Why the hate against archers?

[Skjaldbakka]

Why are there so many ways to shut down archers?

Wind Wall, Deflect Arrows, etc.?

I mean, there is a feat that just stops one ranged attack/rnd. Why isn't there a similar feat for melee attacks? Is it so much harder to parry than it is to deflect an arrow?

Just a random thought really . . .

Parry
prereqs: combat expertise
benefit: the same as deflect arrows, but against melee attacks, and requires that you be wielding a weapon or shield to block with.

[Closet_Skeleton]

Because while racking their brains for new spells and updating old spells, Wizards of the Coast developers get a bit narrow minded.

There's actually a lot of love for archers. There are dozens of archer Prcs and feats. It's just that magic was designed to have a counter for everything.

[Dr._Weird]

Be creative. Who cares if they've caught the arrow if it has a delayed blast fireball tied to it?

[Human Paragon 3]

Also, Archery is inherently stronger than melee attack. If you could deal the same amount of damage in a turn (or more, rapid shot, many shot) without placing yourself in danger of enemy retaliation, wouldn't you want to? Just look at the archery ranger vs. the TWF ranger.

And, as a wizard, wouldn't you want protection from arrows? Your fighter friend can't block everything, you know.

I think it's pretty balanced as is, thanks to attacks of opportunity and archery nerfing spells.

Also, like above poster stated, there are tons of cool archery buffs and prestiege classes.

[Leon]

Why are there so many ways to shut down archers?

Wind Wall, Deflect Arrows, etc.?

I mean, there is a feat that just stops one ranged attack/rnd. Why isn't there a similar feat for melee attacks? Is it so much harder to parry than it is to deflect an arrow?


Yup it stops a arrow, then the rest of your arrows hit the target, windwall is more of a problem but you get that - they by no means stop a archer from performing his role all the time

Two ways are not so many

[OverdrivePrime]

Why isn't there a similar feat for melee attacks?

Because stopping one arrow (even a +5 shocking burst bane arrow) isn't usually critical to the outcome of the game.

Stopping one melee attack often can be (frenzied berserker power attacking at -15 with a non-magical greataxe).

Arrow: 1d8+12+2d6+d6 damage is good, but not the end of all tomorrows.
Axe: 1d12+15+60 is quite likely the end of all tomorrows.

Negating a crit with the axe vs negating a crit with an arrow illustrates this even more.

[Skjaldbakka]

Except that alot of the ways to deal good damage with a bow don't rely on a high rate of fire, which is vulnerable to DR and energy resistance.

The way to get the best damage from archery tends to be making that one decisive shot (sneak attack, OotBI). Which can be negated completly be deflect arrows, as long as you are aware of the attacker.

Sure, you could stack a lot of +1d6 Xenergy type enchantments on an archery attack, and go for lots of attacks, but demons take your damage down to practically nill, with their host of energy resistances.


That being said, I probably wouldn't allow a Parry-like feat in a game.

However, lets say everyone got Parry and Deflect Arrows, and what-the-hell, lets say Iron Will/Great Fortitude/and Lightnign Reflexes, in stead of giving a bonus, instead gave an automatic successful save of thier type 1/rnd.

What would the game look like?

This is purely hypothetical at this point, so please don't respond with "wow thats totally broken, why would you ever do that? zOMG!".

[Fawsto]

I tend to believe taht archery, in terms... Sucks! At least when we arrive in teh 20ies.

Try Archer Vs. Tarrasque... Only a melee warrior with a pretty big weapon to deal damage to the Big T. (I am supressing the creative magical ways to fight it!)

[Matthew]

Parry
prereqs: combat expertise
benefit: the same as deflect arrows, but against melee attacks, and requires that you be wielding a weapon or shield to block with.

Heh, heh. I almost made that Feat, but it only works with Shields... Shield Block (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=43960). If you don't already know about Block Arrow, then you might want to add that to your list of ways to shut down Archers...

[Counterspin]

WOTC has a systemic interest in limiting the power of archers because of the way the full attack action works. Being able to take a full attack continuously throughout an encounter was a balance issue which WOTC adressed with certain spells which can dramatically curtail the power of archers, namely windwall.

I agree that deflect arrows is not really that impressive, as a side note.

[Person_Man]

Also, Archery is inherently stronger than melee attack. If you could deal the same amount of damage in a turn (or more, rapid shot, many shot) without placing yourself in danger of enemy retaliation, wouldn't you want to? Just look at the archery ranger vs. the TWF ranger.

Wrong.

Archery is inherently weaker then melee attacks, due to the existence of reach weapons, attacks of opportunity, and a wide variety of feats that benefit melee attacks, compared to the relatively small number of feats that benefit archery.

From a pure damage output, think about Power Attack, Leap Attack, Shock Trooper, Spirited Charge, Headlong Rush, Battle Jump, and a wide variety of other feats that scale well with levels. There is no equivalent for ranged attacks. Its also a lot easier to generate extra melee attacks, from Hold the Line, Karmic Strike, Snap-Kick, Whirling Frenzy, Robilar's Gambit, etc.

If you're concerned about defense as a melee combatant, use a reach weapon. With a moderate feat investment you can shut down most enemies who attack you. For example, use Knock-Down to hit every enemy who tries to approuch you Prone. Or use Evasive Reflexes and Hold the Line and/or Karmic Strike to simply step out of the way of oncoming enemies and/or full attacks. Or just have a high damage output and kill anyone who comes close to you (remember, Power Attack and Leap Attack bonuses last all round). Or you can use just Stand Still to make your enemy stop.

If you think ranged weapons are better then melee weapons, then your party is very poorly built.

[ZeroNumerous]

Try Archer Vs. Tarrasque... Only a melee warrior with a pretty big weapon to deal damage to the Big T.

Thats an entirely wrong argument for a completely different thread..

Honestly, the only possible way a ranged weapon matters is when faced with quantity versus quality. A handful of guys with Winged Boots and +5 Longbows are a deadly threat to anything not a fullcaster, and deadly to any caster without Wind Wall. A handful of guys with +5 greataxes? Web, Grease, Evard's Black Tentacles, etc.. None of them are really relevant anymore.

[OzymandiasVolt]

Making archery just as effective as melee makes melee useless. Everyone can just use full attacks from hundreds of feet away.

If you make melee as easily overcome as ranged attacks it has the same effect. No one would have any REASON to use melee if they can help it.

[MeklorIlavator]

Where are all these good archer Prestige classes?

Arcane Archer is acknowledged as junk, and the Order of the Bow Initiate makes you stay within 30 feet and does precision damage as a standard action, making it also a lackluster choice.

[Yechezkiel]

Related question: Deflect (or Snatch) Arrows vs. a Manyshot?

Mechanically, the entire Manyshot is negated but shouldn't it just be -1 arrow worth of dmg?

[dauphinous]

Archery is inherently weaker then melee attacks...
You forgot something. Archery uses ammunition. Which you can run out of. While you can have greater variety of DR overcoming weapons for less weight/encumbrance, you still run out of arrows at some point. Melee weapons don't run out.

[Yahzi]

Everyone seems to be overlooking another advantage of archery.

With melee, you can at most be the target of 20 or so attackers (completely surrounded by two layers, and the outside one has reach weapons).

With archery, you can easily be the target of hundreds of attackers.

D&D is supposed to be about heroes, not about crowds of peasants with longbows that kill everything in sight. (Unless you run it the way I do, in which case peasants FTW! :smallbiggrin: )

[MeklorIlavator]

Everyone seems to be overlooking another advantage of archery.

With melee, you can at most be the target of 20 or so attackers (completely surrounded by two layers, and the outside one has reach weapons).

With archery, you can easily be the target of hundreds of attackers.

D&D is supposed to be about heroes, not about crowds of peasants with longbows that kill everything in sight. (Unless you run it the way I do, in which case peasants FTW! :smallbiggrin: )

So, how does this make it unbalanced for the players? Usually, players are the ones outnumbered, not outnumbering.

[Indon]

Archery is inherently weaker then melee attacks, due to the existence of reach weapons, attacks of opportunity, and a wide variety of feats that benefit melee attacks, compared to the relatively small number of feats that benefit archery.


The amount of more stuff to enhance melee as opposed to ranged would be part of the 'archer hate'. The person you're responding to is saying that ranged attacks are by virtue of being ranged superior to melee attacks, all else being equal.

Seriously, don't be so quick to formulate a rebuttal-rant.

[Closet_Skeleton]

Where are all these good archer Prestige classes?

Arcane Archer is acknowledged as junk, and the Order of the Bow Initiate makes you stay within 30 feet and does precision damage as a standard action, making it also a lackluster choice.

I didn't say they were good. There are 4 Prcs with archer in their name alone and many other ranged ones. Then again, there are 4 with sword in their name and a lot more melee classes. There aren't any with shield in their name though. Not one.

The sneak attack within 30 ft. seriously sucks as has already been discussed. There's a ranger spell that lets you use it at higher distances but that's only useful in Gestalt.

[Matthew]

Everyone seems to be overlooking another advantage of archery.

With melee, you can at most be the target of 20 or so attackers (completely surrounded by two layers, and the outside one has reach weapons).

With archery, you can easily be the target of hundreds of attackers.

D&D is supposed to be about heroes, not about crowds of peasants with longbows that kill everything in sight. (Unless you run it the way I do, in which case peasants FTW! :smallbiggrin: )
Heh, heh. Too true. A Paladin I enjoy playing once routed about two hundred Cultists in open battle because they forgot to bring any ranged weapons... they should have probably tried to Overbear/Grapple him, though.

[Abjurer]

There be a problem with your feat.

A first-level human wizard could take combat expertise and that one as his 1st level feat and human bonus feat respectively, and as long as he was carrying a dagger around, he would be completely impervious in one-on-one fights against foes at his level.

It needs harder prerequisites.
Like, say attack bonus +6 (giving same- or higher-level NPCs two or more attacks per round) and combat expertise, and maybe combat reflexes.

[Jasdoif]

Related question: Deflect (or Snatch) Arrows vs. a Manyshot?

Mechanically, the entire Manyshot is negated but shouldn't it just be -1 arrow worth of dmg?Manyshot's description says "Damage reduction and other resistances apply separately against each arrow fired." I would consider Deflect/Snatch Arrows to be a resistance in this case.

[Yahzi]

So, how does this make it unbalanced for the players?
You've never raised the peasantry against a dragon?

Back in the days of AD&D, I hired an army of nobodies to kill a dragon with the old "every 20 counts!" trick.

Yes, I am the reason modern dragons have damage resistance. And spell resistance, actually, but that's another story...)

:smallbiggrin:

[Matthew]

There be a problem with your feat.

A first-level human wizard could take combat expertise and that one as his 1st level feat and human bonus feat respectively, and as long as he was carrying a dagger around, he would be completely impervious in one-on-one fights against foes at his level.

