Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="comrade raoul" data-source="post: 728697" data-attributes="member: 554">&lt;homer&gt;Mmmm .... sacred cow.&lt;/homer&gt;Yeah, I think archers are probably a bit too good already, and when I saw Manyshot in the revised PHB, I did a double-take, bitterly noted to myself that it was Christmastime in archer-land, and sat down to do an analysis. Here're my results.[code][font=courier][size=1][color=white]manyshot:expected hits by number of arrowsac-att&nbsp; &nbsp; one&nbsp; &nbsp; two&nbsp; &nbsp; three&nbsp; &nbsp; four-6&nbsp; &nbsp; 0.95&nbsp; &nbsp; 1.90&nbsp; &nbsp; 2.85&nbsp; &nbsp; 3.80-4&nbsp; &nbsp; 0.95&nbsp; &nbsp; 1.90&nbsp; &nbsp; 2.85&nbsp; &nbsp; 3.40-2&nbsp; &nbsp; 0.95&nbsp; &nbsp; 1.90&nbsp; &nbsp; 2.55&nbsp; &nbsp; 3.000&nbsp; &nbsp; 0.95&nbsp; &nbsp; 1.70&nbsp; &nbsp; 2.25&nbsp; &nbsp; 2.602&nbsp; &nbsp; 0.95&nbsp; &nbsp; 1.50&nbsp; &nbsp; 1.95&nbsp; &nbsp; 2.207&nbsp; &nbsp; 0.70&nbsp; &nbsp; 1.00&nbsp; &nbsp; 1.20&nbsp; &nbsp; 1.208&nbsp; &nbsp; 0.65&nbsp; &nbsp; 0.90&nbsp; &nbsp; 1.05&nbsp; &nbsp; 1.0010&nbsp; &nbsp; 0.55&nbsp; &nbsp; 0.70&nbsp; &nbsp; 0.60&nbsp; &nbsp; 0.4012&nbsp; &nbsp; 0.45&nbsp; &nbsp; 0.40&nbsp; &nbsp; 0.30&nbsp; &nbsp; 0.20comparative tableexpected hits by maximum number of attacks possible at listed bab&nbsp; &nbsp; bab +6&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; bab +11&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; bab +16ac-att&nbsp; &nbsp; ms&nbsp; &nbsp; rs&nbsp; &nbsp; ms&nbsp; &nbsp; rs&nbsp; &nbsp; ms&nbsp; &nbsp; rs-6&nbsp; &nbsp; 1.90&nbsp; &nbsp; 2.85&nbsp; &nbsp; 2.85&nbsp; &nbsp; 3.60&nbsp; &nbsp; 3.80&nbsp; &nbsp; 4.10-4&nbsp; &nbsp; 1.90&nbsp; &nbsp; 2.80&nbsp; &nbsp; 2.85&nbsp; &nbsp; 3.45&nbsp; &nbsp; 3.40&nbsp; &nbsp; 3.85-2&nbsp; &nbsp; 1.90&nbsp; &nbsp; 2.70&nbsp; &nbsp; 2.55&nbsp; &nbsp; 3.25&nbsp; &nbsp; 3.00&nbsp; &nbsp; 3.550&nbsp; &nbsp; 1.70&nbsp; &nbsp; 2.60&nbsp; &nbsp; 2.25&nbsp; &nbsp; 3.05&nbsp; &nbsp; 2.60&nbsp; &nbsp; 3.252&nbsp; &nbsp; 1.50&nbsp; &nbsp; 2.30&nbsp; &nbsp; 1.95&nbsp; &nbsp; 2.65&nbsp; &nbsp; 2.20&nbsp; &nbsp; 2.757&nbsp; &nbsp; 1.00&nbsp; &nbsp; 1.55&nbsp; &nbsp; 1.20&nbsp; &nbsp; 1.65&nbsp; &nbsp; 1.20&nbsp; &nbsp; 1.708&nbsp; &nbsp; 0.90&nbsp; &nbsp; 1.40&nbsp; &nbsp; 1.05&nbsp; &nbsp; 1.45&nbsp; &nbsp; 1.00&nbsp; &nbsp; 1.5010&nbsp; &nbsp; 0.70&nbsp; &nbsp; 1.10&nbsp; &nbsp; 0.60&nbsp; &nbsp; 1.15&nbsp; &nbsp; 0.40&nbsp; &nbsp; 1.2012&nbsp; &nbsp; 0.40&nbsp; &nbsp; 0.65&nbsp; &nbsp; 0.30&nbsp; &nbsp; 0.70&nbsp; &nbsp; 0.20&nbsp; &nbsp; 0.75[/color][/font][/size][/code]Some explanation: each table item indicates the number of statistically expected hits. In the second, comparative table, &quot;ms&quot; means manyshot, and &quot;rs&quot; means rapid shot, and each column represents the expected hits if the attacker fired as many arrows as his base attack bonus allowed (a bab of +11 allows three arrows with manyshot, and four with rapid shot). The &quot;ac-att&quot; column on both tables refers to the target's AC minus the attacker's total attack bonus, not counting modifiers from manyshot or rapid shot. In other words, if he were making a single, normal ranged attack at his highest bonus, &quot;ac-att&quot; is the number he'd need to roll to hit. When it's negative, it means the attacker's attack bonus exceeds the defender's AC by the listed amount.Note that critical damage isn't considered here, because it's too complicated and varies significantly from archer to archer. This makes manyshot slightly worse than its listed expected hits would suggest, since only one attack can deliver critical damage.What can we infer from these results? The comparative table isn't interesting, but it's reassuring: it's always better to use rapid shot than manyshot. The analysis of manyshot by itself, however, is interesting. If you can hit your target easily, manyshot provides a very big advantage. It's not worth using, however, for difficult shots, unless you really need to do a lot of damage and are willing to take a big risk: if you need a 7 or higher to hit, it's always (statistically) better to fire three arrows than four; if you need a 10 or higher, it's always better to fire two arrows than three; if you need a 12 or higher, it's best not to use manyshot at all. Note, though, that archers tend to have really good attack bonuses, so most of the time, they'll be able to use manyshot to good effect.Is manyshot broken? As other posters have pointed out, it's very rare for archers, unlike melee characters, not to be able to take a full attack action if they want to (since you don't need to move next to your target) -- so manyshot isn't so much a general boost to damage output as it is a helpful tactical option. In general, I see manyshot having two or three common uses:1. It's a big help in surprise rounds -- you can use your partial action to fill your enemies full of arrows.2. It's great when you want to both do lots of ranged damage and increase the distance between you and approaching melee attackers.3. If it's compatible with Shot on the Run, it can be a very powerful way to move outside of cover, do lots of ranged damage, and go back in.4. If anything in 3.5e lets you take extra partial actions, it can enable archers to do massive damage when combining it with a (rapid shot-aided) full attack action.Now all of these can be significant advantages in the right circumstances, especially &quot;4&quot;, which could easily break games (especially with those damn cleric-archers). And I think archers are good enough as is: they don't need any more useful tactical options -- they can already deliver very large, reliable amounts of damage from wherever they want, whenever they want.The conclusion: there's no way I'm allowing manyshot in any games I run, but it's not so sick that I'd step out of a game in which a DM allowed it.