Archery

[Skjaldbakka]

1) Power Attack being shifted down to 1:1 for all weapons, coupled with 1.5 Strength Bonus to AB and DB (minimum of +1 Bonus, so -1 becomes 0, 0 becomes 1, etc..) for Two Handed Weapons (but only Two Handed Weapons).

2) Combat Expertise as a Bonus Feat for all Martial Classes,

3) Weapon Finesse applies to all weapons.

4) Dumping of Iterative Attacks in favour of an Extra Attack at their Full Attack Bonus when they reach Base Attack Bonus 11 .

5) Strength Bonus applies to Bow AB and Thrown Weapons (does not stack with Dexterity)

6) Full Strength Bonus to Off Hand Attacks

7) Adios retarded Race Weapons

8) Clerics learn spells like Wizards

9) Only Spells on my list are available.

10) Great Swords do 1D12 Damage

11) Critical Hits are gone, many weapons move up a Damage Die.

12) Elves get automatic Proficiency with Short Swords, Long Swords, Short Bows and Long Bows.

13) Spears and Long Spears can be used One Handed (but do 1D6 Damage)

14) Tower Shields are Two Handed Weapons

15) Armour doesn't reduce Movement Speed, only Running Speed

16) One Handed or Light Weapons used Two Handed move up a Damage Die (i.e. 1D6 becomes 1D8, 1D8 becomes 1D10, etc...). Conversely, Two Handed Weapons used One handed move down a Damage Die (i.e. 1D12 becomes 1D10)

17) Shields grant a Block Manoeuvre as an Immediate Action

18) Orcs are just another word for Hobgoblin. Half Orcs undergo significant reforms...

19) Monks get full Base Attack Bonus progression, amongst other things

20) Saving Throws become +1 per Character Level for all Classes and Prestige Classes

21) Skill Focus becomes +4 and can be bought in stages; other Skill Boosting Feats are removed.

Why Strength to hit with bows? I can see strength for thrown weapons, but strength for bows doesn't make sense to me.

To avoid sidetracking another thread.

[MCerberus]

I don't see it either, the tension is stored in the bow and if you can pull the string you can fire it. It's just a ranged touch that you have to deal with armor.

[Kizara]

I can tell you as someone that did no small amount of archery that strength does indeed let you pull bows that do more impact, but it does nothing at all for your ability to hit with them.

[Jack Zander]

Okay, so you can pull a longbow while I can only pull a shortbow. But when we both pull a shortbow it'll have the same impact.

[Corinthus]

A bow with the same draw will always hit with the same impact. Your ability to hit depends on how steady your hands are (dex). If you have a higher strength, then you can pull a bow with a higher draw, which will have more impact.

Honestly, WotC got archery right already, no reason to change it.

[Townopolis]

There are a few things I might change. Bows could do a little more damage, perhaps having mighty bows add double your strength modifier (up to double the mighty rating), or perhaps just upping the die type by one. An archer without a tank is worse off than a glaive wielder, and an archer with a tank is no better off, they still have to take precise shot to retain most of their effectiveness. While I'm at it, I'd make repeating crossbows martial.

However, as far as the base mechanics go, Wizards got archery right.

[Matthew]

The reasoning is simply that the 'to hit roll' represents both 'hitting a target' and 'penetrating armour' (Since Armour Class does not apply against Damage). Heavier bows that require greater strength to use, overcome armour better than lighter Bows that require less strength to use.

[Skjaldbakka]

The reasoning is simply that the 'to hit roll' represents both 'hitting a target' and 'penetrating armour' (Since Armour Class does not apply against Damage). Heavier bows that require greater strength to use, overcome armour better than lighter Bows that require less strength to use.

OK, that makes sense. If figured you would have a good justification. So you wouldn't use this rule with say, armor as DR, at the same time.

I personally depict armor AC as reducing the valid target area, and thus making the target harder to hit, but that doesn't really work well with bows (as not much armor stops bows). My solution is to give bows a bonus to hit vs. armored targets, to represent that arrows will punch through armor, if it hits at the right angle.

Do you have some way to make tower shields useful in your game? Like a feat or something to let you use a weapon at the same time?

[Matthew]

Probably not, though you could always argue that arrows shot from stronger bows travel faster and so are harder to avoid than arrows shot from weaker bows, which is pretty much the argument for using Strength to hit in Melee under an Armour as DR system [i.e. Strength = Speed]. I have no idea how true that is, though. At the moment, Armour in my games grants full AC, but Medium Armour also grants 1/- DR and Heavy Armour 2/- DR.

Just to clarify, I should point out that you cannot apply a higher strength than the rating of the Bow in the above system.

On the same subject, I give Cross Bows 'Strength Ratings', so when shot they behave as though shot with Strength X. Originally, I was inclined to do the same as you and apply a modifier against armour [i.e. following the 2e Combat and Tactics method], but the speed argument swayed me back, as well as the simplicity of doing it this way.

I should probably also mention that, under my rules, Range Penalties apply both to AB and DB (to a minimum of 1, of course).

Tower Shields: The way it currently works in my game is that you can set a Tower Shield up as a Pavise and treat it as cover or you could use it to Bull Rush someone in a pinch; it's generally used for approaching fortified positions.