It needs harder prerequisites.
Like, say attack bonus +6 (giving same- or higher-level NPCs two or more attacks per round) and combat expertise, and maybe combat reflexes.
Not really. Two Weapon Fighting is available to all. Sunders would also likely really ruin his day, not to mention Disarms, Grapples and other such things. Of course, if Parry actually blocked those, it would be a more serious problem, but not by much.

[Runa]

Wrong.

Archery is inherently weaker then melee attacks, due to the existence of reach weapons, attacks of opportunity, and a wide variety of feats that benefit melee attacks, compared to the relatively small number of feats that benefit archery.

From a pure damage output, think about Power Attack, Leap Attack, Shock Trooper, Spirited Charge, Headlong Rush, Battle Jump, and a wide variety of other feats that scale well with levels. There is no equivalent for ranged attacks. Its also a lot easier to generate extra melee attacks, from Hold the Line, Karmic Strike, Snap-Kick, Whirling Frenzy, Robilar's Gambit, etc.

If you're concerned about defense as a melee combatant, use a reach weapon. With a moderate feat investment you can shut down most enemies who attack you. For example, use Knock-Down to hit every enemy who tries to approuch you Prone. Or use Evasive Reflexes and Hold the Line and/or Karmic Strike to simply step out of the way of oncoming enemies and/or full attacks. Or just have a high damage output and kill anyone who comes close to you (remember, Power Attack and Leap Attack bonuses last all round). Or you can use just Stand Still to make your enemy stop.

If you think ranged weapons are better then melee weapons, then your party is very poorly built.

I must say, I actually am playing of all things, a rogue with archery specialities , and with our party (and DM), the way we play, it actually works. It is not a "very poorly built" party I don't think, given how powerful the other characters are, how quickly tend to defeat the monsters supposedly made for our level adventurers, and, most of all, given that we all have something to do and have fun doing it. I should clarify though, because the case is probably unusual:

1.) A level 8 (soon to be level 9) Dread Necromancer in the party who is very, very fond of using Ebard's Black Tentacles (because it is both useful and hilariously wrong, at least in our group) = everything within 20 ft radius of spell loses dexterity bonus. Note I said 20 ft, not 30, so Sneak Attack still holds, even if the guy I'm attacking is at the center of the spell so long as you're not more than ten ft away from the edge of the spell... and I don't even have to hide, be invisible, or flank to get it in Sneak damage, because he automatically loses DEX. Throw in the ability to hit him with more than one arrow, and wheeee...

2.) The other two members of the party (which is all level 8's to start, I think we're all leveling up now though) are a Monk/Cleric/Saint build and a half-dragon psionic-powered Ranger. They do enough damage on their own that me doing maybe 14 damage in one attack (25 one time, with a crit and Rapid Shot) is generally enough, at least for the enemies we usually get pitted against. To not to mention that considering my comparative squishyness and the Necro's penchant for casting the Tentacles thing, it's better to be at a distance.

3.) I still have a rapier, several daggers and Kyton armor (Kyton armor is +5 armor that has chains that can attack things next to you upon activation, doing damage that while small - I think it's only 1d4 - still lets you keep your hands free. Expensive, but worth every penny!). I'm not exactly defenseless even if I get closer up.

4.) I also have a Wand of Invisability that, under House Rules at least, I don't need to roll a Use Magic Device check to use (I'm eventually going to multiclass Wizard, I've already got ranks in Use Magic Device, etc., I think the DM just figured "Eh, she'd know how to use it, we just have to keep track of how many rounds it's been in effect"). Reeeally helps get Sneak. And you know, not get hit so much.

5.) I'm not one of those people that is completely obsessed with doing the most damage or doing damage in every single round of combat, especially given the other party members can all do considerable damage as well, so long as I'm not doing nothing (sneaking around invisible or firing an arrow counts as "something" even if it misses, as far as I'm concerned), I'm happy, especially given that I still get to do things like detecting and disabling traps and picking locks and bluffing people and stuff. :)

So, the ranged weapon may not be "better than melee" for the entire party, but for my character within this party, it's just fine. Most effective? Eh, probably not. But for me, in my group, with our current party, it works.

And I saw someone complaining about the Arcane Archer prestige class before. It's not THAT bad, surely? (And it's "acknowledged" that it sucks? Acknowledged by whom, exactly?) Really, all it is is enhancements to existing archery skills, some of which, while not spectacularly useful (especially given some of them can be done only once per day), are still nice to have once in a while and, in the case of being able to shoot through solid matter or around corners, can easily provide much amusement during the course of the game, at least if your group is anything like mine it could.

I realize it's not a super-duper-uber effective combat class, but really, if everyone else in the party has kickarse skilz, and you don't mind being only occasionally useful in combat, it's really got the potential for fun. And that's what the game is all about, ain't it? ;)

(There really should be more archery feats, though...)

-Runa

[Person_Man]

I must say, I actually am playing of all things, a rogue with archery specialities.

Archery is a great idea for Rogues, because Rogues exist to solve Skill encounters, and can easily be killed in combat. So staying away from combat while doing your best to contribute from afar is a great idea. Just don't expect to be contributing much in an optimized party, or when you fight anything immune to Precision damage (undead, constructs, etc).


It is not a "very poorly built" party I don't think, given how powerful the other characters are...

A level 8 (soon to be level 9) Dread Necromancer..

Monk/Cleric/Saint build and a half-dragon psionic-powered Ranger..


LOL. OK, so you may not have picked this up, but Dread Necromancers, Monks, Rangers, and most things with Level Adjustment are mechanically quite weak compared to many, many other builds. For example, any full caster using a normal spell list without LA, or any strait Tome of Battle class, or lots of useful melee builds I could point you to. So you're probably actually quite useful playing a archery Rogue, because everyone else in your party is also mediocre, and the DM has to balance encounters against the entire mediocre party.

And that's a good thing, because it lets everyone play what they want without having to worry about optimization. But if you play in a group with at least one veteran player who does optimize, then everyone else will be left in the dust during combat, in which case they have the choice of either sucking, optimizing their PC's, or asking the optimized PC to tone it down.



4.) I also have a Wand of Invisability that, under House Rules at least, I don't need to roll a Use Magic Device check to use (I'm eventually going to multiclass Wizard, I've already got ranks in Use Magic Device, etc., I think the DM just figured "Eh, she'd know how to use it, we just have to keep track of how many rounds it's been in effect"). Reeeally helps get Sneak. And you know, not get hit so much.

No, it doesn't. Invisibility only applies until you make an attack, and then you're visible. And Sneak Attack only applies to the first arrow of any volley. So while its nice having a Wand of Invisibility for ambushes, and its nice that your DM has given you a very easily abused house rule, it doesn't let you consistently deal respectable damage each round. I suggest buying a Ring of Blinking and taking Greater Manyshot. That will increase your damage significantly against enemies who are not immune to Precision damage. Also, avoid multi-classing into Wizard (or anything else that doesn't progress your Sneak Attack) like the plague. Trust me, the first level spells aren't worth it.

[Skjaldbakka]

I would advise against taking Greater Manyshot, as you'll get your party killed.

Right now, you have a happy balance. You are playing the only class that is completely solid (not to strong, not to weak). You aren't abusing what you could abuse, and the DM is having you deal with sane encounters.

Lets say you take Greater Manyshot. All of a sudden, you just tripled your damage output. Putting you way ahead of the rest of the party, and quite possibly agitating your DM, as his encounters get slaughtered. Which means he has to scale up the power level to account for you. The rest of the party isn't any stronger for your feat choice.

Avoid the power escalation, and don't shoot for the moon. You might put out a star.

[Fawsto]

The Tarrasque example ilustrates an important point in D&D... It is PCs against the Monsters most of the time!!! So, any archer is in disadvantage against monsters with regenerating skills (licontropes) and monsters with damage reduction (being Big T the best example)! BTW, archers have a small problem called cover. If, let's say, an Archer finds a Tower Shielded Fighter, the archer is doomed to run for his life (using the only advantage there: the archer can move much more with his lighter armor), otherwise the Fighter will aproach and hack the archer at will. Most melee fighters when encountering a covered enemy will simply hack the cover with a sunder attack, being it a Tower Shield, Wooden Door, Table or even some kinds of walls depending on the characters weapon and strenght.

Ok... I can also remember to reinforce my bow to my strenght modifier score... That makes the Bow a incredible 1d8 + 1 damage dealer. Woooo!!. That barbarian with the Greataxe will have some problems when I find him!! Ohhhh Yeah!

[de-trick]

a cm bow is better than a crossbow anyday full attack and strenght mod tro damage and farther reach than any other weapon

[Droodle]

I would advise against taking Greater Manyshot, as you'll get your party killed.

Right now, you have a happy balance. You are playing the only class that is completely solid (not to strong, not to weak). You aren't abusing what you could abuse, and the DM is having you deal with sane encounters.

Lets say you take Greater Manyshot. All of a sudden, you just tripled your damage output. Putting you way ahead of the rest of the party, and quite possibly agitating your DM, as his encounters get slaughtered. Which means he has to scale up the power level to account for you. The rest of the party isn't any stronger for your feat choice.

Avoid the power escalation, and don't shoot for the moon. You might put out a star.I don't see this. With greater manyshot, a level 12 rogue will be able to fire 3 arrows. At -6. Taking a full attack action with Rapid Shot, on the other hand, will net the Rogue 2 shots at -2, 1 shot at -7, and 1 shot at -12. The odds of hitting with all his attacks are much better using Rapid Shot than using Greater Manyshot, and Archers don't really need to move around all that much, and archer Rogues aren't going to be making a lot of sneak attacks after the first round of combat (so, by being out of point blank range, all the Rogue is losing is his +1 bonus for point blank shot in most cases). That said, the Rogue should still take Greater Manyshot, but it isn't going to make the Rogue that much more effective. Scouts, on the other hand........

[Runa]

Archery is a great idea for Rogues, because Rogues exist to solve Skill encounters, and can easily be killed in combat. So staying away from combat while doing your best to contribute from afar is a great idea. Just don't expect to be contributing much in an optimized party, or when you fight anything immune to Precision damage (undead, constructs, etc).

Yeah, it's really weird. When I started a thread asking for advice on how to create my rogue's basic stats and stuff, one guy just kept (and keeps) insisting that "ranged rogues don't work", just because it's supposedly harder to get Sneak Attack that way. But almost everybody else was saying "No seriously, take the longbow! You're too squishy!" :P



LOL. OK, so you may not have picked this up, but Dread Necromancers, Monks, Rangers, and most things with Level Adjustment are mechanically quite weak compared to many, many other builds.

Define "mechanically quite weak" please? I'm a little confused is all. We started as level 8 characters. The Ranger made himself a half-dragon Psionics dude, the Monk is also a Saint and has a Vow of Poverty, which combined give him some crazy immunities and stuff (in exchange, he gives all his money to the church and does not keep magic items and the like).

