Targeting cone attacks

[Gnome]

On targeting cone attacks, Basic 413 says:
"Once you know the target point, imagine (or trace on a battle map) a line between the attacker and that point. The cone spreads to either side of this line, out to its maximum range."

Simple question: Is there ever any reason to aim at a point more than two yards away? As long as you choose a point directly between yourself and your foe, the cone will go through the foe's hex, correct? Given that targeting a hex is already +4, this would seem to make to-hit rolls for cone attacks fairly irrelevant. Am I missing something?

[RyanW]

I don't have my books handy, but the way I'd do it off the top of my head is roll to hit the target, but use the larger SM of the target or the cone at that range (most of the time, the cone should get the SM boost for being a blocky target). If the cone is ten yards wide, you only have to "hit" within five yards of the target. But it's no easier to hit than to hit a ten yard target with a narrow beam.

[Peter V. Dell'Orto]

Originally Posted by Gnome

Simple question: Is there ever any reason to aim at a point more than two yards away?

Good question. It seems like, if you're firing level with your target, all you need to do is point in the general direction you want in order to clip the target. I've run very few cone attacks in 4e so I am still brushing up on them myself.

Originally Posted by Gnome

Given that targeting a hex is already +4, this would seem to make to-hit rolls for cone attacks fairly irrelevant. Am I missing something?

That +4 is for targeting the ground, according to pg. 414. Great for an area attack, terrible for a cone, especially if you're blasting the ground 2 yards in from of you, short of your target. If you want it to go out to maximum range that's not helpful. It's handy for top-down dragon breath, I suppose, but they'd need have more range penalties.

[Langy]

Originally Posted by Toadkiller_Dog

That +4 is for targeting the ground, according to pg. 414. Great for an area attack, terrible for a cone, especially if you're blasting the ground 2 yards in from of you, short of your target. If you want it to go out to maximum range that's not helpful. It's handy for top-down dragon breath, I suppose, but they'd need have more range penalties.

That's incorrect. It's specifically for targeting the hex, not the ground; this is evident in the fact that this rule is used to target airburst warheads, which obviously do not hit the ground.

[Peter V. Dell'Orto]

Originally Posted by Langy

That's incorrect. It's specifically for targeting the hex, not the ground; this is evident in the fact that this rule is used to target airburst warheads, which obviously do not hit the ground.

So then why do only high-tech proximity fused airburst shells get a +4, others a +3, and +1 versus flying targets? If merely aiming at a hex, regardless of where it is, is a +4, they should all get a +4, but they don't.

So it seems to me that the +4 isn't for targeting any hex, any time, but targeting some hexes, sometimes.

[Peter V. Dell'Orto]

It occurs to me that the variation in airburst hit bonuses can be due to wonky fuses not always going off there they should, and hence getting scatter from missing to simulate them going off early or late.

But then question is, is it a +4 for "you only need to get close with these, making the area of your target effectively larger" or +4 for "you are aiming for a specific hex of air." If it's the latter, if you can line up your cone with the target so it'll continue through a hex, you should do so, claim a +4 for aiming at the hex, and make that hex as close as possible.

Which means cones are the best damn anti-aircraft attacks ever, in a way - all you need to do is ensure your cone intersects with your target on your turn, no matter how fast it's going, and make an Innate Attack+4 roll to hit it.

It does seem to make cones really, really accurate, and leads me to think I must be missing something in the rules. Like I said, I haven't had them come up often.

[ericthered]

I'd personally rule that the +4 for the hex and the size bonus of the cone are mutually exclusive: they're both based on a larger target, and it really doesn't make sense for them to stack.

[Langy]

Originally Posted by ericthered

I'd personally rule that the +4 for the hex and the size bonus of the cone are mutually exclusive: they're both based on a larger target, and it really doesn't make sense for them to stack.

The 'bonus to hit based on size of the cone' rule is a houserule; it isn't in the books at all.

In any case, targeting a hex close by won't typically work for hitting a far-away target unless your cone's maximum width is *really* big. This is because targeting that hex should get the cone heading straight through that hexes center - and it'll be pretty rare for a target to be directly down the hex line from you. This also only matters in tactical combat using hex maps, and is an artifact of using hexes.

To better model how difficult it is to hit something with a cone, do what was mentioned upthread - base the SM of the target on the greater of the target's SM and the cone's SM (with the cone's SM being two greater than that listed on the Speed/Range table at its width at the range the target is to be hit; the +2 is due to being circular-shaped). And yeah, don't include the +4 to hit a hex rule, as that's included in the SM rule mentioned here.

[Peter V. Dell'Orto]

Originally Posted by Langy

In any case, targeting a hex close by won't typically work for hitting a far-away target unless your cone's maximum width is *really* big. This is because targeting that hex should get the cone heading straight through that hexes center - and it'll be pretty rare for a target to be directly down the hex line from you. This also only matters in tactical combat using hex maps, and is an artifact of using hexes.

I'm not sure that's true - you'd just have to pick the correct hex to ensure the straight-line extension of your cone overlaps the enemy's hex. It won't always be 2 hexes or less, I suppose, but I'm not seeing how it won't be closer to you than your actual target.

Even that is easier without a hex map because they you just need to line up the center of your cone with your opponent, and pick an "aim" point that is extremely close to you but still puts the end of the cone across the target.

I just keep thinking of minis games I'd played with wide-area cone-shaped attacks. You'd put down a physical cone and every mini it touched took damage (or got attacked, depending on the nature of the cone - gout of flame vs., say, canister rounds). It sounds like, by the RAW, this is how you'd play a cone - point it the right way, and you hit everything between you and the maximum range that's within the covered area.

[Langy]

Originally Posted by Toadkiller_Dog

I'm not sure that's true - you'd just have to pick the correct hex to ensure the straight-line extension of your cone overlaps the enemy's hex. It won't always be 2 hexes or less, I suppose, but I'm not seeing how it won't be closer to you than your actual target.

Even that is easier without a hex map because they you just need to line up the center of your cone with your opponent, and pick an "aim" point that is extremely close to you but still puts the end of the cone across the target.

I just keep thinking of minis games I'd played with wide-area cone-shaped attacks. You'd put down a physical cone and every mini it touched took damage (or got attacked, depending on the nature of the cone - gout of flame vs., say, canister rounds). It sounds like, by the RAW, this is how you'd play a cone - point it the right way, and you hit everything between you and the maximum range that's within the covered area.

That's about right - but, as mentioned, that only works for games that utilize tactical battlemaps.

Real-life people don't have such battlemaps to work off of, so they don't have perfect rangefinding/etc and can't be absolutely certain that someone would get hit properly like that. So just don't allow doing it that way - it's not how they'd operate without the battlemap, so that's not how they're allowed to operate at all.