, starting fights inside of 100 feet limits the following things:
Longbows, with an max range approaching 1000 feet. (exceeding it with composite)
Medium and long range spells (110' range minimum for the former and 440' minimum for the latter).
Any creature with exceptional vision (dragons, for instance).

MrNexx
2007-12-20, 01:26 AM
I'm not saying that. The premise of the thread is combat distance. It was implied that starting combat at this distance was the question at heart. I will say this; people who start combat at visual distance are either foolish or are in the game for hack n slash. If you're talking starting encounters at this distance, well then of course it's more reasonable. I was questioning the reasoning behind arbitrarily starting combat at any given predetermined distance. As a DM ya gots to let the characters make the decision. That doesn't mean that's where the encounter starts though.

Or they have a legitimate reason for starting combat before the other guy can engage them. You've already conceded that they exist, but you want to paint anyone else who says that they exist as being a hack and slasher.

If a DM starts combat at 200 feet, how does he do it? There's one of two methods... the enemy can attack, or he can say "Roll for initiative." Does being told to roll for initiative force a player into shooting someone? Or does it heighten the fact that this is a potentially dangerous situation? If the two groups start at 200 feet, roll for initiative, it may be that the DM is wanting a reaction order in case something goes down. It may be there is something else going on that doesn't directly require the characters to start shooting.

A DM arbitrarily starting combat at 200 feet may have a reason for it, beyond hack and slash.


Eh? NPCs are characters, sure. But they are also subject to the DM changing them in any way (s)he sees fit behind the scenes. So, if the DM wants to let the PCs know in no uncertain terms that combat is iminent, it wouldn't be so bad to drop a fireball on them from catapult range. But if the DM wants to let the characters choose the distance, then why are we even having this discussion?

Because combat can be started by either side. You're walking along, and an arrow lands in front of your feet. 200 feet away, people rise out of the tall grass and yell "I didn't have to miss." Combat MAY begin at any second... the encounter certainly has. The range is still 200 feet.

It is not always the appropriate distance to start an encounter; in a dungeon, the encounter may start at 5'. But it's not an inappropriate place to start an encounter, even one which may lead to combat, for non-hack-and-slash reasons.

Hallavast
2007-12-20, 01:42 AM
Or they have a legitimate reason for starting combat before the other guy can engage them. You've already conceded that they exist, but you want to paint anyone else who says that they exist as being a hack and slasher. Do you know what a concession is? I said (three or four times now) that except for A B and C type situations, people who do X are Y. Why do you insist that I am villifying people who do X because I'm ignoring situations A B or C?



If a DM starts combat at 200 feet, how does he do it? There's one of two methods... the enemy can attack, or he can say "Roll for initiative." Does being told to roll for initiative force a player into shooting someone? Or does it heighten the fact that this is a potentially dangerous situation? If the two groups start at 200 feet, roll for initiative, it may be that the DM is wanting a reaction order in case something goes down. It may be there is something else going on that doesn't directly require the characters to start shooting.
You can either say rolling for initiative is starting combat or it isn't. You can't say both. I say it isn't. And if the only purpose of it happens to be keeping a reaction order if something happens, the DM can roll Initiative in secret if need be, and play out the scenario without using the buzz word to heighten tension.




A DM arbitrarily starting combat at 200 feet may have a reason for it, beyond hack and slash. Then it isn't arbitrary.




Because combat can be started by either side. You're walking along, and an arrow lands in front of your feet. 200 feet away, people rise out of the tall grass and yell "I didn't have to miss." Combat MAY begin at any second... the encounter certainly has. The range is still 200 feet.

It is not always the appropriate distance to start an encounter; in a dungeon, the encounter may start at 5'. But it's not an inappropriate place to start an encounter, even one which may lead to combat, for non-hack-and-slash reasons.

So you are conceding that starting combat based on the situation is optimal. And starting a thread to ask when to start all my combats would be foolish of me. The OP is stating that the players don't want to start combat from so far off. Why is this an issue? Start combat when combat makes sense. Not when any monster in the manual labeled evil happens to come up on your 200' radar.

MrNexx
2007-12-20, 01:52 AM
So you are conceding that starting combat based on the situation is optimal. And starting a thread to ask when to start all my combats would be foolish of me. The OP is stating that the players don't want to start combat from so far off. Why is this an issue? Start combat when combat makes sense. Not when any monster in the manual labeled evil happens to come up on your 200' radar.