I dunno, it just seems to work really well, with a lot of the monsters being easy pickings. Perhaps its just the campaigns we've been doing? Or lucky rolls? The DM seems to like to use the pre-generated ones from WotC's site a lot of the time, maybe that has something to do with it.



For example, any full caster using a normal spell list without LA,

LA? What's that?



or any strait Tome of Battle class, or lots of useful melee builds I could point you to.

I don't think any of us has the Tome of Battle, but I'm not sure. This could explain a lot. :P



So you're probably actually quite useful playing a archery Rogue, because everyone else in your party is also mediocre, and the DM has to balance encounters against the entire mediocre party.

Well, I have been useful at any rate, and we all get to attack at some point... I think that's my definition of a fun battle. :) Go teamwork!



And that's a good thing, because it lets everyone play what they want without having to worry about optimization.

Good god, I can't imagine our group more obsessed with Optimization. That would not be fun.



But if you play in a group with at least one veteran player who does optimize, then everyone else will be left in the dust during combat, in which case they have the choice of either sucking, optimizing their PC's, or asking the optimized PC to tone it down.

Heh, as it is, the DM has to occasionally nerf the Ranger and Monk just to keep them from being "overpowered" in comparison to us though, because of the Sainthood and psionics. Basically, though, he's going to give me the ability to automatically sense when there's a trap (though not, note, the automatic ability to disable it) to compensate and call it even. :P



No, it doesn't. Invisibility only applies until you make an attack, and then you're visible.

I should clarify: what I meant was, it keeps me from getting hit until I attack. :P



And Sneak Attack only applies to the first arrow of any volley.

I think the DM knows that, actually. He seems to keep track of most of those kinds of things pretty well.



So while its nice having a Wand of Invisibility for ambushes, and its nice that your DM has given you a very easily abused house rule, it doesn't let you consistently deal respectable damage each round. I suggest buying a Ring of Blinking and taking Greater Manyshot. That will increase your damage significantly against enemies who are not immune to Precision damage.

I was originally considering eventually multiclassing to Arcane Archer, but after hearing a little more about it, I'm considering just taking more archery feats (like Manyshot and the likes) until I've used up the good ones. :P

As for the Ring of Blinking, I'm saving up for that actually; you're not the first person to mention how useful it is. It's just the DM gave us only 20,000 starting gold wealth for our new level 8 characters (soon to be level 9), so considering I had to buy my bow and armor and other supplies, definitely meant I couldn't afford a Ring of Blinking yet, as the Ring of Blinking is 27,000 gold. :P



Also, avoid multi-classing into Wizard (or anything else that doesn't progress your Sneak Attack) like the plague. Trust me, the first level spells aren't worth it.

If I'm not going to be going into Arcane Archer, it would seem to be pointless until I've progressed further anyway. :P

Oh! By the way, quick question, can rogues take Two Weapon Fighting (I don't have a PHB with me or anything)? 'Cause I do have daggers and a rapier for backup and I'm just thinking about what might happen in the future, after I've run out of a.) arrows or b.) archery feats. :smallwink: Though obviously, I'm taking Deadly Precision first, and probably even Multishot. Just thinking ahead though, and wondering, and curious, and not able to satiate such curiousity as I probably won't have access to the PHB for several days. :P


[quote=Skjaldbakka]
Right now, you have a happy balance. You are playing the only class that is completely solid (not to strong, not to weak). You aren't abusing what you could abuse, and the DM is having you deal with sane encounters.[/qoute]

Which probably explains why our last two games (our first games with these characters) have been so fun. :) We're actually balanced for a change and stuff.

-Runa

[Yechezkiel]

a cm bow is better than a crossbow anyday full attack and strenght mod tro damage and farther reach than any other weapon

Depends on if Crossbow Sniper and other PHB2 feats are allowed, and how far you expect to level in the game.

[Matthew]

Oh! By the way, quick question, can rogues take Two Weapon Fighting (I don't have a PHB with me or anything)? 'Cause I do have daggers and a rapier for backup and I'm just thinking about what might happen in the future, after I've run out of a.) arrows or b.) archery feats. :smallwink: Though obviously, I'm taking Deadly Precision first, and probably even Multishot. Just thinking ahead though, and wondering, and curious, and not able to satiate such curiousity as I probably won't have access to the PHB for several days. :P

Indeed they can and almost always definitely should...

There's a lot of high powered stuff out there, I wouldn't worry about it unless your party is getting trashed a lot or the other Player Characters are outshining you (or each other).

Rogues with Long Bows? Only if they Multi Class or are elves to begin with...

[PinkysBrain]

Depends on if Crossbow Sniper and other PHB2 feats are allowed, and how far you expect to level in the game.
PHB2 or no, crossbows keep on sucking. It's like saying that because all of the TWF feats it has stopped sucking ... in both cases all those feats can do is get you close to parity. If you need 2+ extra feats to get close to parity it still sucks.

[the_tick_rules]

archery does have the advantage of being hidden. Mages don't walk around with windwall 24/7. hit em when they're not aware your there.

[Orzel]

Rangers can use Windwall scrolls.
Rangers can hide well especially in the wild.
Rangers have full BAB and Archery feats
Ranger have an annoying pet

Ranger:...
Caster: Fear my power
Ranger: Readied fullattack rapid shot triggered to your casting. 1 2 3... Make your Concentration save. DC 37
Caster: Curses. Wind Wall
Ranger: Readied fullattack rapid shot triggered to your casting. 1 2 3... Make your Concentration save. DC 43

Repeat til win.

[....]

Ever think that maybe the reason that casters have losts of spells that stop arrows is because they don't like to get shot with them?

They have the same things for stopping melee attackers. Look at the level 1 spell, Color Spray. A readied action to cast that on the first person to come within 15 feet of you pretty well nullifies their attacks. (Unless they make the save, of course.)

[Armads]

Ranger:...
Caster: Fear my power
Ranger: Readied fullattack rapid shot triggered to your casting. 1 2 3... Make your Concentration save. DC 37
Caster: Curses. Wind Wall
Ranger: Readied fullattack rapid shot triggered to your casting. 1 2 3... Make your Concentration save. DC 43

You can't ready a full attack.

[Leon]

So, the ranged weapon may not be "better than melee" for the entire party, but for my character within this party, it's just fine. Most effective? Eh, probably not. But for me, in my group, with our current party, it works.


Thats the most important thing, if you like it and it works for you


Whether or not the game mechanics all crunch down to the optimum numbers is all moot if its not fun

[Piccamo]

Rangers can use Windwall scrolls.
Rangers can hide well especially in the wild.
Rangers have full BAB and Archery feats
Ranger have an annoying pet

Ranger:...
Caster: Fear my power
Ranger: Readied fullattack rapid shot triggered to your casting. 1 2 3... Make your Concentration save. DC 37
Caster: Curses. Wind Wall
Ranger: Readied fullattack rapid shot triggered to your casting. 1 2 3... Make your Concentration save. DC 43

Repeat til win.

Ranger: ...
Caster: Fear my power
Ranger: Readied multishot triggered by your casting.
Caster: I'm already invisible. Wind Wall.
Caster: Time to play with my new toy.
Ranger: !?@#$$@

[PinkysBrain]

It's high level, but a blood seeking + seeking bow is a nice tool for an archer and bypasses windwalls for most caster opponents.

[Orzel]

You can't ready a full attack. To much drinkee. Mean Manyshot not Rapid Shot.



Ranger: ...
Caster: Fear my power
Ranger: Readied multishot triggered by your casting.
Caster: I'm already invisible. Wind Wall.
Caster: Time to play with my new toy.
Ranger: !?@#$$@

"Ranger:...." means "I'm in the bushes, hiding and everyone failed their Spot checks. Everyone 'cept the druid does anyway. Cheating bums. Anyway since I don't see anyone and no one can see me, I'm staying in these bushes. Hold up. Some dude just appeared and he's waving his hands! Now he's shooting lazers and stuff! Gotta stop that %&@$. No mo' casting for you."

I thought everyone koew that. Wait you mean Some people don't know the brokenness of stealth, wands, and +1 shocking icy bane bows? What that heck?

[Cauchy]

As part of a campaign I was in, we were flying, invisible, over a large army with archers. As things played out, two of the characters lost invisibility and, in one round, took 2.5K damage from the arrows. Yeah, that's right, 2,500 damage. Go RAW Natural 20 hits!

Sure, casters > archers (with the right prepared spells), but then again, casters > melee (with the right prepared spells).

[Callix]

I agree that there is very little point to making full attacks at range, and for the ranged rogue idea, while it might work, try a shortbow. An average of 1 damage per hit isn't worth a proficiency feat, and your best shots will be from within 30ft anyway... unless... some of you like my homebrew idea (see sig). Anyway, greater manyshot, while able to do remarkable damage, is the culmination of a long feat tree. And you are a rogue. Take it, you've earned it.

[Sir Giacomo]

Hate against archers?

Don't know...maybe opponents (casters and non-casters) hate them. Various reasons:

- the range. the range (had to say that again). It exceeds all spells excepting the higher level long range ones. For many others (including meleers) it means the archer gets 1-2 extra full attacks before you are even in melee range to him. And then the following ensues:
- manyshot. You move/tumble, make your 2-4 attacks. Opponent moves, makes 1 melee attack. Great, eh?
- windwall: is static, and you can step easily through it. Wizard raises a windwall , archer moves through wall (remember with the right items/buffs, this movement can be as high as 90ft), has standard action left (manyshot, point blank). What wall?

The stuff that archers really fear:
- sunder (bows are not that resilient, including the magic ones). Carry a spare bow (at least one, they don't weigh much and get quickdraw to have them ready in no time).
- concealment (get a seeking enchantment asap)
- full cover (hmm...difficult one. Actually, for all characters to overcome full cover).
- force wall effects (but everyone actually fears those. Get a rod of cancellation asap)

- Giacomo

[ZeroNumerous]

- the range. the range (had to say that again). It exceeds all spells excepting the higher level long range ones. For many others (including meleers) it means the archer gets 1-2 extra full attacks before you are even in melee range to him. And then the following ensues:

Spell range: Long will always be greater than longbow range. Heck, at first level Long range for a caster is 110 feet. The same range as a longbow. It just gets better as he levels. At 5th level, thats 150. Archer's still on 110. 20th thats 300 feet. Archer? Still on 110.



- manyshot. You move/tumble, make your 2-4 attacks. Opponent moves, makes 1 melee attack. Great, eh?

We all know melee sucks versus casters, but your 2-4 attacks won't kill the raging barbarian. However, when he charges you with his ransuer, power attacking for five, leap attacking, converting it all to lowered AC to hit you, and the other various tricks for charging builds.. You're dead.


- windwall: is static, and you can step easily through it. Wizard raises a windwall , archer moves through wall (remember with the right items/buffs, this movement can be as high as 90ft), has standard action left (manyshot, point blank). What wall?

The wizard puts the wind wall in a cylinder around himself. What archer?


