Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 729166" data-attributes="member: 4937">Of course it wasn't valid.The point was to force people to consider just how powerful in and of itself the ability to attack at range is. I agree that the original implementation of ranged combat was fairly balanced with melee combat, though I do feel that on the whole the list of limitations you cite does not balance against the advantages.  I do have a few quibbles, most notably with the strange tactical burden imposed upon someone in melee combat with an archer and the low penalty of getting an extra full attack from rapid shot.  But I don't want to start up another discussion of the narrowness of RS's penalty.  There are enough of those already.Just because I consider the original balance close doesn't mean I think you can continue to maintain that balance if you continually add feats the remove the list of restrictions that you described.  And there have been any number of feats , spells, items, and class abilities created that elimenate almost every one of them.  Given how powerful I find PC archery to be in my campaign I really don't think that archers need that much help. Multishot is still too good (for all the reasons I cited) whether or not archery is too powerful.</blockquote>