Archers: viable archetype?

[Aust Diamondew]

Mounted Archery can make you archer very very scary.
Try to engage opponents from a few hundred feet away that way you can spend a few round pumelling them until they close with you.

 

[dagger]

I also think the new Swordbow magic item from Races of the Wild is a must for archers once they can afford it, even if you have close combat shot.

The elven craft bows are nice as well, but the Swordbow freaking rocks.

 

[VirgilCaine]

Unbless I happen to have a horse around, It is not really possible to carry more without magical aid.

What do you mean?
If you are using a pack animal (mule or donkey, 8 gp, pack saddle 5 gp) to carry food and water and tools (picks, shovels, etc.), and only keeping your weapons on you, it's easy to have a lot of stuff available. Water is the problem here, since it weighs 8 lbs/gallon.

If you aren't using pack animals...well...

 

[Crothian]

What do you mean?
If you are using a pack animal (mule or donkey, 8 gp, pack saddle 5 gp) to carry food and water and tools (picks, shovels, etc.), and only keeping your weapons on you, it's easy to have a lot of stuff available. Water is the problem here, since it weighs 8 lbs/gallon.

If you aren't using pack animals...well...

Right, which is why I said unless we happen to have a horse around to carry the items. REplace horse with other animal to carry things, but really after a few levels the survibility of a donkey goes way down.

 

[felis]

High Magic Double plus good...

In a really high magic game no one can crank out more damage than an archer consistantly. One simple reason (if it didn't change in 3.5), enchantment from the bow and the arrows stack... +5, speed, shock bow with a set of 5 x (+5, returning, energy etc.) for a combined ungodly +10 at least two shots plus whatever you get by class or rapid/multishot, and extra energy damage for seasoning purposes. You can basically hit whatever you want a lot of times, and play fun tricks like "I want to shoot the wizard through the scroll he is reading with a flaming arrow." Under our house rules, it was about +8 for a head sized called shot target, so you would still get a plus two, (or zero if the DM is being tough on you). And whether or not you hit him, you can always make the arguement that the enchantment on his clothing doesn't really apply to the scroll he is holding in front of his body, thus he would only get his dex bonus +10. Concentration check doesn't mean much when there is nothing to read.

You can also have fun with a high initiative by holding your shot for the oppontent magic users to start there thing and preemptively pop them one; it adds to the concentration check (damage and flaming apparel), and if they make the first check, pop them again. Continue (shoot hold) till either spell or wizard is wrecked. For that matter, there really is no reason for an archer not in the thick of things to not hold there shot for the end of the round. Survey the battle field. See who needs help and who doesn't.

There is one flaw in this plan. By book rules, arrows break every time they hit and 50% of the time when they miss. But really come on, if you are putting that much magic (or any at all really) into an arrow, I think you should also pay the wizard to research an enchantment that would harden an arrow on par with any other weapon. Especially if it is returning, I don't think there would be much arguement about negating that breakage rule.

If you could not tell, they are my favorite. Always seem to gravitate back to them.

 

[RandomPrecision]

That's funny. We usually start an adventure with not a lot of gear, so we don't need a pack animal, and we just slowly add more an more things to our inventories, hoping that the DM never bothers to find encumbrance levels. He typically doesn't.

As for archery, it's awesome if someone can specialize in it, but my parties tend to be somewhat small. I think a 4-person party should probably go fighter-rogue-cleric-wizard, allowing plenty of substitutions, of course, but generally following that setup. If there's a fifth PC, they should certainly specialize in ranged combat, but before that, I'm not sure if it's as important as the other roles. That being said, rogues can certainly make adequate archers, since they tend to have high dexterity scores, but it's more debatable whether or not you can sneak attack.

 

[felis]

after thought

Also there is just nothing funnier than an elven archer with (special made) blunt tipped arrows, poping a team mate for one point of damage and the aid spell attached....

or that time I saved a guy's life by popping him in the head with an arrow tipped with a specially shapped thunder stone so that he couldn't hear the banshee scream. This too was designed for spell casters: 20% misspell chance for deafness, and it has to do something fierce to the concentration check to actually be hit (no just have it go off in the area).

 

[kenobi65]

One simple reason (if it didn't change in 3.5), enchantment from the bow and the arrows stack...

Bad news for you...yes, it *did* change in 3.5, and they no longer stack.

 

[Rackhir]

In a really high magic game no one can crank out more damage than an archer consistantly. One simple reason (if it didn't change in 3.5), enchantment from the bow and the arrows stack...

Unfortunately this was changed in 3.5 as the whining of the archer haters, got them to drop this. None the less they are still very viable, unless you are running in a campaign where the DM likes sundering stuff as bows are quite vunerable to this as someone mentioned earlier.

Shot on the run should be avoided as it simply is not worth it. Mounted combat is scary because it can get you a full move (your mounts) AND a full attack. Works best if combined with some some sort of exotic steed, like a griffon. Make sure to buff that steed as they can be rather fragile at the levels where you can obtain them.

Archers are also dependent on prestige classes for a lot of their effectiveness. Unfortunately the only current WotC approved class (Order of the bow Initiate) is actually worse than it's 3.0 counterpart. Having replaced sneak attack dice with some sort of devistating shot attack that takes a full round and does an extra d8 per two class levels. You are almost always better off with a full attack. It does give you one extremely valuable feature which is the No AoO feature at iirc 2nd lvl. The class is fairly worthless aside from that. Deep Woods Sniper from Masters of the wild is much better. Peerless archer from the Silver Marches (FRSB) is the most munchkin class I have ever seen, but BOY do you get some cool toys if your DM is foolish enough to permit it. Exotic weapon master from complete warrior can also give you the No AoO ability. There are numerous other "Archer" classes, from various sources, but that comes down to what your DM permits.

Ranger now makes an excellent mix with fighter for a base archer. It can get you some of the basic feats you need (PBS and Rapid Shot) and better yet gives you hide, move silently and spot as class skills.

 

[Lord Pendragon]

An archer has different strengths and weaknesses than a melee fighter, but is absolutely a viable combat character. I currently play in a 10th-level mostly-Core game, and our archer is very effective. Is he more effective than the fighter? Sometimes yes, sometimes no. They shine the most in different situations. But both are always useful, and both do comparable damage in most cases.

Our archer is a straight ranger. The best archer, though, is probably a fighter/ranger. Ranger for the free archery feats, good skills, access to spells, etc. Fighter to pick up a mess of archery-boosting feats, particularly Weapon Focus and Specialization (which is more effective for an archer than a melee fighter, since it applies to each arrow fired and an archer fires a lot more arrows than a melee combatant swings his sword.)