I've never said anything else. I've simply said that it was sometimes appropriate to start it at that 200' radar. And then you started arguing about it.

Hallavast
2007-12-20, 01:58 AM
I've never said anything else. I've simply said that it was sometimes appropriate to start it at that 200' radar. And then you started arguing about it.

OMG! That whole stupid argument was about an ill-addressed response... I originally was replying to the original question, not anything you posted before it. Then you had a problem with my tone and I disagreed with your particular diction... :smallannoyed:

Goodnight.

Talic
2007-12-20, 02:11 AM
My 2 cp.

Both of you seem to be saying the same thing, but butting heads over it. The RP buff is trying to subtly slander others for their willingness to attack things, and that's I think where the problem lies.

Keep in mind, at its heart, the rules for D&D are combat oriented. Diplomacy and bluff rules are contained on a total of one page. Alignment, motivation, and RP guidelines might get 4. Combat, magic, and the like get chapter upon chapter dedicated to them. The game is not a peaceful game.

On an open plain, encounters can start as far away as 6 miles. An encounter is simply when one side becomes aware of the other. A group of mounted humanoids rushing across the plains will kick up a dust cloud easily visible from miles. A campfire from that distance is easily visible, day or night, by smoke or light. Combat will almost never begin at distances over 300 yards however. The reason being, you need to be able to clearly identify what you're encountering.

Does this need dialogue? Not always. You can be relatively sure the oxen pulling a cart full of grain is likely not a hazard, but the orcs riding worgs 350 feet out, who seem to notice your party, and divert directly towards you at maximum movement? That's a good shot at combat, and more than a bit fuzzy on whether you should. Personally? I'd drop the lead worg. I interpret it as, at worst, an attack, and at best, an attempt at intimidation entering discussion, such as a demand for surrender. Either way, unacceptable.

Bear in mind, militaries have gotten in wars over simple misunderstandings, where one nervous person fired an arrow because he misread a situation. Doing that in D&D does not make you a bloodthirsty hack-n-slasher. The interpretation lies in the hands of the DM and the player, and nobody's perfect.

Dervag
2007-12-20, 02:52 AM
K. Fine. If your characters are on the frontline of a war (like in the example I gave earlier as an exception), then this doesn't apply. If, however, the PCs are some kind of ambassadors or special agents, engaging in random fights on the open plain is usually a bad idea. Imagine:

PCs: "Er... sorry for killing 3 of your platoons without provocation on our way over here, General Jub Jub, but we've come to discuss a truce on behalf of our King..."
DM: *Slaps head*Yeah. So good players are smart enough to know that just because they see something they shouldn't automatically shoot it. The question of encounter distance is still important. For example, let's say you're in bandit country and you see a group of armed men on horseback. If you saw them from a mile away, you might try to flee or set an ambush just in case they're hostile. If you see them 100 yards away it's too late for that; you have time to draw your weapons and shout "Friend or foe?" but that's about it.


Uh... if the DM plans on having something track down and blitzkrieg the party, does it really matter at what point the players want to start the combat? By this time it's pretty much out of their hands, yes?Well, if it's a huge fierce melee monster, they might be very happy to start the combat at long range rather than short range. Conversely, if it's a wizard they probably want to start at short range rather than long range.


I'm not saying that. The premise of the thread is combat distance. It was implied that starting combat at this distance was the question at heart.That's a very narrow interpretation.


Because combat can be started by either side. You're walking along, and an arrow lands in front of your feet. 200 feet away, people rise out of the tall grass and yell "I didn't have to miss." Combat MAY begin at any second... the encounter certainly has. The range is still 200 feet."So... you put down your bow and I put down my sword and we try and kill each other like civilized people?"


Do you know what a concession is? I said (three or four times now) that except for A B and C type situations, people who do X are Y. Why do you insist that I am villifying people who do X because I'm ignoring situations A B or C?Because "hack and slash" is commonly seen as a derogatory term. Likewise, it is derogatory to assert that another player is not roleplaying. When you do it frequently, it tends to overshadow your nuanced statement to the effect that "well, it's actually roleplaying and OK after all if you're in a war zone. But I still don't see why anyone would bother to have a defined long distance for opening combats unless they're just a bunch of hack-and-slashers who don't roleplay at all."

Prometheus
2007-12-20, 11:34 AM
In my campaigns monsters encountered while travel is a BIG part of the travel encounters, so it make sense for them to start "combat steps" to either attack, run, or brace as soon as they see a threat.