- full cover (hmm...difficult one. Actually, for all characters to overcome full cover).

Throw an AoE spell behind the target in question. Full cover is no longer relevant.


- force wall effects (but everyone actually fears those. Get a rod of cancellation asap)

Disintegrate.

[Brother_Franklin]

It seems like everyones been watching too much LOTR. Didn't you know, the best part about being an archer is hitting your foe over the head with a hammer. Now assuming your a fighter class, you will have some extra feats after getting the specfic archery ones you want. You could go a couple of ways. For example if you have decent strength:

Quick Draw
Improved Disarm
Weapon Focus (Heavy Flail)
Dodge

DM: You've pelted your oppenet with many arrows, but finially the barbian charges and slashes with his greataxe. Luckily, you jump out of the way. Which way do you want to run?

You: I don't. How badly hurt does he seem?

DM: Well there is an arrow in his skull.

You: I drop my bow. Let me see if I can get that arrow out by bashing it repeativly with my flail.

If you strength is less decent:

Quick Draw
Improved Grapple
Weapon Finess
Weapon Focus (Hand Axe)

I drop the bow, get out my hand axe and jump the SoB. "Where's your Great Sword now?"

Anyway, if I have a point at all, is that no archer in the history of mankind hasn't had a couple other weapons by his/her side. Now if you want to be an Elf god bless your Tolkienian soul, but real archers have other weapons. The real fun is while they only get one attack on you, you can have one or two rounds of full ranged attack, plus one round of full melee attack. Now if there is a windwall, you have a back up. Run up and jump the mage!

[ZeroNumerous]

He hits you with Evard's Black Tentacles, or coats your back-up weapon in Grease. Congrats, you were less effective than you were before. Honestly, being an archer in D&D has to amount to more than just the Fighter-class, which is subpar to begin with. You'll need a few PrCs to make a viable archer that can hurt someone.

[Orzel]

It seems like everyones been watching too much LOTR. Didn't you know, the best part about being an archer is hitting your foe over the head with a hammer. Now assuming your a fighter class, you will have some extra feats after getting the specfic archery ones you want. You could go a couple of ways. For example if you have decent strength:

Quick Draw
Improved Disarm
Weapon Focus (Heavy Flail)
Dodge

DM: You've pelted your oppenet with many arrows, but finially the barbian charges and slashes with his greataxe. Luckily, you jump out of the way. Which way do you want to run?

You: I don't. How badly hurt does he seem?

DM: Well there is an arrow in his skull.

You: I drop my bow. Let me see if I can get that arrow out by bashing it repeativly with my flail.

If you strength is less decent:

Quick Draw
Improved Grapple
Weapon Finess
Weapon Focus (Hand Axe)

I drop the bow, get out my hand axe and jump the SoB. "Where's your Great Sword now?"

Anyway, if I have a point at all, is that no archer in the history of mankind hasn't had a couple other weapons by his/her side. Now if you want to be an Elf god bless your Tolkienian soul, but real archers have other weapons. The real fun is while they only get one attack on you, you can have one or two rounds of full ranged attack, plus one round of full melee attack. Now if there is a windwall, you have a back up. Run up and jump the mage!

QFT

I swear people play archers in parties ALL WRONG.

You're supposed to annoy the enemy so bad with long ranged damage and spell disruption that they do something stupid so you can power/sneak attack their butts off.

Drop the Bow! Throw an Axe! Stab their brains!

Fighters/Rangers
Feat 1 : Power Attack
Feat 2 : Quick Draw
Feat 3 : Power Attack booster feat


He hits you with Evard's Black Tentacles, or coats your back-up weapon in Grease. Congrats, you were less effective than you were before. Honestly, being an archer in D&D has to amount to more than just the Fighter-class, which is subpar to begin with. You'll need a few PrCs to make a viable archer that can hurt someone.

Archers should almost NEVER EVER attack spellcasters on their turn. Ready attacks on spellcasting. No spells more thime to run up and Bash Brains!!!!!

[Leon]

Spell range: Long will always be greater than longbow range. Heck, at first level Long range for a caster is 110 feet. The same range as a longbow. It just gets better as he levels. At 5th level, thats 150. Archer's still on 110. 20th thats 300 feet. Archer? Still on 110.


110 Base yes but he'd be willing to shoot further than that - heck if he's willing to take the penalies he can shoot put to 1100ft

[ZeroNumerous]

Archer: Ready action versus the caster attempting to cast a spell.
Caster: I cast Wind Wall in a five foot cylinder, centered on myself.
Archer: *Shoots arrow.* *Deals 1d8+2d6+1d6+4.* *Assuming average, he does 17.*
Caster: DC 27 Concentration check? *Rolls 1d20+17(20 if he has Skill Focus: Concentration).* *Assuming average, he makes it* *Caster is now immune to all forms of archer attack.*

Someone's forgetting that Concentration is, not only a class skill but also the one thing anyone takes Skill Focus for. And honestly, this is hugely meaningless since a Caster can throw up a persistant Protection from Arrows spell and just not worry about wind wall at all.

EDIT: Leon. Your limited in range by your ability to see that far. At most, an archer has 400 to 500 feet in spot to make any sort of accurate shot.

[Orzel]

Archer: Ready action versus the caster attempting to cast a spell.
Caster: I cast Wind Wall in a five foot cylinder, centered on myself.
Archer: *Shoots arrow.* *Deals 1d8+2d6+1d6+4.* *Assuming average, he does 17.*
Caster: DC 27 Concentration check? *Rolls 1d20+17(20 if he has Skill Focus: Concentration).* *Assuming average, he makes it* *Caster is now immune to all forms of archer attack.*

Someone's forgetting that Concentration is, not only a class skill but also the one thing anyone takes Skill Focus for. And honestly, this is hugely meaningless since a Caster can throw up a persistant Protection from Arrows spell and just not worry about wind wall at all.

Concentration check is 10 + damage, ZN. You failed your check. All wizard's do.

[Dhavaer]

Concentration check is 10 + damage, ZN. You failed your check. All wizard's do.

That what he said in his post. DC 27.

[Brother_Franklin]

Well, obviously a caster can kill everyone and everything. I'm just saying that if a windwall is thrown up you shouldn't feel completely ineffective. In my opionion, if you get a caster to throw away spells like casting grease on your handaxe instead of say, someone elses weapon that's probably a win. While he's casting all these spells on me or because of me. First windwall, then greese. I assume my caster has bound his soul to a cicada or something.

On the count of PrCs. Well yes PrC can make anything better. However, I think a human fighter can pick up most of the things I was talking about and some of the neat archery tricks before qualifing for the nifty PRCs. Afterall, some of the Archer feats are just silly. Like Presise shot. If he is close enough to be meleeing with somebody, I'm not using my bow on him anymore.

[Morty]

You know, just because wizard can beat archer with lame spells like Black Tentacles or broken spells like Wind Wall doesn't mean archer is weak. Wizard generally tend to be stronger than everything.
Seriously, Wind Wall is some kind of joke. 3rd level spell that makes you untouchabe by even 20 level archer? WTF? If it just created one straight line, it could be fine. But since wizard can envelope himself in it, it's ridiculous.

[Sir Giacomo]

Completely agree to Brother_Franklin.

@M0rt
Wind Wall and Black Tentacles do not beat an archer. A wizard has to come up with more than that.
Black tentacles: make a grapple check, escape, use remaining no. of attacks to continue firing (or 5ft move out). And that is if you do not currently have access to the usual escape devices ring of freedom of movement, dimdoor/teleport items or a simple salve of slipperiness used prior to combat.
Wind wall, see below:


Spell range: Long will always be greater than longbow range. Heck, at first level Long range for a caster is 110 feet. The same range as a longbow. It just gets better as he levels. At 5th level, thats 150. Archer's still on 110. 20th thats 300 feet. Archer? Still on 110.

Already answered by Leon. With far shot feat and distance enhancement, you can actually beat the range of a 20th level long range caster.
@ZeroNumerous: spot checks you only need if someone is trying to hide. Similarly, casters with long range spells need spot checks vs something hidden.
Otherwise, your can see quite far (or basically, the penalties of -2/range increment are also there to reflect that you can see less and less accurately).



We all know melee sucks versus casters, but your 2-4 attacks won't kill the raging barbarian. However, when he charges you with his ransuer, power attacking for five, leap attacking, converting it all to lowered AC to hit you, and the other various tricks for charging builds.. You're dead.

At the levels where a meleer can pull this kind of 1-hit-wonder, you can bet that the archer has many defenses against a simple charge (similar to a wizard), the least of it being switching with quickdraw to a melee weapon as well as outlined above by some posters already.


The wizard puts the wind wall in a cylinder around himself. What archer?

Archer moves into cylinder, melees or manyshots. Again: What wall?


Throw an AoE spell behind the target in question. Full cover is no longer relevant.

Good point. But how strong are these area effects? And: it does not always work against those with full cover (you need line of sight to the point where the area spell should originate).


Disintegrate.

Yes, casters may have this one more method vs force walls in their arsenal.

Ah, and btw I would agree with ZeroNumerous on that most casters have quite good concentration skills, so readying a shot/manyshot is likely not such a great idea, when you can do with your round a full attack or move AND manyshot (if the caster is not protected in some way, he is dead. If he is, then readying the shot would not have done any good). There may likely be some situations (like a wizard very close to the archer and not able to move outside the 30ft manyshot range), where it could be OK, but otherwise not.

- Giacomo

[Dausuul]

And honestly, this is hugely meaningless since a Caster can throw up a persistant Protection from Arrows spell and just not worry about wind wall at all.

I love people who think protection from arrows makes them immune to archers. It's like thinking protection from evil makes you immune to balors. A +1 bow completely ignores protection from arrows, and a good bow is the first magic item any sensible archer gets.

There are, sad to say, no such limitations on wind wall.

But then, archer versus full caster is a non-starter anyway, just like any non-caster versus full caster. The comparison here is archer to melee, and archers stack up pretty well there. They get less damage per hit, but a lot more hits, and they really shine at high levels where everything flies at ungodly speeds and the melee guys have all they can do just to catch up with the monsters.

In my experience, the one thing archers really dread is DR that they don't know how to beat and/or don't have the arrows to beat. Fear the archer with that enhancement from the Magic Item Compendium that makes your bow shoot force arrows.

[Leon]

There are, sad to say, no such limitations on wind wall.


This is where the archer sigh's and pulls out his Shrink Itemed Balista (Siege Weapon - ignores windwall) :biggrin:

[BardicDuelist]

Force arrows FTW.

Also, if archers were to be too good, there would be no reason to melee (like how our wars are fought nearly exclusively with ranged weapons now).

[Piccamo]

Completely agree to Brother_Franklin.

