Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ilbranteloth" data-source="post: 7228500" data-attributes="member: 6778044">That makes sense with GWM. Essentially Sneak Attack for heavy weapons, although from a fluff standpoint it would be because of a hard hit instead of a precise one. For sharpshooter, on the other hand, a rogue can use the ability to tie into Sneak Attack. Since it's a flat bonus, it simply adds +10 to their Sneak Attack damage.On the one hand, it maintains the higher damage output of sneak attack vs. other classes.On the other hand, if designed well, the right feats could theoretically give other classes an option for similar damage output of a rogue. Not sure where I stand on that question specifically. But it does make sharpshooter more powerful than GWM despite sharing the same mechanic.--Incidentally, when considering how archery works, and particularly sharpshooter in my campaign (and I haven't settled on a final version yet), I look at actual archery, including bow-hunting. Historically, archery is at its deadliest at short range. But once somebody was within closing range, it was very dangerous. If it was a single opponent, you could get off a point blank range shot, but then you'd have to drop your bow and draw a weapon, and from 30 feet out, a charging opponent was at a significant advantage if you didn't hit them (that is, penetrate their armor to disable them) because they would be able to get to you and attack before you had your weapon drawn. So any sort of archery within 30 feet is a bad idea in my opinion, and would go a long way to bringing the advantages of ranged weapons down.However, within about 100 yards or so, it's very deadly. Mail and plate armors were impervious to slashing attacks, and you needed extra leverage (pole arm) and narrow, focused piercing attacks to hit somebody. A sword generally wasn't enough, but a spike (like a pick or the back of a hammer) was. Arrows, on the other hand, could pierce them at a short enough range, and a heavy enough bow (war bow). So from about 30-90 feet they should be very deadly.This coincides with bow-hunting as well. Most archers don't take a shot while hunting beyond about 30 to 40 yards. Because when you're hunting, you're looking for a single-shot kill through the heart. At that range, an arrow will go entirely through a game animal. One of the reasons why something farther out is a very difficult kill, besides just your aim, is that deer, for example, can hear the bowstring and react just fast enough that you miss the heart. Then it's a wounding shot or a miss.So I like the idea that under certain circumstances - hidden and undetected at short range, maybe point blank range - you have an expanded critical threshold and/or increased critical damage. It's a good model for the deadliness of a very situational shot.I use resistance (damage reduction) for armor in my campaign. So at short range (with the right arrowheads) you ignore that resistance. Without that, I'm OK with increased damage.Arrows fly at a speed a bit faster than a fastball in baseball of around 100 to 120 mph. So in baseball, you have enough time to react when it's being thrown from 60 feet. A 90 mph fastball that's hit is about 110 mph off the bat. If you see an archer shooting an arrow at you from 120 feet or farther, it's not that farfetched to just avoid it. It's not that different than trying to catch (or if you wanted to) dodge a baseball. More importantly, consider trying to shoot a baseball out of a pitching machine to hit an erratically moving target in center field. Just not that easy, especially because of the amount of arch you need to put on the arrow.Long range should not ever be easy in my mind. You can target a location (a fixed target), but that's really effective only if you have a bunch of archers targeting an area. That's why I think removing disadvantage isn't a great idea.So limiting the -5/+10 to short range would seem reasonable to me.And yes, I know plenty of people (a few in particular) will tell me this isn't about "reality" or a simulation. Whatever. It's a bow and arrow. It's representing a bow and arrow, and I think that understanding how they really work is a good starting point for developing rules for them. In part because there are some people that consider the weapon to be the same as the one in our world, and it's certainly feasible to write rules that are acceptable for a wide range of play styles.</blockquote>

Verification