From my initial reading there isn't a prescribed number of Challenge Dice to assign for ranged attacks at the various Range Bands (i.e., Close, Medium, Long, and Extreme). The rule book states that all melee and ranged attacks start with one Challenge Die...but what if the ranged attack is at Long Range? The only hint at this is in the description for the Long Bow and the Hochland Long Rifle which both add a Challenge Die to fire a Extreme Range. So assuming there are no rules for extra Challenge Dice at Medium or Long Range it would seem to me that ranged attacks are at a clear advantage over melee attacks...given the number of maneuvers it takes to cover those distances.

Did I miss something in the rules about this?

Wolferine, I also didn't find something in the book.

I house ruled it this way:

Medium Range: +2 challenge dice
Long Range: +3 challenge

Shooting into Melee: on a miss and a margin of a Bane result other person engaged is hit. When dice shows Chaos Star -> critical

This game is really good an has a fun to play "game engine" but the rulebook lacks a lot clarity (hmm... ist this correct written? "Klarheit" in german).
I think I would have done it better , the text not the graphics

My approach is not so much as to assign challenge dice, as the rules seem to indicate that there are no additional challenge dice within range bands the weapon can reach, but rather to note the environment and work within the rules. In woods, medium range means a misfortune die, long range 2 dice (yes wood elf racial ability negates those); in a building/ruin etc. the location may have a notation "beyond medium range, characters do not have a line of site to each other (they're around a corner, in a different room)" etc. Similarly in any such terrain, beyond close range note that anyone (PC or creature) using Dodge active defence adds an extra misfortune die to foe's attack as they are assumed to be taking advantage of obstacles such as trees, pillars, etc.

These are all location-feature-based modifications.

Rob

The default difficulty for hitting with a ranged weapon is a single challenge die, up to the max range of the weapon, firing further than that range is not possible unless specifically stated in the weapon descrption (such as long rifle).

The max range of the weapon is effecitvely the distance to which that weapon is accurate, so be careful of adding in extra challenge dice for the furthest ranges.

Take the difference between pistol and longbow, all the rules are really stating is that a longbow can be used to accurately hit a target further away than pistol can. The pistol is limited to short range targets and cannot shot accurately further than that.

If you add challenge dice when the long bow is used to hit medium or long range targets, then you are effectively making that weapon less accurate over those ranges too, lessening its advantage over the pistol such that although it can be used at ranges other than short, its unlikely to actually hit anything anyway.

there are certainly situations where challenge dice could and should be added to the roll, but i personally wouldn't add them just because someone is shooting at a target further away; its just one challenge die, period.

Yep, no default penalty for firing at range and that is the advantage of a Long Bow over a Pistol. Agree that environmental effects can introduce Misfortune dice (but not Challenge dice) so that a strong wind might add 1 to shots at medium range and [bB] to shots at long, while gusts may add [bB] at medium and [bBB] at long. Rain may reduce visibility and intervening terrain may make shots more difficult (adding misfortune) or impossible due to lack of line of sight.

pumpkin said:

Ok. That makes sense what you wrote. But this induces a feeling that somethings or that there is a rule missing. I don't know.
I mean if a target has more distance it's harder to hit, or not? Doesn't matter if You use a Longbow or a Pistol.

This sommer I had some Olympic Bow lessons and it is harder to hit a smaller or farther away object then a big object in close range. Additionally there are also weather conditions which have influence (I had the experience that wind doesn't have influence with a Olympic Bow until it's a storm ).

I agree with Lautrer...just because a pistol is only effective at close and a bow is effective up to long (even extreme if you add challenge dice) doesn't negate the fact that shooting something at long ranges is difficult. Whether shooting with a gun or a bow the further away from something you are the harder it is to hit it...even if the conditions are perfect. As I understand misfortune die, they represent the difficulties/advantages generated by the environment...but not the difficulty of accomplishing a task, that is what challenge dice are for.