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="comrade raoul, post: 728697, member: 554"] <homer>Mmmm .... sacred cow.</homer> Yeah, I think archers are probably a bit too good already, and when I saw Manyshot in the revised PHB, I did a double-take, bitterly noted to myself that it was Christmastime in archer-land, and sat down to do an analysis. Here're my results.[code][font=courier][size=1][color=white]manyshot: expected hits by number of arrows ac-att one two three four -6 0.95 1.90 2.85 3.80 -4 0.95 1.90 2.85 3.40 -2 0.95 1.90 2.55 3.00 0 0.95 1.70 2.25 2.60 2 0.95 1.50 1.95 2.20 7 0.70 1.00 1.20 1.20 8 0.65 0.90 1.05 1.00 10 0.55 0.70 0.60 0.40 12 0.45 0.40 0.30 0.20 comparative table expected hits by maximum number of attacks possible at listed bab bab +6 bab +11 bab +16 ac-att ms rs ms rs ms rs -6 1.90 2.85 2.85 3.60 3.80 4.10 -4 1.90 2.80 2.85 3.45 3.40 3.85 -2 1.90 2.70 2.55 3.25 3.00 3.55 0 1.70 2.60 2.25 3.05 2.60 3.25 2 1.50 2.30 1.95 2.65 2.20 2.75 7 1.00 1.55 1.20 1.65 1.20 1.70 8 0.90 1.40 1.05 1.45 1.00 1.50 10 0.70 1.10 0.60 1.15 0.40 1.20 12 0.40 0.65 0.30 0.70 0.20 0.75[/color][/font][/size][/code]Some explanation: each table item indicates the number of statistically expected hits. In the second, comparative table, "ms" means manyshot, and "rs" means rapid shot, and each column represents the expected hits if the attacker fired as many arrows as his base attack bonus allowed (a bab of +11 allows three arrows with manyshot, and four with rapid shot). The "ac-att" column on both tables refers to the target's AC minus the attacker's total attack bonus, not counting modifiers from manyshot or rapid shot. In other words, if he were making a single, normal ranged attack at his highest bonus, "ac-att" is the number he'd need to roll to hit. When it's negative, it means the attacker's attack bonus exceeds the defender's AC by the listed amount. Note that critical damage isn't considered here, because it's too complicated and varies significantly from archer to archer. This makes manyshot slightly worse than its listed expected hits would suggest, since only one attack can deliver critical damage. What can we infer from these results? The comparative table isn't interesting, but it's reassuring: it's always better to use rapid shot than manyshot. The analysis of manyshot by itself, however, is interesting. If you can hit your target easily, manyshot provides a very big advantage. It's not worth using, however, for difficult shots, unless you really need to do a lot of damage and are willing to take a big risk: if you need a 7 or higher to hit, it's always (statistically) better to fire three arrows than four; if you need a 10 or higher, it's always better to fire two arrows than three; if you need a 12 or higher, it's best not to use manyshot at all. Note, though, that archers tend to have really good attack bonuses, so most of the time, they'll be able to use manyshot to good effect. Is manyshot broken? As other posters have pointed out, it's very rare for archers, unlike melee characters, not to be able to take a full attack action if they want to (since you don't need to move next to your target) -- so manyshot isn't so much a general boost to damage output as it is a helpful tactical option. In general, I see manyshot having two or three common uses: 1. It's a big help in surprise rounds -- you can use your partial action to fill your enemies full of arrows. 2. It's great when you want to both do lots of ranged damage and increase the distance between you and approaching melee attackers. 3. If it's compatible with Shot on the Run, it can be a very powerful way to move outside of cover, do lots of ranged damage, and go back in. 4. If anything in 3.5e lets you take extra partial actions, it can enable archers to do massive damage when combining it with a (rapid shot-aided) full attack action. Now all of these can be significant advantages in the right circumstances, especially "4", which could easily break games (especially with those damn cleric-archers). And I think archers are good enough as is: they don't [b]need[/b] any more useful tactical options -- they can already deliver very large, reliable amounts of damage from wherever they want, whenever they want. The conclusion: there's no way I'm allowing manyshot in any games I run, but it's not so sick that I'd step out of a game in which a DM allowed it. [/QUOTE]

Verification