arrow counting question

[Droogie128]

they get the use of enchanted ammunition.

That's all that should be tracked. Mundane ammuntion should not.

 

[hipnotode]

i dont know, it just seams like a step towards "riturals that dont make things should be free" and then "how manny potions do you have left?" "loads?"
i would also like to enforce throwing weapons dont return. if they return it nerfs seekers spiritbond and swordmages swordbond. other classes could always spend a feat for heart of the blade.
but as i said before, i dont really want to debate this, its a matter of opinion. i just want to clear up some mechanical questions.

 

[Droogie128]

i dont know, it just seams like a step towards "riturals that dont make things should be free" and then "how manny potions do you have left?" "loads?"
i would also like to enforce throwing weapons dont return. if they return it nerfs seekers spiritbond and swordmages swordbond. other classes could always spend a feat for heart of the blade.
but as i said before, i dont really want to debate this, its a matter of opinion. i just want to clear up some mechanical questions.

Again. It severely punishes specific classes. It also doesn't nerf anything. Swordbond allows a swordmage to call their weapon. It isn't the same thing, at all. Think about it. If the weapons didn't return, then any aoe with a thrown weapon would require 1 magical weapon per attack to even have a hope of hitting past level 5. It would render those powers useless. This is nowhere near as bad as the effect it would have on bow/crossbow users. No other class suffers this kind of penalty. Once the ranger runs out of arrows, then what? He has to sit and be useless for who knows how long until he can get some arrows.

Seriously, tracking ammunition is a nerf to seekers. Magical thrown weapons returning, is not. It is actually required to make the game's math work.

 

[hipnotode]

Again. It severely punishes specific classes. It also doesn't nerf anything. Swordbond allows a swordmage to call their weapon. It isn't the same thing, at all. Think about it. If the weapons didn't return, then any aoe with a thrown weapon would require 1 magical weapon per attack to even have a hope of hitting past level 5. It would render those powers useless. This is nowhere near as bad as the effect it would have on bow/crossbow users. No other class suffers this kind of penalty. Once the ranger runs out of arrows, then what? He has to sit and be useless for who knows how long until he can get some arrows.

Seriously, tracking ammunition is a nerf to seekers. Magical thrown weapons returning, is not. It is actually required to make the game's math work.

there are also items in the game that supply unlimited ammunition, like that endless quiver or the quenchquiver weapon.(im shure theres more examples, there just the two that come to mind)
unless you houserule that you can attune the endless quiver to any ammunition (which would be far more broken, unlimited +6 arrows) and that the quenchquover adds the watter keyword they get nerfed.
also theres the gloves/arm slot that supplies daggers.

 

[delericho]

In general, I agree with others - tracking mundane ammunition is a hassle that doesn't really add enough to the game to be worth it. If you enforce it, you'll also likely find that the high-Str characters will load up on absurd numbers of arrows, so that the group never, ever runs out. (And if you don't use encumbrance, then any character who uses a bow will do this.)

Incidentally, if you find that tracking single arrows is just too much of a pain, here's a workable compromise:

Instead of selling arrows by the 10 (or whatever), sell them by the "bunch". In each encounter that a character fires even a single arrow, have him cross off a "bunch" arrows (regardless of how many he actually fires in the encounter).

Of course, this means that he uses as much resource if he uses 1 arrow in the fight as if he uses 100, but is that really a huge problem? (It should average out over time.)

Outside of encounters I would suggest a "rule of one", whereby a character can fire one arrow, or lend one arrow to a colleague, without having to cross off a bunch. However, any more (or if there's even a hint of it being abused), and he has to cross off a "bunch".

(Also, for very large battles, such as the battle at Helm's Deep, you'll probably want to split the scene into several smaller enounters. However, the desire/ability of the characters to take a short rest to refresh their powers/spend healing surges will probably take care of that for you.)

 

[hipnotode]

i do not think that counting arrows is too much of a nerf to ranged based characters, i think they make up for it with the ability to get a +1 to an atack and damage ontop of weapon, and an effect which means each ally they can see gets a +1 till end of there next turn for 25gp/shot.
i think that if you take away counting unenchanted arrows, ranged characters actualy get a huge bonus in the way of enchanted ammunition.

delericho's idea is a good rule if you dont like the bookkeeping of it, but i dont mind that kind of thing.

thinking about it now i think that powers ect that use more than a couple of arrows in the flavour text should use like a 2d4/d6 system.
and ill probably aply that to just powers that are not likly to use enchanted ammunition.

 

[Saeviomagy]

there are also items in the game that supply unlimited ammunition, like that endless quiver or the quenchquiver weapon.(im shure theres more examples, there just the two that come to mind)
unless you houserule that you can attune the endless quiver to any ammunition (which would be far more broken, unlimited +6 arrows) and that the quenchquover adds the watter keyword they get nerfed.
also theres the gloves/arm slot that supplies daggers.

They're not being nerfed - they're stinking garbage in the first place. Even WITH closely tracked ammo, you can buy all the ammo you'll ever spend across 30 levels for less money than the endless quiver costs.

The bracers of endless daggers (or whatever they're called) are every bit as bad. For starters, if they're required for thrown weapons, then they're the only item that any thrown weapon user can actually use: every enchantment in the book that's applicable to thrown weapons is junk. And THAT means that the thrown weapon guy is not ONLY being denied every enchantment in the book other than those supplied by the bracers, but ALSO loses his arms slot.

Also - you seem to be completely incorrect on how magical ammo works. The bonus from a magical arrow does not apply on top of that of the magical weapon: you only use the highest bonus.

 

[hipnotode]

okay i just went back to AV2 and reread, i was wrong about the enhancement bonus, but the properties/crit bonuses stack.

If the projectile weapon is magical, use the ammunition's enhancement bonus in place of the weapon's enhancement bonus. The weapon's critical bonus and the properties from both the weapon and the ammunition still apply.

not as big a bonus as i thought, but still it is one, which i still think is worth loosing a round or two at the end of a long fight. in fact i think it will shorten the fight. so swings and roundabouts.

anyway, this thread has gone way off topic. with this response youd think that theyd errata out ammunition entirely by popular demand and id have to post this in the houserules section. maybe i would of got a more of the response i was looking for there. oh well.

 

[captainspud]

anyway, this thread has gone way off topic. with this response youd think that theyd errata out ammunition entirely by popular demand and id have to post this in the houserules section. maybe i would of got a more of the response i was looking for there. oh well.

I share the opinion of all the other posters-- tracking ammo is a waste of time.

BUT.

This was absolutely not the time and place to have that argument. One attempt at the start to dissuade you from using ammo was fine, but from the moment you said, "No, it's okay, I'd still rather do it," people really should have dropped it and left you alone. Derailing the entire thread to incessantly badger you to play a different way than you enjoy was out of line, and I apologize on behalf of everyone else in this thread.

As for the actual question you asked: something like "one arrow per square" is fine for attacks (I wouldn't bother adding extras for more [W]s-- that's more to represent you pulling harder on the bowstring, or hitting a critical weak spot), and you could always randomize the number of arrows you volley off for the ladder-- say, d8 or so.

See? It's possible to completely disagree with someone and still be helpful.

 

[DracoSuave]

To answer the question its 1 piece of ammo per target unless the ammo is enchanted and thrown.

As for the value of keeping track, its subjective and only the dm can answer that.

Some players will keep track when not required. Other wont when required. As a dm I just let the player decide what they want to do.