@M0rt
Wind Wall and Black Tentacles do not beat an archer. A wizard has to come up with more than that.
Black tentacles: make a grapple check, escape, use remaining no. of attacks to continue firing (or 5ft move out). And that is if you do not currently have access to the usual escape devices ring of freedom of movement, dimdoor/teleport items or a simple salve of slipperiness used prior to combat.
Wind wall, see below:
Yes, there are other tools a wizard must employ to beat an archer. This is a team based game and more often than not they are not 1v1 matches. If the archer is the villain he'll have to pull every trick he can to beat a party with a wizard.




Already answered by Leon. With far shot feat and distance enhancement, you can actually beat the range of a 20th level long range caster.
@ZeroNumerous: spot checks you only need if someone is trying to hide. Similarly, casters with long range spells need spot checks vs something hidden.
Otherwise, your can see quite far (or basically, the penalties of -2/range increment are also there to reflect that you can see less and less accurately).
Medium: The spell reaches as far as 100 feet + 10 feet per caster level.
Long: The spell reaches as far as 400 feet + 40 feet per caster level.

At all levels a Long spell beats a ranged character, Medium can go either way.




At the levels where a meleer can pull this kind of 1-hit-wonder, you can bet that the archer has many defenses against a simple charge (similar to a wizard), the least of it being switching with quickdraw to a melee weapon as well as outlined above by some posters already.

Unfortunately the archer won't be as good as the meleer at this sort of thing. The best scenario is one where the archer can utilize rough terrain to make it so the meleer can't charge. In that case the meleer should just flee.



Archer moves into cylinder, melees or manyshots. Again: What wall?

How does he get into the wind wall when the wall is around his 5-foot square? At that point he has to melee the wizard.



Good point. But how strong are these area effects? And: it does not always work against those with full cover (you need line of sight to the point where the area spell should originate).
Cloud Kill is a pretty good one :smalltongue:




Yes, casters may have this one more method vs force walls in their arsenal.

Ah, and btw I would agree with ZeroNumerous on that most casters have quite good concentration skills, so readying a shot/manyshot is likely not such a great idea, when you can do with your round a full attack or move AND manyshot (if the caster is not protected in some way, he is dead. If he is, then readying the shot would not have done any good). There may likely be some situations (like a wizard very close to the archer and not able to move outside the 30ft manyshot range), where it could be OK, but otherwise not.

- Giacomo
Just remember that Manyshot is at a 30-ft range.

At higher levels an archer is less restricted than some other types of non-casters. He does not have the mobility issues of other non-casters because he does not need to fly to hit flying opponents. There are plenty of builds outside of core that make an archer much better and able to do hundreds of damage per round. The archer is my favorite archetype and I feel that at higher levels, when melee characters are not able to perform as well, they shine pretty well.

[Indon]

Medium: The spell reaches as far as 100 feet + 10 feet per caster level.
Long: The spell reaches as far as 400 feet + 40 feet per caster level.

At all levels a Long spell beats a ranged character, Medium can go either way.


I beg to differ.

A longbow has a range increment of 100 feet, and a maximum range of 10 increments; thus 1,000 feet. Yes, the attack is at -20... but the Spot check of someone noticing someone sniping at that distance is at -100, so it's ridiculous all around.

At Long range, a spellcaster requires CL 15 to have that range. Now if it's a Longbow of Distance, max range 1,500 feet, you require caster level 21 to beat that with a Long range spell.

Keep in mind; Ranged weapon maximum is 10 increments. Throwing weapon maximum is 5 increments. Now, a caster could beat an archer completely unwilling to take a distance penalty in range, any day.

[Piccamo]

It is also unrealistic to believe you could hit someone from that distance. At level 1, even firing at 1 full range increment decreases your chances of hitting greatly. Further, by level 20 it is likely a caster is going to have a caster level greater than 20, even in core.

In order to fire 400 feet (4 range-increments) and just hit a square (AC 10) with any degree of success he must have at least a +8 bonus to hit. In other words, level 5 or higher. At that point the wizard's long is already up to 600 feet.

[Sir Giacomo]

Yes, there are other tools a wizard must employ to beat an archer. This is a team based game and more often than not they are not 1v1 matches. If the archer is the villain he'll have to pull every trick he can to beat a party with a wizard..

True! If the archer is a pc, he can pin down an enemy caster in his windwall, allowing the meleers to close in. If the archer is an npc, he'll try some ambush, trying to take out the caster in the group first. But that's likely too situation-specific on what kind of threat at any level an npc archer opponent could pull.


Medium: The spell reaches as far as 100 feet + 10 feet per caster level.
Long: The spell reaches as far as 400 feet + 40 feet per caster level.

At all levels a Long spell beats a ranged character, Medium can go either way..

As Indon pointed out above, archer beats caster in pure range. But due to visibility restrictions, let us say they are about on par.



Unfortunately the archer won't be as good as the meleer at this sort of thing. The best scenario is one where the archer can utilize rough terrain to make it so the meleer can't charge. In that case the meleer should just flee..


I'd dare to say that at any given level, a same level melee charger will not be able to kill the archer in one blow. Which would mean: archer of same level gets 1-2 full round attacks, plus one manyshot in point blank range for 1 single opponent attack. It is not hard to see who wins in this contest.
The charger will have to try to surprise the archer, choose the terrain very carefully (narrow tunnels, small rooms) and maybe needs to have superior numbers, or he's in trouble.
The best bet could be a grapple attempt in that single attack, but that (as I outlined above) the archer can avoid almost as easily as any caster at higher levels.


How does he get into the wind wall when the wall is around his 5-foot square? At that point he has to melee the wizard..

OK, but switching to melee an archer CAN do with quickdraw or unarmed strike quite easily. Or, if he has access to fly or a high jump check, he can shoot from above (since the wind wall does not protect form above).



Cloud Kill is a pretty good one :smalltongue: .

Yes! A classic LogicNinja nosave-and-suck!.


Just remember that Manyshot is at a 30-ft range..

Enough to trade 2-4 attacks/move for one counterattack vs a meleer


At higher levels an archer is less restricted than some other types of non-casters. He does not have the mobility issues of other non-casters because he does not need to fly to hit flying opponents. There are plenty of builds outside of core that make an archer much better and able to do hundreds of damage per round. The archer is my favorite archetype and I feel that at higher levels, when melee characters are not able to perform as well, they shine pretty well.

Archers are my big favourite for non-casters as well, since they are so flexible also at high level play and risk less than meleers.

- Giacomo

[Person_Man]

Stuff

OK, so here's my best shot at answering the questions you posed to me. I apologize if I missed something, or if my advice comes off as too strident:


Most of the basic rules can be found on the SRD (http://www.systemreferencedocuments.org/35/sovelior_sage/home.html) or crystalkeep (Google it, there are board rules about not linking to legally questionable content). If you're new, its often fun to explore the toybox full of rules that are out there.

LA is the abbreviation for Level Adjustment. Certain races like the Ogre (http://www.systemreferencedocuments.org/35/sovelior_sage/monstersOtoR.html#ogre), are more more powerful then the standard races (human, elf, etc). So WotC assigns a level adjustment to them. Sometimes they also have racial hit dice, which are essentially monster class levels (inferior to player class levels).
Class Levels + Level Adjustment (if any) + Racial Hit Dice (if any) = Effective Class Level, abbreviated ECL. So a 1st level Ogre Barbarian (1 level of Fighter + 2 Level Adjustment + 4 levels of Giant = ECL 7. It's the same as playing a 7th level Barbarian. However, WotC does a phenomenally bad job of balancing LA against player class levels, and racial hit dice are essentially dead levels because they don't advance any class abilities. So in many cases, using a race with LA is a bad idea.


"Mechanically weak" is a very, very, subjective term.

Full spellcasters tend to be the strongest, because they have a huge range of spells which can be used to counter almost any potential threat or Skill challenge, their spell effects and damage scale very well with levels, and some of their spells work regardless of Saving Throws or other defenses. They also have access to metamagic, which allows all sorts of encounter breaking effects.

Full BAB classes tend to be next. With a high To-Hit and a good combination of class abilities, they can consistently deal high damage and act as an effective meat shield, preventing monsters from getting to the more squishy PC's in back. If they're smart about their feat selection, their damage also scales well, making them effective at most levels. However, starting at mid levels full BAB classes can often be replaced by summoned monsters.

Skill Monkeys are next. They excel at solving Skill encounters. They generally lack the hit points and AC needed to stand on the front line of combat, and they lack full BAB, and they tend to lack high high Str because their stat points are in Int and Dex, and often Wis and Cha as well, depending upon what Skills they want to be good at. Their damage scales poorly with levels. And Rogues and Scouts in particular are utterly useless against anyone immune to Precision damage, which includes a lot of very common enemies. So they're generally safest just staying away from the front line and doing what they can with ranged attacks, but with the right build (Two Weapon Fighting + high Sneak Attack high Con + magic armor and items + special abilities) they can pull off close combat. At higher levels, they become a lot less useful, because most Skill encounters can be solved using the right spell.

At the bottom of the barrel are some of the hybrid classes, like the Monk, Bard, and the Ranger. They were created to try and do multiple things well. But D&D encourages niche specialization. So in trying to do multiple things well, they really often just do multiple things in a mediocre fashion. A Monk isn't nearly as effective as a Swordsage. A Bard isn't as effective as a Beguiler. A Ranger is not as effective as Duskblade (for Two Weapon Fighting) or a Soulbow (for archery) or a Scout (for Skills and mobility).

Plus, as the above example illustrates, there's the problem of codex creep. Basically, WotC publishes a phone book worth of material every month. Because they want to write something interesting that players will buy, newer material tends to be stronger then older material. So newer players with one book can sometimes have a hard time playing with more experienced players with ten books who haven't learned how to tone down their builds yet.

[Piccamo]

I'd dare to say that at any given level, a same level melee charger will not be able to kill the archer in one blow. Which would mean: archer of same level gets 1-2 full round attacks, plus one manyshot in point blank range for 1 single opponent attack. It is not hard to see who wins in this contest.
The charger will have to try to surprise the archer, choose the terrain very carefully (narrow tunnels, small rooms) and maybe needs to have superior numbers, or he's in trouble.
The best bet could be a grapple attempt in that single attack, but that (as I outlined above) the archer can avoid almost as easily as any caster at higher levels.

At level 1 everyone has max HP, I'll say that the archer somehow managed a d12 HD for this exercise and has a 14 Con. For the rest of his levels I will assume an average roll on his die.
Level 1: 14 HP, AC 17
Level 5: 48, AC 19
Level 10: 100 (Gained +2 Con booster item), AC 23
Level 15: 157, AC 27
Level 20: 215 (Gained +4 Con booster item), AC 31

Now I can compare the average damage of a meleer at these levels. This meleer will go the leap attack, shock trooper route. He will not have levels in Frenzied berserker. My meleer will start with an 18 Str and attempt to boost it whenever possible. His weapon will be a Falchion (2d4 damage, 18-20/x2 crit range) for this exercise.

