Quote Originally Posted by Eldariel View Post
- Far shot: Increased range increments. Either percentile (1.5*) or straight up (random numbers) +20' to accurate range and +80' to max range.
- Sharpshooter: Halve cover or reduce cover by one category. Treat half cover as no cover and three-quarters cover as half cover, for example. Or halve the penalties as I do (but in Sharpshooter)
I like this. Reduce, don't eliminate the feat, and maybe extend range some to balance.

Quote Originally Posted by Droppeddead View Post
Well, not saying you are wrong but a lot of the things you bring up isn't a fault of the game but rather how you play it. There are a few factual things you get wrong as well though so I'll just mention those as well.

In a blank map scenario, this is all true. Remember though that people (and zombies) can both block line of sight and give cover. It might be hard to even see that wzaird of there's a hoard of zomboes (and people fighting the zombies) in the way.
...
Againm this isn't really a problem with the system as much as it is a problem with how people run their games. I can agree that playing on flat, open battlemaps with no distinguishable feature will get boring quickly. The solution to that isn't to change the rules though but to change the way you run your battles. High ground for people to shoot from, things to duck behind or that blocks line of sight. A bee hive that makes the high ground a dangerous place to be at which then sucks for the archer who climbed there. Lots of ways to make battles interesting.
In support -- It's easy to look at the ranges and forget reality. While there is a problem in that there should be more penalties applied -- I mean, ignoring 3/4 cover at 300 feet, and against moving targets? -- I agree that "realistic" GM-ing fixes a lot.

GMs have to think through the scenarios. Arrows at range require altitude, and you just can't ignore tree limbs and so on because of a feat. A target standing in the open below a line of trees, at long range -- how do you sharpshoot that with no penalty at all, if whether the arrow going through the tree limbs or not will be totally random?

Also consider concealment -- lightly and heavily obscured. Again, you should not be able to sharpshoot at something you can't see clearly enough to distinguish. Tall grass that might not stop an arrow can still stop you from getting enough of a line of sight to the target to sharpshoot. Basically add to sharpshooter: "You must have a clear line of sight to the target. The target must not be obscured by other factors besides the cover." Perhaps someone else can suggest better wording, not trying to totally nerf sharpshooter.