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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ashkelon" data-source="post: 6981744" data-attributes="member: 6774887">This is the type of thinking this thread was created to discourage. You are under the mistaken assumption that archers are squishier than melee warriors.Sorry to tell you, but the greatweapon fighter and the crossbow archer can have exactly the same AC. Both can wear plate just fine. The archer could also use bracers or armor or the mage armor spell to have the same AC as plate armor without any of the weight though. They will also have the same Con score and therefor the same HP. D&D is a daily war of attrition. In most scenarios, killing things faster does far more for the party overall than surviving longer would. Especially given the disparity between an optimized damage dealer and a mediocre damage dealer. And this is all ignoring the fact that the archer has +5 more initiative, +5 more stealth, and +5 to Dex saves as compared to the melee warrior, all of which contribute far more to overall survivability than a few more HP.The point of this thread is that they don't need to. The crossbow archer can fight in melee range or at range. Whichever is more needed for the current situation.This thread is primarily talking about the crossbow archer, though the premise is the same with a regular archer. At the end of your turn, use your item interaction to draw a dagger or other melee weapon so you threaten OAs. At the start of your turn drop the dagger and make ranged attacks. Repeat as needed.Nope. Drawing a weapon is your one item interaction for the round. So only one thrown attack no matter how many attacks you actually have. This is part of why this thread states that ranged weapons are superior to melee.See above about drawing a weapon at the end of your turn and dropping it at the start. Daggers are cheap, but at higher levels when gold is plentiful, no reason to not carry a few rapiers for each combat.The point is that the crossbow archer can choose to fulfill the same function as the melee warrior if he so chooses by wading into melee and shooting enemies at point blank range, all the while threatening them with OAs as needed, but can also function at full efficiency when enemies happen to be outside of melee range.True, but at low levels the threat of an OA is significant. At higher levels not so much. A high level enemy with 100+ HP would barely care about the 10 average damage it might take from provoking a fighters OA. So the "threat" of OAs and their impact on combat diminishes as you level. As such, it becomes less and less meaningful to the discussion about the fighter's capabilities in melee.Sure, but how often does an enemy decide not to do an action because of a potential OA. If his choice is take an OA to attack a squishier target or avoid taking an OA and attack the high HP high AC fighter, the answer will vary depending on the creatures level and HP. An 11 HP hobgoblin would not likely risk it, but a 150 HP giant probably would't care nearly as much. Therefor the so called threat of OAs and their impact on combat diminishes with level.</blockquote>

Verification