Alternative to AOO when using ranged ability in melee

Not sure if this has been something that has been gone over at length before (and im sure it is) but i wanted to hear peoples thoughts on a house rule i've been running with next. My players enjoy the tactical element of combat with miniatures and to date 4e has been their favourite edition for this reason, While 4e isn't my favourite for several reason its by far the 'nicest' designed game and introduced a number of exceptionally solid game mechanics that im glad to be seeing brought across to next.

One that my players are missing is the AOO on creatures performing ranged actions in melee, not wanting to houserule the whole AOO system I opted for a compromise and ruled that all Ranged attacks made within 5ft of an enemy are made with disadvantage. So far this has worked really well and hasn't caused any boggin down in combat as its nice and light, hasn't changed anyones damage output significantly and has brought back a more 'tactical' feel for the players. 
This actually was the rule a few packets ago. I am not sure why it was removed. Also, there used to be a Dexterity DC 10 check for casting spells, but that too was removed.

Unlike other editions, 5e requires a feat to shift / 5-ft-move. Unless surrounded or pushed against the wall, a shift would let you escape and make a ranged/spell attack without penalty. If I had to guess, they're waiting to create more elaborate grid rules in a later pack.
Sounds fair to me.
I would be concerned for those that do both melee and ranged (like a cleric), but if it works for your table, go for it.
Viva La "what ever version of D&D you are playing right now!"
Sounds fair to me.
I would be concerned for those that do both melee and ranged (like a cleric), but if it works for your table, go for it.

As its disadvantage (and not an attack) it doesn't feel too much like a penalty and more 'less chance of sucess' if that makes sense. In earlier editions you would take direct damage and/or spend an age working out the AoO rules - with this houserule its very much more a case of 'less than optimal situation' if someone attemps a ranged action whithout unbalancing the already precarious monsters/martial damage maths.

My only real concern is that i shouldn't really be houseruling a playtest, to stick to the rules as intended - however in this one area i feel narrative logic falls over if there's nothing discouraging ranged actions in melee.

I joined the playtest after that rule was removed but would like to try it out anyway. Can someone post the text of the rule here? And was it only ranged weapon attacks or also magic attacks?
I, too, was perturbed when disadvantage for using a missile weapon within reach of a melee enemy disappeared from the packets. In my games, I find it critical to have that in place for ranged attacks of any kind (including ranged spell attacks that involve an attack roll). Otherwise, the players severely abuse their ranged attacks and many of them never equip melee weapons at all.
We kept that (house)rule with my playtest group since most of my friends liked it.

We also tried a variant rule that included when any non-touch spells is cast.

Opportunity Attacks: If a hostile creature that you can see moves out of your reach, make a ranged attack or cast a non-touch spell while adjacent to you, you can use your reaction to make a melee attack against that creature. This attack is called an opportunity attack. The attack interrupts the creature’s movement or action, occurring right before the creature performs it.

Sign In to post comments