Level 1: 16.002 damage([5 weapon + 7 strength + 2 PA]*.90 (miss chance)*1.27 (crit damage)); advantage: Meleer. While the meleer is raging he can 1-shot the archer, if not he cannot 1-shot the archer.
Level 5: 29.178 ([5 weapon + 9 strength + 10 PA + 2 Weapon Spec])*.90 (miss chance)*1.27 (crit damage)); advantage: Archer. The archer's HP has risen too quickly for the meleer to 1-shot it at this level.
Level 10: 110.400 ([13 weapon + 12 strength + 40 PA + 2 Weapon Spec + 2 MWM] * 1.6 (crit damage)); advantage: Meleer. With leap attack and shock trooper the meleer no longer misses the archer and improved critical greatly increases his damage.
Level 15: 173.800 ([20 damage + 14 strength + 60 PA + 2 Weapon Spec + 2 MWM]*1.6 (crit damage) + 7 PowCharge/GrtPowCharge; advantage: Meleer.
Level 20: 225.400 ([30.5 damage + 20 strength + 80 PA + 2 Weapon Spec + 2 MWM + 2 GrtWeapSpec) *1.6 (crit damage) + 7 PowCharge; advantage: Meleer.

The build presented here is not horribly optimized. It involves 1 level of barbarian and the rest fighter. I am fairly certain the math is correct, but if not please let me know. These are also using dice averages, so it is possible that the meleer does not 1-shot the archer or that it does far more damage than is necessary. While it is possible for a meleer to one-shot the archer, mobility, the bane of meleers, may well stop him. As may the archer's arrows. Unfortunately the same bonuses to speed an archer can get a meleer can get as well.

[Indon]

It is also unrealistic to believe you could hit someone from that distance. At level 1, even firing at 1 full range increment decreases your chances of hitting greatly. Further, by level 20 it is likely a caster is going to have a caster level greater than 20, even in core.

In order to fire 400 feet (4 range-increments) and just hit a square (AC 10) with any degree of success he must have at least a +8 bonus to hit. In other words, level 5 or higher. At that point the wizard's long is already up to 600 feet.

A ranged character is under little pressure to hit immediately. Unless the enemy has offensive spellcasting of comparable range (and enough of it to be lethal at range), a ranged character can just sit still and invite their opponent to a firefight... or to charge at him, taking attacks along the way.

The D&D optimization mentality of kill-the-enemy-in-round-one-or-you're-worthless is inapplicable until and unless your enemy can affect you.

Mind, of course, that this mindset is difficult to pull off in a mixed party; an archer or spellcaster is likely attacking from much closer ranges if there are meleers in the group, but a purely archer/spell ranged party can mutually engage from healthy distances with impunity.

[Piccamo]

A ranged character is under little pressure to hit immediately. Unless the enemy has offensive spellcasting of comparable range (and enough of it to be lethal at range), a ranged character can just sit still and invite their opponent to a firefight... or to charge at him, taking attacks along the way.

The D&D optimization mentality of kill-the-enemy-in-round-one-or-you're-worthless is inapplicable until and unless your enemy can affect you.

Mind, of course, that this mindset is difficult to pull off in a mixed party; an archer or spellcaster is likely attacking from much closer ranges if there are meleers in the group, but a purely archer/spell ranged party can mutually engage from healthy distances with impunity.

It isn't that if you don't kill your opponent in 1 round you're worthless, it is that if you don't you will be killed. It is that combat is generally resolved in less than 5 rounds. The first time he fires at the wizard the wizard goes invisible. With most builds an archer cannot deal enough damage to the meleer to bring him down before he gets to the archer. The Meleer will 1-shot the archer (see above). There are some pretty good archer builds out there that can deal enough damage to take down the meleer in 1 round, but he's still better off getting closer so he can take him down reliably.

I don't feel it should be about a PvP setup. It should be about who contributes more to the party. At higher levels that is the archer over the meleer and the caster over the archer, unless there are still mostly ground-based foes who do not have dirty tricks (good luck finding those to fight :smalltongue: ).

[SpikeFightwicky]

QFT

I swear people play archers in parties ALL WRONG.

You're supposed to annoy the enemy so bad with long ranged damage and spell disruption that they do something stupid so you can power/sneak attack their butts off.

Drop the Bow! Throw an Axe! Stab their brains!

Fighters/Rangers
Feat 1 : Power Attack
Feat 2 : Quick Draw
Feat 3 : Power Attack booster feat



Archers should almost NEVER EVER attack spellcasters on their turn. Ready attacks on spellcasting. No spells more thime to run up and Bash Brains!!!!!

Or how about:
- Take a 5-foot step back
- Make another full attack with bow
- Repeat until one of the 2 dies

If you're an archer, you should be better at ranged attacks, otherwise you'd be a melee character... It's detrimental to switch to melee unless your opponent has reach from size.

[SpikeFightwicky]

At level 1 everyone has max HP, I'll say that the archer somehow managed a d12 HD for this exercise and has a 14 Con. For the rest of his levels I will assume an average roll on his die.
Level 1: 14 HP, AC 17
Level 5: 48, AC 19
Level 10: 100 (Gained +2 Con booster item), AC 23
Level 15: 157, AC 27
Level 20: 215 (Gained +4 Con booster item), AC 31

Now I can compare the average damage of a meleer at these levels. This meleer will go the leap attack, shock trooper route. He will not have levels in Frenzied berserker. My meleer will start with an 18 Str and attempt to boost it whenever possible. His weapon will be a Falchion (2d4 damage, 18-20/x2 crit range) for this exercise.

Level 1: 16.002 damage([5 weapon + 7 strength + 2 PA]*.90 (miss chance)*1.27 (crit damage)); advantage: Meleer. While the meleer is raging he can 1-shot the archer, if not he cannot 1-shot the archer.
Level 5: 29.178 ([5 weapon + 9 strength + 10 PA + 2 Weapon Spec])*.90 (miss chance)*1.27 (crit damage)); advantage: Archer. The archer's HP has risen too quickly for the meleer to 1-shot it at this level.
Level 10: 110.400 ([13 weapon + 12 strength + 40 PA + 2 Weapon Spec + 2 MWM] * 1.6 (crit damage)); advantage: Meleer. With leap attack and shock trooper the meleer no longer misses the archer and improved critical greatly increases his damage.
Level 15: 173.800 ([20 damage + 14 strength + 60 PA + 2 Weapon Spec + 2 MWM]*1.6 (crit damage) + 7 PowCharge/GrtPowCharge; advantage: Meleer.
Level 20: 225.400 ([30.5 damage + 20 strength + 80 PA + 2 Weapon Spec + 2 MWM + 2 GrtWeapSpec) *1.6 (crit damage) + 7 PowCharge; advantage: Meleer.

The build presented here is not horribly optimized. It involves 1 level of barbarian and the rest fighter. I am fairly certain the math is correct, but if not please let me know. These are also using dice averages, so it is possible that the meleer does not 1-shot the archer or that it does far more damage than is necessary. While it is possible for a meleer to one-shot the archer, mobility, the bane of meleers, may well stop him. As may the archer's arrows. Unfortunately the same bonuses to speed an archer can get a meleer can get as well.

Your example is more or less on par, except for a few things. I'd give the archer a much higher AC than you gave him. A fighter can get +5 mithril full plate and a +5 animate shield by level 20, and a ranger can get +5 mithril breastplate and a +5 animated shield by then. All other mods aside, that alone gives 33 for the fighter and 32 for the ranger (includes armor and dex bonus only).

It also assumes an open field where the 2 combatants start within chargeable melee range. Mobility aside, terrain would make a huge difference. If I was in the same situation as the archer, I'd try my hardest to retreat to an area with cover, or hide in plain sight if possible.

Against a ground-based monster, the melee-er will be king, and vice versa for an airborne monster.

[ZeroNumerous]

Or how about:
- Take a 5-foot step back
- Make another full attack with bow
- Repeat until one of the 2 dies

If you're an archer, you should be better at ranged attacks, otherwise you'd be a melee character... It's detrimental to switch to melee unless your opponent has reach from size.

Well then the Meleer takes a five-foot step forward and full attacks. You've just be gibblified. Atleast with that one shot charge he only got one attack on you. A full-attack power attacking/leap attacking/shock trooper would just obliterate any archer of equivalent level if all he did was five-foot step.

[SpikeFightwicky]

Well then the Meleer takes a five-foot step forward and full attacks. You've just be gibblified. Atleast with that one shot charge he only got one attack on you. A full-attack power attacking/leap attacking/shock trooper would just obliterate any archer of equivalent level if all he did was five-foot step.

That's fine, and I agree with you, but you're sucking up a full attack in both scenarios... The user I quoted suggested taking out a heavy flail and engaging in melee combat once the melee-er closed in. I suggested a better solution of maitaining your ranged attacks from 5 feet away before going down.

Given the option, I'd likely get the **** out of there and try to find some rough terrain/cover/hide in plain site.

[Brother_Franklin]

Well my point with the flail is that no one is actually better with the bow than with a melee weapon in terms of racking up the damage. A point I think I've seen other people make. At least not if your a fighter. On the other hand, you don't have to give up much before becoming a decent archer. The more I look at them the more I think the archery feats are wastes of time. Point Blank Shot-woohoo +1 10% of the time. Rapid Shot-flurry of misses. Far shot-I could shoot him, if I could see him.
Nope the only 'archery' feat that is worth it is Quick Draw. Which is also usefull for anyone who wants to face oppents with DR, go through town with a hidden weapon, grapple ever, sleep ever, or just not be that tool who is always waving his sword around just in case something pops up and says boo.

Give any infintry fighter some Gloves of Dexerity, and a nice Compond Bow and he becomes much more usefull.

You know what, add a couple of throwing weapons in too.
[Lighter Armor is optional but reccomended].

[Dausuul]

Well my point with the flail is that no one is actually better with the bow than with a melee weapon in terms of racking up the damage. A point I think I've seen other people make. At least not if your a fighter.

Not even remotely true. Anyone who specializes in archery is going to have higher Dex than Str, resulting in a much better chance to hit with the bow than with the melee weapon (unless they blew a feat on Weapon Finesse). Plus all their focus is going to be on improving their accuracy and damage output with the bow. A fighter archer will have Weapon Focus/Specialization in the bow, and any archer will dump the bulk of his/her cash into beefing up the bow's performance, as well as picking up a pile of archery feats.

Which brings me to...


On the other hand, you don't have to give up much before becoming a decent archer. The more I look at them the more I think the archery feats are wastes of time. Point Blank Shot-woohoo +1 10% of the time. Rapid Shot-flurry of misses. Far shot-I could shoot him, if I could see him.

