Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="jaer" data-source="post: 3949547" data-attributes="member: 57861">I think a lot of the problem here is that many of the Fighters-should-be-better-archers group are coming from the old description.&nbsp; It does not seem that fighters are the master of all weapons any more.&nbsp; They are the master of meele.&nbsp; Rangers will be the master of archery, and if you don't like the fluff background stuff, drop it.&nbsp; You could more easily call the classes &quot;meele combatant&quot; and &quot;ranged combatant.&quot;You want to play a character who can do both?&nbsp; Multiclass.&nbsp; There is no reason to think that someone who focuses on meele combat after battle should be as good with a bow as the guy who spends all of those battles shooting people with arrows.&nbsp; Even if they both spend all there off-time practicing archery, one of them has more bow-time and a lot more real-world bow experience which is represented in his class abilities.Looking at combat, movement will be more fluid.&nbsp; Rangers will be lighter armored and probably get increased movement and might do more damage while moving (they killed the Scout and took his stuff after all).&nbsp; He is trained to stay out of combat, to keep moving away from orcs who want to cut him down.&nbsp; This is drastically different in combat philosphy then they guy in heavy armor who is trying to stand between the orcs and people behind him.Why should one class be able to represent both of these drastically different tactics?&nbsp; Why would you want it to?&nbsp; Why think &quot;I want to be an archer&quot; and pick the class that represents people who spend their lives mastering a meele weapon and wearing heavy armor?&nbsp; Both go against what would make for a good archer.Sure, once the orcs are fleeing, the fighter can pull out a bow and start shooting them along side the ranger, but the fighter is more used to using a sword, to being in meele and holding the line.&nbsp; Why should he be as good with a bow as the guy who spends all of his time darting about and peppering enemies with arrows?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="jaer, post: 3949547, member: 57861"] I think a lot of the problem here is that many of the Fighters-should-be-better-archers group are coming from the old description. It does not seem that fighters are the master of all weapons any more. They are the master of meele. Rangers will be the master of archery, and if you don't like the fluff background stuff, drop it. You could more easily call the classes "meele combatant" and "ranged combatant." You want to play a character who can do both? Multiclass. There is no reason to think that someone who focuses on meele combat after battle should be as good with a bow as the guy who spends all of those battles shooting people with arrows. Even if they both spend all there off-time practicing archery, one of them has more bow-time and a lot more real-world bow experience which is represented in his class abilities. Looking at combat, movement will be more fluid. Rangers will be lighter armored and probably get increased movement and might do more damage while moving (they killed the Scout and took his stuff after all). He is trained to stay out of combat, to keep moving away from orcs who want to cut him down. This is drastically different in combat philosphy then they guy in heavy armor who is trying to stand between the orcs and people behind him. Why should one class be able to represent both of these drastically different tactics? Why would you want it to? Why think "I want to be an archer" and pick the class that represents people who spend their lives mastering a meele weapon and wearing heavy armor? Both go against what would make for a good archer. Sure, once the orcs are fleeing, the fighter can pull out a bow and start shooting them along side the ranger, but the fighter is more used to using a sword, to being in meele and holding the line. Why should he be as good with a bow as the guy who spends all of his time darting about and peppering enemies with arrows? [/QUOTE]

Verification