Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Al" data-source="post: 850210" data-attributes="member: 2486">That's certainly true.  However, the archer does still gain obvious benefits from a higher Strength, and your repeated examples demonstrate.  The archer is (generally) not too stupid.  He can identify his weaknesses and cover them...if he's not bright enough to do that, he can pocket the difference (given that the meleeist seems to be buying top-of-the-range Dex and Str buffing items) and convert it to increase his efficacy elsewhere. Not really.  By your own example, the meleeist is buying 18 Strength using point-buy, leaving him far fewer points to spend elsewhere (and he'll want a respectable Con).  Even if he cuts corner and buys the same number of stat points, his ability increases are going to be focussed on Str rather than Dex, and he will tend to gravitate towards Str-boosting items *before* (no not necessarily in exclusion of) Dex-boosting ones.  Between point-buying and ability increases (or possibly race selection) the top level archer is likely to lead the fighter by about 8-10 points on Dex: more than reasonable, given you give the meleeist a 16 point advantage on Strength.  If anything, there is no reason why if the meleeist has a 16-point advantage on Strength then the archer should not have a 16-point advantage on Dex. The wizard's Protection from Arrows will, of course, only protect him from up to +3 arrows, but the archer is using +4s; Stoneskin would give protection, but is equally as valid against melee weapons.  Protection from Elements is equally as effective against elemental melee weapons as missile weapons. Very high ACs will tend to increase the utility of having high to-hit bonuses, where the archer will almost certainly lead (by about 7 points or so as I previously stated), and will decrease the usefulness of Power Attack. Both of which are equally as effective against melee attacks.Of course, I'm not saying that an archer can kill a well-prepared wizard.  I'm saying that the archer is more likely than the meleeist to be able to kill the wizard before he can start the heavy-gun spells rolling, and possibly even before he can erect his defenses. Assuming a successful critical, this will do average 66 points of damage if the fighter manages to close to range.  Even beyond 30', the archer can deal in surplus of 80.  Within 30', with ranged sneak attack, Weapon Spec etc. also coming into play, the archer can get to roughly 180 points, disregarding criticals (four attacks, each attack doing d8+8(magic)+4d6(two elements, holy)+4d6(sneak attack)+2(spec)+1(bracers)+4(str)+1PBS).  With this sort of damage, it's not just the wizards who are worrying.  Even a 12th level barbarian with average HP rolls and 24 Con is going down (167.5HPs).  That is why archers are so deadly- because of the pivotal first round of combat.  If the archer gets the drop on melee man (12th level fighter, 18 Con, average 120 HPs).  His to-hit bonuses can reach very high levels (12 base + 8 Dex + 2 bracers + 8 magic + 1 focus +1 PBS - 2 RS = +30 to hit) with melee man only on a 35 AC (10 base + 11 armour + 5 shield + 3 Dex + 3 amuletnatarmour + 3 ringofprot), and he only needs three hits (a 5,5,10 would do) to take out melee man in one fell swoop. The melee fighter will have an advantage in grappling, as I have repeatedly said.  Incidentally, I would say that Weapon Finesse is relatively common, since every character, let alone every archer, ought prepare for the worst-case scenario, and there are only eight archery-based feats (Rapid Shot, PBS, Precise Shot, WF, WS, Distant Shot, Improved Crit, Sharpshooting), not all of which will be taken (especially Far Shot, which I've never seen). Sure, like I said, melee weapons are harder to sunder than missile weapons.  I've already conceded this, though I said that the adept sunderer (Improved Sunder et al.) can get through nearly anything, melee or missile.Arguments about disarm, sunder and so forth I fail to see much merit in.  I have already repeatedly admitted to in a one-on-one battle, the meleeist can use such tactics and can gain an advantage.  My case is that the archer, whilst not invincible by any stretch of the imagination, has greater overall power than the meleeist, all cases considered (i.e. not just in terms of disarming, sundering and grappling). ...etc.  A second ago you were using a keen falchion for the nice crits.  Before that you were using a greatsword for the sundering and disarming.  For PrCs you oscillate between the spiked chain and dual-wielding (shortswords?).  Just because I refer to the 'meleeist' it does not give you liberty to chop-and-change his melee weapon at will depending on which is the most advantageous in the given situation! PHB 136 "You can use a melee attack with a slashing weapon to strik a weapon...The attacking weapon must be no more than one size category smaller".  Show me an effective dual-*longsword* wielding Tempest build and I'll concede this point. To be fair, I didn't say all flying encounters were indoors- I said most.  Given, moreover, that the creature is question was an elder arrowhawk, I think that an outside encounter is probably more realistic. Presumably because the back rank is dishing out more damage than the front one?  With comparable ACs and HPs, the only reason one would go to the back rank, forfeiting full attacks and provoking AoOs is if they posed a significantly greater threat than the front rank, which sort of proves my point. We can trade spells all day.  Grease or Entangle can mess up a meleeist.  Wind Wall can mess up an archer.  Expeditious Retreat makes life difficult for the meleeist.  Fire Shield makes it painful for the meleeist.  Protection from Arrows causes real difficulty for the archer...ad nauseam.  Using spell X to beat archery is invalid as I can find a spell Y to beat melee. Probably, but either way you cut it, the archer is better (by default!) than the meleeist at range. Doesn't protect you against negative levels, unless you also have Negative Plane Protection, and now you're skewing so that the meleeist has the buffs.  As for the archer, he may not get sneak attack, but he's still doing respectable amounts of damage (about 60 per round or so). But not every monster has spells!  Ever seen the tarrasque Haste himself?  A dire tiger with Greater Magic Fang?  Gray Renders with Mirror Images?  Vermin with a penchant for Protection from Arrows?  Sure, a fair proportion of mid- to high-level opponents will have some form of magical assistance, but not all, or even most.</blockquote>

Verification