Bow Feats

[Pickaxe]

...and the bows in 3.5 are alot closer to real life than in other editions,

To which:

...except that I can't fire an arrow a third of a mile. (comp bow plus Far Shot)

Followed by:

Yeah but you can't do magic either though,

The last does not refute the response to the first. You say bows are more realistic. He says they aren't. You say magic isn't realistic. How does that support the statement that bows are more realistic? I'm sorry, I'm not seeing the connection in your argument.

By the way, a little tact is a wonderful thing.

--Axe

 

[Pickaxe]

Not at all, it is after all a fantasy game, but it still needs grounding in some form of realistic frame work,

may point was it's part of the setting that a person could do such "heroic" things with a bow,

but you missed that :\

I probably missed that because I can't find it in any of your posts. The purpose of the feat you described is a) to make archery match your experience with high tension composite bows and b) allow archers to "keep up" with melee fighters. The counter argument is a) as far as D&D models combat, that level of "realism" is unnecessary, and 2) archers do just fine already. Your response has been, "You don't know what you're talking about, and I do."

Let me address the second counter argument. From a balance perspective, I know others have argued that archers already have more going for them than melee fighters. They can fight from a distance, they get Point Blank Shot, which has no melee equivalent, they get Manyshot and Rapid Shot, which effectively give them more attacks than your greatsword fighter, and they can get Bracers of Archery, which, again, have no melee equivalent. All this without having to work within a threatened area.

Regarding your interest in "realism," I would offer that your feat does not model what you want. It's a one-shot boost, which doesn't sound a lot like progressive training. I would suggest altering it to match something like Combat Expertise, where you trade your BAB for an addition to your Strength, but only for determining your ability to use a bow with a Strength rating. This way, more training (i.e., BAB) results in ability to pull a stronger bow.

--Axe

 

[irdeggman]

Quote:
Originally Posted by irdeggman
Then it more closely relates to the ability increase gained at every 4th level then.

No, not at all, dude you just don't get it :\

Actually I think I "get it" exactly. I have been consistently pointing out equivalents to other styles, which have been ignored.

You have stated numerous times that this bonus is due to "training" and "experience" and yet when anyone tries to make a connection to the "training" or "experience" rules in the RAW they get dismissed as "you just don't get it".

So to recap the D&D rules. . . ."Experience" translates into gaining something from overcoming obstacles and challenges. This in turn translates into gaining character levels. Character levels translate into "tangible benfits" - character level feats, ability increases. This also allows for gaining of class levels which grant other "tangible benefits" like saving throw and BAB improvements as well as hit points and "class abilities".

So if this developing of a specialized muscle set is not based on "experience" and thus leveling up then what is it based on? And how could it possibly be translated into a D&D game mechanic?


Now if you want to capture "realism" then I think Pixkaxe is correct. But I think he is using the wrong feat as a basis. YOU should be using the Power Attack feat which directly translates from BAB. Oh wait that was the OP's original question -

1. Is there a feat that allows one to do something similar to power attack with a bow?

Everyone has stated that no such feat exists in the core rules. The simpliest answer would be to create one for archers that functions almost (notice the use of the word "almost") exactly like Power Attack (trading BAB for an equivalent Str rating) in order to use bows (negating the penalty from long bows and allowing use of higher Str rating composite bows.

This type of feat would reflect the "training" or "experience" issue you are trying to emulate, keep in line with existing feats and provide an adequate trade off that scales with character level (i.e., "experience").

 

[Pickaxe]

Now if you want to capture "realism" then I think Pixkaxe is correct. But I think he is using the wrong feat as a basis. YOU should be using the Power Attack feat which directly translates from BAB. Oh wait that was the OP's original question -

I would certainly agree with the Power Attack analogy; I just picked Combat Expertise as an example of an "exchange BAB for X" feat. This also has the possible advantage of emulating that it's probably harder to be accurate with a more powerful bow. Thus, only the most experienced characters will be able to both draw the strongest bows and hit with them consistently.

--Axe

 

[librarius_arcana]

The last does not refute the response to the first. You say bows are more realistic. He says they aren't. You say magic isn't realistic. How does that support the statement that bows are more realistic? I'm sorry, I'm not seeing the connection in your argument.

The key word you don't seem to understand is "more"

now go back and try reading it again,

By the way, a little tact is a wonderful thing.

--Axe

Why what are you saying?,

 

[librarius_arcana]

I would certainly agree with the Power Attack analogy; I just picked Combat Expertise as an example of an "exchange BAB for X" feat. This also has the possible advantage of emulating that it's probably harder to be accurate with a more powerful bow. Thus, only the most experienced characters will be able to both draw the strongest bows and hit with them consistently.

--Axe

Only someone who wasn't an archer could make that statement,

You are very, very wrong,

again

 

[librarius_arcana]

Actually I think I "get it" exactly. I have been consistently pointing out equivalents to other styles, which have been ignored.

No, you don't

just the fact that this elemment is still being discussed (+ the type of questions, and
inaccurate views shows you don't get it, at all) all I can say is, go out, try it, then come back and talk about it when you know more about the subject,

 

[Pickaxe]

Only someone who wasn't an archer could make that statement,

You are very, very wrong,

again

As a matter of fact, like most of the world's population, I am not an archer. Can you tell me why I am very, very wrong, instead of just taking an insulting and condescending tone?

This is the latest in a line of posts that you've made that do nothing to advance your argument and at the same time insult the person you are addressing. This is called being tactless. Part of the reason people are still dignifying your posts with responses is that we don't want our silence to affirm arguments that seem wrong and are positively rude.

If you want to make your case, "you don't know archery" and "you're just wrong" are not the way to go. If you know so much about archery, explain why your argument is supported by the evidence.

The fact of the matter is that no one has really disagreed with your observations on archery. I've held and fired a bow, but not enough to claim any expertise, yet the fact that you need certain muscles to be very strong to pull a strong bow is obvious enough to me, and probably to just about everyone else on these boards. The same goes for the fact that training in archery will develop these muscles to a greater extent than others.

How you have tried to incorporate this into D&D is what people are arguing about. The specialized strength that you describe comes from prolonged training, correct? Feats, in your own words, are a "knack." Having a "knack" for something does not come from training (although training can improve it), analogous to being a prodigy in something like music. Is it your experience that some people have a "knack" for firing bows, and that is why you came up with this feat, or is it supposed to reflect the effects of training? My understanding from your posts is that the latter was your intention. In that case, what's wrong with incorporating BAB into the feat, much like Power Attack? If you want it to reflect training, then I think you need more than just a "one-shot" feat to represent this. Yes, your feat can be taken multiple times, but is that really how you want to reflect special training, when D&D already has several mechanics that do this? And that's assuming that this sort of thing isn't already implicitly covered by other rules, as others have argued-- to which you have simply pronounced that they just don't "get it."

--Axe

 

[RigaMortus2]

I don't get it

 

[Pickle843]

that's 1d10 + um 67

Hey Guys, I've got 2 questions:
1. Is there a feat that allows one to do something similar to power attack with a bow?
2. Are there any feat combinations, PC, races that makes an archer keep up with the damage dealing potential of a melee fighter?
Cheers,
Sam

well according to a PC in my dnd campaign the prestige class arcane archer allows the player to add somewhere between 1 and 100 damage to each ranged attack (practically whatever he rolls on the percentile dice) don't bother looking it up in the DM's guide it's only like a + 5 max or something. So I have but one solution..............kill his character!