ShirtlessOBrien wrote:Everything you do to soften the restriction on firing into melee benefits ranged attackers on both sides compared to melee combatants on both sides.
I disagree. I think this benefits melee fighters far more than ranged fighters.
Let's take a simplified example. Anton is fighting a technodemon in melee. Aiden is across a chasm and chooses to fire at the technodemon. For the purposes of this example, nobody misses their attacks.
Status Quo: Aiden fires every round and has an equal chance of hitting Anton and the technodemon on an odd die roll. Statistically, Aiden hits the technodemon every 3 in every 4 rounds. The remaining rounds are spent injuring Anton, who curses and spends Possibilities to soak.
Proposed House Rule: Aiden aims first and then fires. He hits the technodemon 1 in every 2 rounds, which is 33% drop in efficiency. Anton, meanwhile, gets to dedicate all his Possibilities to staying alive and pummeling the technodemon.
It also makes more narrative sense. Consider another scenario:
Status Quo: Aiden aims and fires every other round. He has a 25% chance of hitting Anton. Because Aiden was aiming for the technodemon, whenever he hits Anton, he almost assuredly rolls an extra bonus die to damage from the +4 to hit. On top of that, Aiden would hit the technodemon 3 out of every 8 rounds. Less damage to the technodemon and more damage to Anton make the aim action less useful here. Granted, this stems from another pain point of being more skilled means you better hurt your teammates, but that's a different house rule to consider.