Point Blank does suck, but it's a prereq for everything else.
Rapid Shot is excellent. Like any other "flurry" mechanic (-2 to hit in exchange for an extra attack), if you crunch the numbers, the trade-off is almost always worth it. Until you get iterative attacks, the only time you lose out with Rapid Shot is if you need a roll of exactly 18 to hit the target. Anything lower or higher, and Rapid Shot either wins or breaks even. And by the time you do have iterative attacks, you should be hitting pretty reliably and an extra shot will be well worth the slight drop in accuracy.
Far Shot is handy at high levels when everything has a move speed of 60+, although it doesn't compare to the other archery feats.
Precise Shot is vitally useful if you have any kind of melee fighters in your group, including summoned critters.
And then there's Mounted Archery, which is the ultimate defensive feat for an archer.


Nope the only 'archery' feat that is worth it is Quick Draw. Which is also usefull for anyone who wants to face oppents with DR, go through town with a hidden weapon, grapple ever, sleep ever, or just not be that tool who is always waving his sword around just in case something pops up and says boo.

I will agree that Quick Draw is a very good and much underestimated feat.


Give any infintry fighter some Gloves of Dexerity, and a nice Compond Bow and he becomes much more usefull.

No argument there, but a specialized archer will tear him to shreds if he can't close to melee. Believe me, I've seen what a well-built archer can do. It's scary as hell.

[smellie_hippie]

*snip*
No argument there, but a specialized archer will tear him to shreds if he can't close to melee. Believe me, I've seen what a well-built archer can do. It's scary as hell.

Play as a scout. Grab yer point blank and rapid shot. Scout offers class feats of "shot on the run" which combines with their core ability to improve AC as a part of their movement rate. Now you have an archer that does not have to remain stationary, moves slightly faster than equal sized opponents, fires well into melee...

He's never gonna have that incredible "smack down" that the enraged barbarian will dole out with a greataxe... but it's still impressive to create a pincushion.

[Dausuul]

Play as a scout. Grab yer point blank and rapid shot. Scout offers class feats of "shot on the run" which combines with their core ability to improve AC as a part of their movement rate. Now you have an archer that does not have to remain stationary, moves slightly faster than equal sized opponents, fires well into melee...

He's never gonna have that incredible "smack down" that the enraged barbarian will dole out with a greataxe... but it's still impressive to create a pincushion.

Yeah, the archer I'm thinking of is a scout/ranger multi-class with a force bow and all the trimmings. His damage output versus evil outsiders is insane. The party tank is a warblade, built by a guy who knows how to optimize pretty damn well, but he just can't keep up with the archer.

Note however that Rapid Shot doesn't work for a scout build. You need Manyshot/Greater Manyshot, since you have to move at least 10 feet to get your skirmish bonus... or else you have to somehow get hold of that Tome of Battle stance that lets you move an extra 5 feet on a 5-foot step. :smallamused:

[Matthew]

Whatever happened to Arrows of Dispelling? Are there no supplements that feature this excellent resource for the Archer?

[Fenix_of_Doom]

Ok... I can also remember to reinforce my bow to my strenght modifier score... That makes the Bow a incredible 1d8 + 1 damage dealer. Woooo!!. That barbarian with the Greataxe will have some problems when I find him!! Ohhhh Yeah!
You've also said this in some other thread and I just had to reply to this for a sec.

if you are an archer, then you probably have a full BaB class and thus very little need of mental stats. you'll also probably have an average or better HD, so more then 14 con is not necessary, so strength is basically your second most important stat and will be higher then 13.

other points: I always thought flying and other mobility spells did the same as windwall for melee.

I recently read a thread started by Sir Giacomo were people were saying "archer fighter are the among the best fighters".


please do go on with your kinda off-topic dabate about powerfull archer builds

[Damionte]

You can't take a 5-Foot step to escape from black tentacles. You can't take 5-foot steps when your movement is hampered.

[Damionte]

Also the melee vs ranged warrior argument depends on terrain. On a wide open plain the melee warrior starts to win once they can close whatever starting distance the combat started at. Assuming he has enough HP's remaining when that time comes.

In rougher terrain where it may be possible for the archer to keep the melee warrior away for a longer period the battle starts to swing in the archers direction.

This is mopstly because on avg the melee builds can dish out more straight damage. They also have more combat options availuable to them, in the form of disarm, sunder, and common attacks of opportunity.

A ranged warrior on avg won't dish out as much damage though respectable damage is there. Defense is generally on par with a melee char or better, with a ranged character though. Range itself is a great defense, when facing a melee type as they can't hit what they can't reach. AC is generally the same for both. A melee type may get a few more points of AC overall depending on the build but this will usually be at the expense of either thier movement ability if wearing heavy armor or thier offense if they're a shield based build.

[PyritePyro]

Spell range: Long will always be greater than longbow range. Heck, at first level Long range for a caster is 110 feet. The same range as a longbow. It just gets better as he levels. At 5th level, thats 150. Archer's still on 110. 20th thats 300 feet. Archer? Still on 110.


Um, not exactly at longer than 110 feet the archer takes a -2 to his attack roll. at 220 feet, a -4, at 330, a -6 The maximum range of a bow is 10 range increments. that is, for a composite bow 1100 feet at -20 to the attack roll, or a little under a quarter mile. And as the wizard's level gets higher, the archer has more BAB to waste on longer range shots. Also throw in far shot, and range increment of any weapon increases by 1/2. So instead of 110 for a composite longbow the increment is 165. That gives it a maximum rage of 1650 feet, or 550 yards. This is over a quarter of a mile, and in fact it's a range increment that can't be closed in one round of normal movement.



We all know melee sucks versus casters, but your 2-4 attacks won't kill the raging barbarian. However, when he charges you with his ransuer, power attacking for five, leap attacking, converting it all to lowered AC to hit you, and the other various tricks for charging builds.. You're dead.



The wizard puts the wind wall in a cylinder around himself. What archer?



Throw an AoE spell behind the target in question. Full cover is no longer relevant.

Hmmm, well I just looked up wind wall. It's 10 feet per level of wall. Unless your friends, or minions can rush him (remember 1650 feet, that's a long way to go) He can still run away from your friends, his movement is the same as theirs under most circumstances. If he has a horse, it's even easier. So he stays at a fairly optimal range , let's say between 330 and 495 feet (-6 to his attack, but well outside a wizard's range, and assuming a level 20 PC fighter his BAB would be +20 so he's still attacking at +14. plus dex bonus (+6) (assuming optimal build, and all stat increases put in dex) and possibly a strength bonus (depending on player's luck luck) (+4 or less)) I don't see where the advantage falls to the wizard behind a wind wall. Unless he uses a movement spell to close within range, and manage to kill the archer, or archers despite the damage they can EASILY deal to him. while he's trying to make concentration checks. An archer build is only at a -2 at maximum range for a wizard of level 20. The range advantage is securely in the corner of the archer.

edit:cleaning up my math

[Skjaldbakka]

How's your archer at making that DC 33-40 spot check to pick out his target at that range? You do take a -1 to spot for every 10 ft. you are away from the thing you're spotting.

[PyritePyro]

How's your archer at making that DC 33-40 spot check to pick out his target at that range? You do take a -1 to spot for every 10 ft. you are away from the thing you're spotting.

Well, let's actualy break this down. We just need to be attacking outside the range of the wizard. Now why don't we check the DC of people in the open. Unfortunatly, I can't find one. So if we're talking an ambush where there isn't easy concealment, this is the sort of thing that's not covered by what I could find in the PHB or the DMG. I seem to have lost my DM's screen. If you could tell me the base DC, I'd be happy to answer your question. On the other hand, from my life experiances, A human can be easily seen at 1/4th of a mile in the open. I live in the great plains, so YMMV

[Skjaldbakka]

Realism + D&D = not so much

As for your base DC:


Very easy (0) Notice something large in plain sight (Spot)

EDIT- Where did you think it was from? d20srd of course (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/skills/usingSkills.htm#difficultyClass)

edit- I have done built the high range archer build. Maxed out range puts you outside maximum spotting distance while still inside first range increment. And by maximum spotting distance, I mean cranked out spot checks at level 20 (you don't need to be level 20 to max out your range though, IIRC).

[PyritePyro]

Realism + D&D = not so much

As for your base DC:
something large and in plain sight :0

Source please? And actually D&D is fairly good on the realism for a lot of things. Such as speed of movement, the amount a person can carry without becoming encumbered, and many other factors. And the wizard would have to make the same spot check. Actually the things D&D does well include the maximum effective range of ranged weapons. I think that there should be some decreases in the DC also. Otherwise it simply shows that wizards didn't put the same thought into spot as they did to listen (eg a noisy battle has a DC of -10) so that means 0 is a poor choice for the DC of something in plain sight.

[Forks]

How often do you really get to use a max range of 1000+ for an attack? Most dungeons and encounters Ive gone through severely limit your range, normally because we're romping around in some temple or fortress etc. Spells like teleport and so on of course rely on max range for usefulness.

I can imagine some scenarios where max range for an attack really matter, such as picking off guards from the walls of a fort or walled city. But how often do important targets just hang out exposed like that? Most important people are aware of the dangers of their position.

So: How often do you really get to use a max range of 1000+ for an attack? 500+ is much more useful, and 200-300+ is likely that much more useful.

Also, Im pretty sure these melee vs archer or caster vs archer debates are somewhat misguided, if only in their context. Archers have their set of pros and cons. So do meleers and (sorta) casters. I think the right way of looking at it is to consider your party make up and what an archer can bring to it. How can the archer help the party deal with some practical situations? I think thats the right context.

[Dausuul]

Also the melee vs ranged warrior argument depends on terrain. On a wide open plain the melee warrior starts to win once they can close whatever starting distance the combat started at. Assuming he has enough HP's remaining when that time comes.

In rougher terrain where it may be possible for the archer to keep the melee warrior away for a longer period the battle starts to swing in the archers direction.

This is mopstly because on avg the melee builds can dish out more straight damage. They also have more combat options availuable to them, in the form of disarm, sunder, and common attacks of opportunity.

On the other hand, a lot of melee builds involve heavy armor. If the archer can outrun the melee guy, the melee guy automatically loses; the archer just has to keep running until he's opened up a gap that the melee guy can't close in 1 round, then turn around and launch a volley of arrows, then repeat.

[PyritePyro]

How often do you really get to use a max range of 1000+ for an attack? Most dungeons and encounters Ive gone through severely limit your range, normally because we're romping around in some temple or fortress etc. Spells like teleport and so on of course rely on max range for usefulness.

I can imagine some scenarios where max range for an attack really matter, such as picking off guards from the walls of a fort or walled city. But how often do important targets just hang out exposed like that? Most important people are aware of the dangers of their position.

So: How often do you really get to use a max range of 1000+ for an attack? 500+ is much more useful, and 200-300+ is likely that much more useful.

Also, Im pretty sure these melee vs archer or caster vs archer debates are somewhat misguided, if only in their context. Archers have their set of pros and cons. So do meleers and (sorta) casters. I think the right way of looking at it is to consider your party make up and what an archer can bring to it. How can the archer help the party deal with some practical situations? I think thats the right context.