But I agree there certainly are moments where dialogue is key, so I guess a good guildline for anything not attacked on sight is the maximum range you can hear. I suppose the DC for hearing a shout is -10, and understanding is 0, and so the best Listener or Listen check can probably hear them at 150 feet, provided that they wish to communicate from that distance - so it shouldn't' be a problem for the cautious and the skeptical. Of course, bandits would probably want to be considerably closer before communicating their intentions but its all part of the game.

MrNexx
2007-12-20, 01:01 PM
OMG! That whole stupid argument was about an ill-addressed response... I originally was replying to the original question, not anything you posted before it. Then you had a problem with my tone and I disagreed with your particular diction... :smallannoyed:

Goodnight.

Oops. I'm certainly sorry for my part in this.

MrNexx
2007-12-20, 01:03 PM
"So... you put down your bow and I put down my sword and we try and kill each other like civilized people?"


"Frankly, I think the odds are slightly in your favor at hand fighting."

Curmudgeon
2007-12-20, 02:20 PM
How do you guys handle combat distance? Strictly by the 3.5 D&D rules, though you have to look in several places to find them all.

D&D 3.0 had distances at which encounters automatically started. D&D 3.5 removed almost all of those (only leaving automatic encounter starts for avalances and forest fires). So in D&D 3.5 no encounter starts until somebody succeeds on a Spot check.

It's a DC 0 check to Spot a Large object in plain sight. Each size increment adjusts this DC by 4. Each 10' of distance penalizes the Spot check by -1. A standard 2X spyglass will reduce effective distances by that magnification factor, and masterwork spyglasses will provide more magnification.

The terrain distance factors just pick distances at which there's no intervening cover to foil line of sight. For aerial encounters with clear skies the distance can be any distance; it's just a matter of waiting until somebody succeeds on their reactive Spot check. Outside of combat I use everybody's "take 10" Spot numbers, so I know at what distance the first Spot check will succeed; after that I adjust things downward, if necessary, if the terrain formulas (like 6d6 x 40' for Plains terrain: 240' - 1440') says there's intervening cover.

Reinboom
2007-12-20, 02:30 PM
I take the:
http://www.penpaperpixel.org/tools/d20encountercalculator.htm
Tool, note: the encountered thing at the bottom, and slightly adjust it.

Of course, this is only for spot checks. Not for starting an encounter.

The start of the encounter for high distances depends on the situation. On my normal Sunday games, the last one in fact, I started the main combat at around... 350 feet away. Why? Because the enemy decided "ok... I should be able to get a fireball in on the group now."
The enemy was a group of bounty hunters (for dead or alive reasons) sure of their target with a very organized "advantage first" mindset.

Other occasions, combats would start much closer.

Dervag
2007-12-20, 05:00 PM
In my campaigns monsters encountered while travel is a BIG part of the travel encounters, so it make sense for them to start "combat steps" to either attack, run, or brace as soon as they see a threat.

But I agree there certainly are moments where dialogue is key, so I guess a good guildline for anything not attacked on sight is the maximum range you can hear. I suppose the DC for hearing a shout is -10, and understanding is 0, and so the best Listener or Listen check can probably hear them at 150 feet, provided that they wish to communicate from that distance - so it shouldn't' be a problem for the cautious and the skeptical. Of course, bandits would probably want to be considerably closer before communicating their intentions but its all part of the game.What's the range increment for Listen?

There are a lot of people who can make themselves understood at the top of their lungs from very long distances.

Talic
2007-12-21, 01:11 AM
What's the range increment for Listen?

There are a lot of people who can make themselves understood at the top of their lungs from very long distances.

-1 per 10 feet. Thus, at 210-219 feet, you suffer a -20 penalty to listen. Assuming a human shouting is a DC -10, that means you have to make a DC 10 to hear. Accomplished by most people taking 10.

Dervag
2007-12-21, 01:35 AM
I think we need some way to link the range increment on Listen to the volume of the sound, the way I came up with a houserule to link the range increment on Spot to the size of the thing being spotted.

After all, you can hear a bolt of lightning from miles away. Even if you give the bolt a very negative base Listen DC (say, -2000), all that means is that it's perfectly audible out to (DC + 10)*10 feet, and practically impossible for any normal person to hear a few hundred feet beyond that. Which is so unrealistic it strains credulity.

A ten-foot range increment is all very well for something like a human voice, but it doesn't make sense for very small sounds (a twig snapping) or very loud sounds (a thunderbolt).