firing into water

[Anunnaki]

So, for arrows, it's probably a combined damage reduction/hit modifier situation?

Maybe keep it simple, something like:

Depth: Effect
Shallow (Up to 1 yard): No modifier
Medium: (Up to 2 yards): -2 Damage Step; +2 Cover modifier
Deep: (Up to 4 yards): -4 Damage Step; +4 Cover modifier
Really Deep (>4 yards): Can't be hit

Regards, James

[The_Gun_Nut]

It has to do with surface area of the impact. The larger the surface area, the more energy is transferred to the intercepting medium. A broadhead tipped arrow will penetrate more than a target (blunt) arrowhead, or a bullet.

The bullets that have conical shapes, and thus a smaller impact cross-section, tend to be supersonic, and thus break up more on impact.

EDIT: I'd have it penetrate deeper based upon the original range of the bow in question. Say, a number of feet equal to the short range of the weapon in hexes?

[Flagg]

I think this calls for a test! Who has a swimming pool, a bow, and a death wish?

[Anunnaki]

[thezombiekat]

[slayride]

Generally when my Player Characters were fighting in water in melee they received a -3 penalty to Attack and Damage Tests (This situation actually came up in the Prelude to War quest to raise one of the sunken airships in the river and they came under attack by water elementals summoned by a Theran Elementalist). Same situations with bows firing into the water against a submerged target.

[crzydevil]

There are about 20 things to take into consideration here. One thing that I didn't see mentioned is that most arrows meant to be fired into, or through, water (such as fishing arrows) don't have any fletching. This is because fletching causes arrows to turn in the water. This of course isn't really an issue unless the target is more than a couple of yards under the surface. You can make this as simple or as complex as you want it to be. Personally, I'd decide on the exact parameters and come up with a simple, but attainable, modifier. I think Slayride has it. Short and sweet.

[thezombiekat]

[ragbasti]

also the GM could just rule that at some point the opponent is just safe from the attack.
But up to that point the -3 seems fine to me - nice and simple and enough to make it noticable.

[Anunnaki]

Simple is better.

There are always going to be situations which aren't covered by rules, so keeping the game continuity rolling along is important.

I use the "Rule of Two" in my own games: simply, add/subtract 2 to/from the Difficulty Number and/or add/subtract 2 to/from the Effect Test result, as required.

This is applied on-the-fly as I adjudicate results. As the GM, I know what the DNs are and I record the results of Effect Tests (Damage Tests, and so on), therefore it's easy to keep things rolling along without getting hung up on lengthy conversations about types of missiles and penetration capabilities (similar thing applies to the other thread about cooperative actions, btw).

"Did that arrow hit the guy underwater? Yeah, you think so. Make a Damage Test just in case. You think there's blood in the water, but it's hard to tell with all the chaos going on around you and the poor lighting. How badly hurt do you think your opponent is? Want to spend a round making a Perception Test? No? OK."