I still stand by my original statement, having the ability to shot something at medium, long, and even extreme ranges at the same challenge die difficulty, of a melee attack, is a HUGE advantage. Consider that it takes, 3 maneuvers to move from Extreme to Long, 2 maneuvers to move from Long to Medium, 1 maneuver to move from Medium to Close, and 1 maneuver to move from Close to Engaged...it would take someone only capable of melee attacks 7 maneuvers to be able to attack a character wielding a ranged weapon (that's 6 fatigue incurred if attempted in the same round...which would most likely make the character Fatigued and add Misfortune dice to any attack he/she would attempt to make). Assuming the person with the ranged weapon doesn't subsequently move, this just seems very unbalanced...especially from the stand point that a monster (goblin, skaven, etc.) with a bow could essentially do this to a PC wielding an axe and trying to attack the monster.

It just seems a bit unfair/unbalanced that the only way to balance ranged attacks with melee attacks is to hope there are intervening terrain pieces or environmental conditions to make it harder for someone to shoot at ranged; and thus avoiding the notion that it is harder to shoot things a great distances.

I appreciate the feedback that has ensued from this post, I think I will try adding a Challenge die for Medium and Long range bands (for a total of 2 Challenge dice) to seek a balance between melee and ranged. As someone posted and as stated in the rule book, the 1 Challenge die is the default difficulty...not the hard and fast only difficulty that can be assigned to an attack.

Lautrer said:

Lautrer said:

As a trained Archer I kinda know what I am talking about from a real life experience and would like to give some input as I love the Warhammer world and it's attempts to make a real life gritty world for us to play in.

For a skilled archer, or marksman of any kind, range doesn't really affect the shot. Yes it is more difficult when you start to shoot, but as you gain more experience, you learn very quickly how to adjust. I could shoot from 100 meters and hit the target very easily. Later you learn to shoot from 200 to 500 meters. In competition the target is made larger, but still the principals are the same for these distances, I agree with a challenge dice for extreme distance in these cases because you are still attempting to hit a small target, and it is still very possible to do, but at medium and long, no, it is too easy to still hit a medium sized target at those ranges.

Wind is the biggest problem for an archer where there is straight line of sight, but if they are skilled, then no more than a black dice. If an unskilled player attempted to shoot in a strong wind then you might want to look at a challenge dice. In our party, the Barber-Surgeon purchased a blunderbuss without having the Ballistic skill and 2 agility... He's the type that I would give more misfortune dice at different ranges, but a wood elf skilled and holding a bow, you would have to come up with a convincing argument for me to accept that he could not shoot into a target at any range.

The other factor to consider is movement. I'm trained to hit a stationary target with clear line of sight. But when hunting, shooting at a moving target through trees or other obstacles, then you add another level of difficulty. So as a GM you can add more misfortune dice if the beastie your ranged person is shooting at is moving erratically. Moving in a straight line doesn't count. They would need to 'perform a stunt' in my opinion to keep jinxing, dodging and moving in a manner that would prevent a ranged person from getting a good shoot off. This could assist melee chars to get into range without being peppered by arrows. In this case I would give the archer more misfortune dice to hit the target, but again, not challenge dice unless you are getting beyond 3~4 misfortune dice (and then I would just swap 3 blacks for 1 purple, sort of thing)

I agree with the others who have said to add misfortune dice for the environment. Not for range, at least not for chars that are trained in ballistic skill.

First of all, who says ranged attacks have to be balanced with Melee attacks? If you want to close with an archer across an open field, you have to accept that you may get hit a couple of times before you get to him. Hopefully, you're a better melee fighter once you do so that you make up for the advantages he enjoyed while you were at range. In most cases you may not even want to attempt to close with an archer across an open field. Do you have to engage him? Can you just go around? Can you get him to come after you so that you can lure him into an area with some terrain features that you can use for cover?

Stop trying to be gamist and thinking that melee fighters should be "balanced" with ranged fighters. If someone is shooting at you, you dive for cover, you don't think, "Good thing at this range it's harder for him to hit me. I should be able to run up to him before he kills me."

Lautrer said:

Of course it is more difficult to hit targets farther away in real life. But for me at least... this is a fantasy game and as such it is more important that it is a fast and fun game to play during combat. The more realism you want to add, the more rules you must add, and in the long run... the more rules you add the more a game tends to slow down and the fast pace gets lost.

