Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Rackhir" data-source="post: 2204115" data-attributes="member: 149">Your view of how DMs should react to archers, depends on constantly going after the character's bow. Otherwise the archer can just do a 5' step back and keep firing. There are always ways for a DM to screw players, I just don't see why the DM should make a particular point of screwing archers vs other characters. The Rapiers and daggers are not significantly more difficult to sunder than a bow, yet I never see people going "Just break their rapier". Personally, I simply don't like sundering being used in D&D period. It seems a sour grapes way of dealing with foes for PCs or NPCs.I was emphasizing the fact that D&D is not realistic, because you are baseing your argument on what is "realistic". Complaining that one minor change (not sundering bows at every chance) is "without some kind of verisimilitude" is silly. IRL bow were never used in close combat, not because people were afraid of having their bows destroyed. They weren't used, because unlike Legolas, people can't draw and fire quickly enough to prevent the enemy from sticking a sword in your guts which realistically kills you. Not giving you a scratch as the D&D HP system dictates. The whole D&D combat system is fundamentally unrealistic because of this HP system. Try playing GURPS sometime. That has a pretty realistic approach to combat between people and it is extremely lethal. One or two good hits in a vital location and you're dead.How is an archer more dependent on other charcters than a Rogue when operating in a scouting mode? He's better able to defend himself, deals substantially more damage and probably has considerably more HP. I don't see the logic there.Actually we both forgot the Arcane Archer. However those are base classes you are listing and none of the non fighter classes really contribute anything in the way of archery specific skills. They might have abilities that are useful, but you might as well include every base class, since every class has it's useful skills and abilities. The reason why those other classes aren't tied to a bow is because they aren't nearly as good at using a bow as a dedicated archer is. Especially when you start including Archery specific PrCs. A dedicated archer is at a minimum typically going to have Precise shot, Point Blank Shot, Rapid Shot, Weapon Focus and weapon Spec. Leaving aside weapon spec, that's all the feats until 9th lv for a non-human non-fighter. Even a fighter doesn't have enough feats to be good at archery and equally good at a melee feat chain. You have to specialize if you want be really effective at something in D&D and specialization is the whole point of PrCs. Cleric Archer builds I'm can be extremely effective, but I find then aestetically offensive, because they are primarily spell casters and require a specific elven munchkin race and a specific munchkin elvish god to be fully effective. I'm puzzled as to why you included bards though. Rogues I can see including for the sneak attack dice, but I'm not sure what the bard's going to contribute.Any decent fighter(type) based archer is going to be at least as effective with a melee weapon as a non-archer is going to be with a bow and that is still a dammed sight better than any non fighter(type) is going to be in frontline combat. You still have fighter BAB, decent strength (For the Strength bow) and fighter HP. So even without a bow you are still going to be an effective combatant. Just because you've lost your bow or are fighting something where it's not effective, doesn't mean you have to run and hide.</blockquote>

Verification