Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Pickaxe" data-source="post: 2936219" data-attributes="member: 10812">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</blockquote>

Verification