If you worry about realism.. then there are far worse things than arrows being more difficult to shoot the further away targets are:

• Swords do much less damage against plate than a blunt weapon does.
• Almost all armors, and definetly the heavier ones (like plate and chain f.ex) would be obsolete, and people wouldn's wear/use them anymore... since blackpowder weapons have been invented and been around for quite a while now.
• Rapiers should really only exist if the game was realistic and people don't use heavier armors anymore. A rapier is f.ex. a worthless weapon against a person wearing plate. But it became the best melee weapon in the post blackpowder weapon era where people didnt wear armors anymore. In this enviroment.. rapier was far superior to swords, maces (making them virtually obsolete in this era, only used by people who couldn't afford getting this new weapon)
• So.. if we where going for hardcore realism. There would basically be no swords, no maces etc. The melee weapons of use would be rapiers and some offhands like the main gauge, blackpowder weapons, and noone would wear armors.

This is a fantasy game though, and with fun and simplicity in mind... some liberties have been taken when it comes to realism:

• Swords do as much damage as a mace against plate (Possible reason: Since specific rules for each armor type depending on if a weapon is crushing, slashing or piercing means more rules and more rules would make the game more complex and less fast paced than it is now).
• All weapons from different ERAs are used side by side (Possible reason: It is simply more FUN for the players to be able to choose between different types of weapons than to choose between rapier type A, rapier type B and... rapier of type C).
• People are still using armors (Possible reason: I'm guessing pretty much the same reason as for the one above. It's simply more fun for the players to chose between different types of armor. Removing amors from the game would be more realistic, but also.. less fun for alot of players who enjoy this part of a game)

The above are just me guessing the reasons. I don't presume to have any kind of knowledge about what the creators of the warhammer fantasy world had in mind when they decided these things, but i suspect the ideas of fun, the pace of the game, and not making things overly complicated are probably reasons why the warhammer fantasy setting isnt more realistic.

With this in mind, i have no problem whatsoever with the fact that the game doesnt apply penalties for shooting a longer ranges, since we left realism behind along time ago when the game chose fun (with different equipment choices etc) before realism. It is a fast paced fantasy game made to be fun for the players, not to be overly complicated and realistic. Although to some people the idea of fun is for a game to be realistic no matter if it makes a game complicated or slow to play... i think the warhammer setting probably isnt for them. Over and out.

Wolverine-X said:

Wolverine-X said:

OK, but think how "most" other games do ranges (including V1/V2) and then apply that to V3. Lets keep the numbers really simple and use some from V2 so say a close target is 8yrds away, a medium target 16yrds away and a long target 32yrds away, the actual numbers don't really matter.

8yrds equates to the normal range for a V2 pistol, so you wouldnt expect to recieve a penalty for trying to hit a target at that range. 32 yards equates to the normal range for a V2 longbow, so in V2 you wouldn't take a penalty for trying to hit someone with a longbow at that range (long range in V3) but with your house rule, you would.

I agree that hitting something at long range for the weapon being used c ould incur a penalty, but this is what the longbow being used at extreme range is trying to emulate in V3, but by simply putting penalties on for weapons used at the long range band per se, the rule simply punishes weapons that in other games could happily hit targets at that range without penalty.

I also agree that the ability to hit people from distance is a huge advantage compared to melee attacks, but that is also somewhat true of other games.

I just don't think adding challenge dice based on range regardless of weapon used is the way to fix it, but give your rule a go, it's your game, and let us know how it plays out.

Exactly Pumpkin. You should add misfortune dice only for range bands BEYOND the weapons normal range of effectiveness.

mac40k said:

Let's get something straight...I'm not trying to be a "gamist", whatever that is!?!

I simply asked if anyone had come across a rule regarding ranged attacks and the significant advantage that they have over melee. I'm a seasoned gm...19years across almost every game system fantasy or otherwise that you can imagine, including 2nd ed WH...and I'm looking for a way to make the game balanced. And for those that question balance, I'm not sure how many games you've ever gm'd but balance is a key to making a game enjoyable for all participants. It's not a matter of realism vs. fantasy, it's about trying to make the game enjoyable for those that I plan to run this for. The ambiguity and lightness of these rules clearly leave room for this type of interpretation.

I would agree with the principal that having a single challenge die penalty for ranged might suffice, if it weren't countered by the huge requirement for melee character to incur in getting to the ranged attacker. Not only are thy being shot at (I guess this is sort of par for the course), but the limitations to movement makes it seem like the melee characters are slogging through waist deep mud...incurring a Fatigue for every maneuver beyond the freebie that they attempt. And we all know what a significant penalty Fatigue can have on a character once it starts stacking up.

