A ranged attack against a fighter with a shield.

The rules are a bit unclear how shield cover works. It specifically claims shield is NOT cover, then claims it is.

It sais multiple ranged attacks counts as an attack, but it's unupposed. Do the defender have to split his skill if he is shot?

Re-reading the "Ranged weapons" rules I didn't find anywhere that the shield is not cover; it says:
"the shield acts as “cover,” imposing a –5 modifier to the attacker’s skill".
Where's the "shield is not cover" part?

Since the roll is unopposed, the defender does not get to roll. So he cannot split or use his skill in any way against the ranged attack(s), be they 1, 2 or 100.
Note that for this reason the shield counts only as cover and never as armor against ranged weapons.

Roberto

Page 117 under “Cover” states: “…protected by a substantial protective covering (other than armor or a shield) imposes a -5 modifier to attacker’s weapon rolls. …//… Cover modifiers usually apply against ranged attacks, but a character in melle might … gain a cover modifier”

Page 118 under “Ranged Weapons” states: “All ranged attacks are made as unopposed rolls. If the target has a shield, he does not get an opposed roll, but the shield acts as “cover”, imposing a -5 modifier to the attacker’s skill.”

Page 118-119 under “Fighting multiple opponents” states: “Any number of missile armed men can shoot at a single target. …//… A knight can use his shield as many times in a round as he responds to an attack. Missiles shot at a target constitute a single attack, from arrows, bolts or rocks.”

What's interesting is the last part, where it claims that ranged attacks is a single attack.

Roberto already gave a good response, but just to clarify the cover bit...


KAP 5.1, p. 117:

"
COVER
A character who is partially protected by a substantial
protective covering (other than armor or a shield) imposes
a –5 modifier to attacker’s weapon rolls. For instance, a
knight standing behind the crenellation on a battlement is
much harder to hit than one standing in the open, and an
archer partly concealed behind a tree is a difficult target.
Cover modifiers usually apply against ranged attacks,
but a character in melee might, at the Gamemaster’s discre-
tion, gain a cover modifier.
"

However, it needs to be noted that the above is written for MELEE combat, too, and you do not get the shield as cover in melee.

KAP 5.1, p. 118:
"All ranged attacks are made as unopposed rolls. If the
target has a shield, he does not get an opposed roll, but
the shield acts as “cover,” imposing a –5 modifier to the
attacker’s skill."

Here we have the Ranged Attack rules, where the shield DOES act as cover, but ONLY against ranged attacks. Notice how the ranged attacks are unopposed, so the defender doesn't get a roll and hence it doesn't matter how many dozens of arrows are fired at him. Since the defender doesn't get to roll, he would never get a partial success and thus the extra armor from the shield. So the shield is instead used as cover, making it harder to hit the shield user past the shield, which makes sense.

Why don't we use shields as cover in Melee, then? Because in Pendragon, the attack and the defense are both coming from the same roll. So if you give Knight A -5 to skill because Knight B has a shield, then you will make it also much more likely that A fails to defend against B's strike, too. (Granted, there could be some justification for this, as shields are awesome in melee, but it would nerf the two-handed weapons even more; polearms are actually also awesome in melee, especially if the opponent has a short weapon and no shield. Besides, the +6 armor already makes shields pretty awesome in Pendragon.)

In conclusion, Pendragon Combat works fine and there is no need to fiddle with something that already works.

Page 118-119 under “Fighting multiple opponents” states: “Any number of missile armed men can shoot at a single target. …//… A knight can use his shield as many times in a round as he responds to an attack. Missiles shot at a target constitute a single attack, from arrows, bolts or rocks.”


A better wording would have been something like:
"Since all missile attacks are unopposed, the defender never splits or uses his skill to defend against them, but his shield acts as cover (-5 to each missile attack)."

Skill splitting doesn't matter when the attacks are unopposed.

What Morien said (much better than me).

Also, my take on "Missiles shot at a target constitute a single attack, from arrows, bolts or rocks" is that it's intended to be applied to other mechanics: for example, to calculate knockout, for the purpose of first aid / healing, and so on.

Roberto

Also, my take on "Missiles shot at a target constitute a single attack, from arrows, bolts or rocks" is that it's intended to be applied to other mechanics: for example, to calculate knockout, for the purpose of first aid / healing, and so on.


Interesting. I never read it to mean that. If the PK gets hit by 10 arrows, he doesn't take one 30d6 hit, but ten 3d6 hits, with armor protecting against each one and each one making a separate wound to be healed by First Aid. Also, he doesn't suddenly become airborne for having taken 100 points of knockdown damage; each of those 10 point arrow hits doesn't do more than make him flinch a bit, which again fits how it should actually work when being hit by multiple arrows.