I was simply pointing out that an archer has a much longer maximum range than a wizard's spell. Then responding to rebuttals. I'm not stating that one is inherently superior to the other. I am simply saying that it's not as one-sided as the claim goes. And as far as how often will you be able to pick out people at a distance, no, it's not common in dungeons. But you build your character based on the environment you expect to encounter, or have encountered in your adventures. If your campaign isn't suited to archers, you simply won't create one. Over 20 levels of combat, most players would give up on something the DM won't allow to shine. If raiding and skirmishing is likely, or combined arms combat, then there may be advantages to having such a build.

[Sir Giacomo]

How's your archer at making that DC 33-40 spot check to pick out his target at that range? You do take a -1 to spot for every 10 ft. you are away from the thing you're spotting.

You do not need to make a spot check vs something that does not hide. And if the meleer hides, you can bet that the archer has a better spot check (he is optimised for it, after all).

@Piccamo: good calculations on the meleer needing only 1 hit to kill an archer. However, do not forget that
1) the archer did already 2 full round attacks vs the meleer (remember the meleer can only move 120ft each round, 160 ft if barbarian, 200ft if barbarian with run feat(unlikely), and can only make double move with charge in the round he wishes to close in), likely killing him at all levels (I made a 20th level pure core fighter archer build once that could kill a balor in 1 round plus a suprise round shot) and
2) if he did not kill him 2 full round attack, the last one will since the archer likley has a higher initiative modifier, giving him one more attack. Charger dies.
It is actually the same odds (or even better) if the charger tries to charge a caster for 2-3 rounds...

- Giacomo

[Skjaldbakka]

You do not need to make a spot check vs something that does not hide.

Oh really, than why is it a DC 0 spot check to notice something in plain sight?

:elan: Hey, look at that halfling!

:vaarsuvius: What halfling?

:elan: can't you see him? he's over there by that housecat, 2-3 miles away.

:vaarsuvius: 2-3 miles away! How can you possibly see that!

:elan: What?! Its not like he's hiding!

[Damionte]

You do not need to make a spot check vs something that does not hide. And if the meleer hides, you can bet that the archer has a better spot check (he is optimised for it, after all).

You were close. You actually don't need to make a skill check when there's no chance of failure. In this example Once you start adding in range then there's a modifier. Once that modifier is more than the skill of the person making the spot check then they have to make a check. Even if it just means failing on a Nat-1.


On the other hand, a lot of melee builds involve heavy armor. If the archer can outrun the melee guy, the melee guy automatically loses; the archer just has to keep running until he's opened up a gap that the melee guy can't close in 1 round, then turn around and launch a volley of arrows, then repeat.

That was my point. Note that there are also Archer builds that do thier thing in heavy armor as well. Not all archers are woodsy stealth snipers. A dungeon crawling archer would be well served to invest in a fighter type build in heavy armor.

[Matthew]

Oh no, not this again. Can you see the Sun? Can you see the stars? No, sir, the size modifiers versus Distance Spot Checks do not coincide...

Spot Checks are only called for to Spot something a character would not ordinarily be able to see or has a chance of not noticing, they are not called for in order to be able to see.


Spot (Wis)
Check
The Spot skill is used primarily to detect characters or creatures who are hiding. Typically, your Spot check is opposed by the Hide check of the creature trying not to be seen. Sometimes a creature isn’t intentionally hiding but is still difficult to see, so a successful Spot check is necessary to notice it.

A Spot check result higher than 20 generally lets you become aware of an invisible creature near you, though you can’t actually see it.

Spot is also used to detect someone in disguise, and to read lips when you can’t hear or understand what someone is saying.

Spot checks may be called for to determine the distance at which an encounter begins. A penalty applies on such checks, depending on the distance between the two individuals or groups, and an additional penalty may apply if the character making the Spot check is distracted (not concentrating on being observant).

Spot Check Penalties Condition Penalty
Per 10 feet of distance -1
Spotter distracted -5
Read Lips
To understand what someone is saying by reading lips, you must be within 30 feet of the speaker, be able to see him or her speak, and understand the speaker’s language. (This use of the skill is language-dependent.) The base DC is 15, but it increases for complex speech or an inarticulate speaker. You must maintain a line of sight to the lips being read.

If your Spot check succeeds, you can understand the general content of a minute’s worth of speaking, but you usually still miss certain details. If the check fails by 4 or less, you can’t read the speaker’s lips. If the check fails by 5 or more, you draw some incorrect conclusion about the speech. The check is rolled secretly in this case, so that you don’t know whether you succeeded or missed by 5.

See also: epic usages of Spot.

Action
Varies. Every time you have a chance to spot something in a reactive manner you can make a Spot check without using an action. Trying to spot something you failed to see previously is a move action. To read lips, you must concentrate for a full minute before making a Spot check, and you can’t perform any other action (other than moving at up to half speed) during this minute.

Try Again
Yes. You can try to spot something that you failed to see previously at no penalty. You can attempt to read lips once per minute.

Special
A fascinated creature takes a -4 penalty on Spot checks made as reactions.

If you have the Alertness feat, you get a +2 bonus on Spot checks.

A ranger gains a bonus on Spot checks when using this skill against a favored enemy.

An elf has a +2 racial bonus on Spot checks.

[Dausuul]

Oh really, than why is it a DC 0 spot check to notice something in plain sight?

:elan: Hey, look at that halfling!

:vaarsuvius: What halfling?

:elan: can't you see him? he's over there by that housecat, 2-3 miles away.

:vaarsuvius: 2-3 miles away! How can you possibly see that!

:elan: What?! Its not like he's hiding!

I counter with the following:

:elan: Hey, look at that guy right there!

:vaarsuvius: (rolls a natural 1, applies Wisdom penalty) What guy?

:elan: Uh, the big half-orc ten feet in front of you. He's right there.

:vaarsuvius: Nope, don't know what you're talking about. Can't see him at all.

[Orzel]

Things 2-3 miles away gain total cover from the planet I think.

Or a random tree/rock/house. There's always a random tree/rock/house in the way at that distance.

[Sutremaine]

Once that modifier is more than the skill of the person making the spot check then they have to make a check. Even if it just means failing on a Nat-1.
A natural 1 is not an auto-failure on a skill check, and rolls for skill checks are required only when the DC exceeds the modifier by two or more. The only exception to this is the 'activate item' function of UMD.

[Damionte]

I didn't say a nat-1 was a failure, in fact i was just about to say that as the poster a couple above seems to be suggesting that it is the case. I was simply sayign that once it's Possible that a natural 1 could fail then you should make a roll, since at that point is is possible to fail. even if chances are you're just going through the motions.

[Sutremaine]

Fair enough. Sorry for misreading you.

[Skjaldbakka]

Oh no, not this again. Can you see the Sun? Can you see the stars? No, sir, the size modifiers versus Distance Spot Checks do not coincide...

Hence, D&D + realism = not so much.

Just out of curiosity, how big is the sun in terms of size categories? You do have exponential increase on the bonus to spot something. The system still breaks down at that point.

There is a Spot DC listed for seeing something in plain sight. That DC is 0.



:elan: Hey, look at that guy right there!

:vaarsuvius: (rolls a natural 1, applies Wisdom penalty) What guy?

:elan: Uh, the big half-orc ten feet in front of you. He's right there.

:vaarsuvius: Nope, don't know what you're talking about. Can't see him at all.

Actually it would be more like this:

:elan: Hey, look at that guy right there!

:vaarsuvius: (rolls a natural 1, applies Wisdom penalty, applies +4 bonus for it being pointed out) OMG, where did he come from!?

[Matthew]

Skjald: It's only for things you wouldn't otherwise notice. Take a look at the Skill entry quoted above. It's not used for looking at your hand or whatever.

[Skjaldbakka]

Right. Because you wouldn't otherwise notice the large thing in plain sight. got it.

[SpikeFightwicky]

Hence, D&D + realism = not so much.

Just out of curiosity, how big is the sun in terms of size categories? You do have exponential increase on the bonus to spot something. The system still breaks down at that point.

There is a Spot DC listed for seeing something in plain sight. That DC is 0.



Actually it would be more like this:

:elan: Hey, look at that guy right there!

:vaarsuvius: (rolls a natural 1, applies Wisdom penalty, applies +4 bonus for it being pointed out) OMG, where did he come from!?

Where are you getting this DC 0 spot thing? It's not listed in the skill entry in the PHB or the SRD.

And how about this situation:

:elan: *Nice, there's an orc 10 feet away on an open plain. I'll assume V can see him because... it wouldn't make any sense otherwise.*

:vaarsuvius: (rolls a natural 1, applies Wisdom penalty) Just me and Elan on this open plain... That re-assuring... OH GOD! I just bumped into an orc! Must have been invisible.

[Skjaldbakka]

I've already posted the link, but here it is again. link. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/skills/usingSkills.htm#difficultyClass)

And tell me you've never been startled by someone that you should have seen, but didn't.

It is less ridiculous to not notice someone nearby than it is ridiculous to be able to see (automatically, regardless of how oblivious you are) something really far away (celestial bodies not withstanding).

[Matthew]

You know, that table is example difficulties of X, not example difficulties before modifiers. Unless you have a -11 Modifier, you should be alright... Still, it's poor design to include such an example.

[Edit] Oh yeah, I cannot really tell if you are being sarcastic or not above.

[Aquillion]

Why are there so many ways to shut down archers?

Wind Wall, Deflect Arrows, etc.?When you think about it, though, there are many more ways to shut down melee guys. Web? Grease? Tentacles? Solid Fog? Walls? Flying, which huge numbers of higher level monsters have? Teleportation? High movement speeds? Just hitting harder and having more HP than you?

Sure, some of these can stop archers for a bit, but an archer just has to maneuver for a clear shot... it's much easier for them to get a clear shot over or past an obstruction than it is for a melee guy to walk the long way past it.

[PyritePyro]

When you think about it, though, there are many more ways to shut down melee guys. Web? Grease? Tentacles? Solid Fog? Walls? Flying, which huge numbers of higher level monsters have? Teleportation? High movement speeds? Just hitting harder and having more HP than you?

Sure, some of these can stop archers for a bit, but an archer just has to maneuver for a clear shot... it's much easier for them to get a clear shot over or past an obstruction than it is for a melee guy to walk the long way past it.

Not only that but an archer can just stay out of range, until a wizard closes in (denying themselves their wind wall) or they run out of prepared wind walls.

[Lycurgus]

All this ranged vs. melee talk seems to be ignoring the fact that if the archer is paying attention to who is approaching him, the melee fighter is meaningless. I don't know of any swords that can chop you from 200 ft. away. :smalltongue: Remember that projectile weapons can fire up to 10 range increments away (with appropriate penalties). You get a bow with seeking on it with some other abilities and you are raining 20 arrows/gp worth of hell down on your enemies:smallbiggrin: . Not to mention the two magic words high ground. If I'm shooting from a position you can't get to, you can't touch me while I'm making you a pincushion. Granted magic can make this moot, but magic, when used with some careful planning, can make anything moot.