As I said previously, I intend to try an additional Challenge die at Medium and Long ranges to see how this plays out. If it turns out to tip the scales to far in on direction then I'll try going with a single Challenge die and see how this plays out.

Thanks for the feedback!

The rules are supposed to be open-ended to a point. If there's no rule, use your imagination!

Wolverine-X said:

I will try it too in our next session.

gilfaim: you said it's easier when you get more experience. That's right. In gamer terms You get expert dices. But, IMO, for two guys with the same experience and same agility characteristic the one who is one increment nearer to the target has a greater chance to hit it.

I will allow to negate these additional challange dices for one stress point. Theres still the possibility for the Bowman to "Asset the Situation" which brings if successful one fatique and one stress back. That's what I sometimes see when Archers, after they shoot, stop for a second, take a deep breath and go on with it.

As I said I will try it out and tell you about our experience with it.

Greetings!

For whats it's worth I will not be implementing any range based difficulty for weapons at their effective range or less.

As has already been explained on several posts in this thread the range increments are the static element now not the modifiers.

So short range is the same distance no matter what ranged weapon you have, so the already in place additional challenge dice at extreme for the long bow and long rifle is beyond the normal range for these weapons so more difficult but not impossible.

Additional misfortune dice might be added due to target actions, or environment but thats it.

I dont want any more complications as some action cards already add challenge dice to attackssuch as, Bullseye, Knockback and ***** in armour.

So to sum up. The question was asked if there were rules for range modifiers that were somehow missed. The (correct) answer from several people has been no, there are no such rules. So, further discussion about how to introduce range modifiers or what appropriate modifiers might be should take place in House Rules, not in Rules Questions. Asked and answered, let's move along.

Not closed. The game leaves it up to the GM to assign difficulty via challenge dice. For ranged combat - definitely hitting targets at longer ranges is more difficult. The target appears smaller as a matter of course (optics and physics).

For example: take shooting a military rifle on a range at 50 meters. You'd better believe it that it is FAR easier to hit that 50 meter target than it is to hit the 300 meter target with a rifle. ( I know from over 20 years experience at doing this -and I have scored expert several times). So - looking at pages 41 and 42 of the WHFRP3 main rulebook, a GM is within the rules (not house rules) to assign more challenge dice to firing a ranged weapon at a target in a longer range band.

IMO - There is too much leeway in using the same difficulty for close, medium, and long ranges. I think the earlier posters got it right when they suggested using close = 1d, medium - 2d, long = 3d (with some extreme weapons already adding a die for 4d: e.g., Hochland Long Rifle).

The game is open to GM interpretation but to say that adding challenge dice for greater ranges is a "house rule" seems to be contradicting the challenge rules.

Let me rephrase my answer. The original rules question had to do with the fact that the OP did not see any rules for increased difficulty for ranged attacks at different ranges and wanted to know if he had missed them. The answer is no. The rules do not have any default range "penalties". The FAQ states that the default challenge level for all Ranged Attacks is Easy (1d), but notes that the GM is the final arbiter of the task's challenge level and may adjust these to suit the story or the particular task at hand.

So, the original question was answered. There are no default penalties in the rulebook that the OP overlooked. I still believe that further discussion of assigning additional range penalties belongs in house rules, because there is no "correct" answer to the question since it's pretty much up to each GM to decide what is best for their game.

mac40k said:

Roger that. I'll have to try out the tests and see how it works. Just seemed to me that using a Hochland Long Rifle on a clear day at extreme range with no adverse environmental effects with only 2d challenge dice (default 1d for ranged plus an extra 1d challenge die for the Hochland at extreme range) would be way too easy. I'll let it rest. Thanks for your clarification. Love the game and can't wait to try it out more.

I tested this issue by playing through a few simple combat scenarios, using some ranged shot actions, and rolling some dice. What I found is that the system is just fine the way it is with the default 1 (1d) challenge die used for ranged attacks. The reason for this is that many actions are designed to increase the difficulty when you try for a longer ranged shot or attempt trick shots. As was ealier discussed, the black dice can be used to add negative factors without a potentially unbalancing purple challenge die being added to the roll.