NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Falconer" data-source="post: 845591" data-attributes="member: 1952">Oh well, it's been some time since I've said anything in the forms... but I think I'll touch on this one for once.One, I feel GMW wasn't broken.  A +5 bonus at level 15 is fitting for that level of spellcaster.  +4/level I feel might be a little slow.  But still in line.  I think 3e has gone a long way towards making non-casters plenty powerfull at higher levels.  In fact, a mage has trouble matching the damage output of the good old slicing/dicing meat shield under many circumstances.On arrows.. . 50 arrows a pop may be overkill.  3X the casters level might be more appropriate for ammunition IMO.  30 arrows doesn't last that long at 10th level. The reason that having enchanted ammunition is the large numbers of monsters that require bonuses to hit at mid and high levels.   The bow cannot impart this and is the only weapon comparable to a melee weapon.  And well buying ammo is REDICULOUSLY expensive.  In order to make a viable archer character.  There MUST be some source of inexpensive ammo.  GMW has been used largely to date because it's about the only way to fill this requirement.Stacking I think was the wrong answer as others have posted in 1e (my favorite incarnation of D&D still to this day).  The bow was limited to +1 and the arrows to +4.  So you never exceeded the +5.I think the best answer is already in the rules.  Bonuses of the same type do not stack.  The exception for missile weapons I think was wrong.  I'd say take the best of weapon or ammunition but not both.  A +3 bow wouldn't care if you had +1 +2 or +3 arrows, only in the case of +4 or +5 ammunition would it matter.Furthermore, in this case, whatever you can have on a single melee weapon you'll never exceed on the missile weapon.  +5 +enhancements.  The big disagreement I see is the potential for +10/+10.  And I also feel that this is abusive and shouldn't qualify for stacking like this.I pointed out ages ago... that the way that Wizards has done many weapons overly empowers multiple attacks (look at shuriken).  With one attack I can tos 3  flaming, shocking, icing, returning +1, shuriken.   Throw in everyone's favourite whipping boy GMW and those are +5.  Not bad for dinky 1point weapons!  It's all from the bonuses.  And that's using *one* attack so full movement applies.  Shoot on the move and it's ugly.I think the best way to state it is 3e is overprone to power-gaming tactics.  This is true of many RPG's.  The only tried and true defense is for the DM to keep things in line.As many have stated.  Many situations are completely wrong for archers.   Even quick single level spells such as fog or even an obscuring illusion render ranged attacks ineffective.   Quickly reducing things to melee range.  Indoor/underground encounters are RARELY suited to the use of ranged weapons. People point out repeatedly within 30' rules... within 30' an archer CAN"T stay out of range!  Even in heavy armour and without movement enhancers a fighter can charge 30' easily and get in his attack.   I haven't played 3e much lately but unless haste has been seriously errata'd one of the best uses of the extra partial action is to use it to move!  Move then use your full attack.  Also I'll point out everything is optional.  The one initiate of the bow... this smacks of the old 2.5E problem (now we're going to have a 3.5E I take it).  Where people would run out and buy a book just to get some new little trick and claim because it was in the published books the DM had to use it.  The DMG is pretty clear that the DM is free to disallow or change things that are imbalanced.  I still hold that anything that ISN"T core rulebook needs DM approval and is pure optional.   Keeps abuse down nicely.</blockquote>

Verification