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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Kahuna Burger" data-source="post: 3414217" data-attributes="member: 8439">You say its nothing against archers, but acknowlege that your house rule kills the archer archetype as a viable role in your parties. So, it's obviously not a character type that you value.As for the targeting houserule, let me reiterate my comment on making the rest of the rules make sense with your houserules - is there a "sure targeting" metamagic feat? Is there a higher level but lower damage area effect spell that is able to be pinpointed? Is there a "tracer round" spell?If not, just like in the "banning fly" thread misplaced on the rules forum, I envision a wizard stading on the sidelines watching the damaged tank duke it out with the equally damaged BBEG while lower level allies provide flanking and Aid Another, saying "Woe is me! If only I wasn't the first adventuring wizard in the long and storied history of adventuring wizards to be in a situation where his only spell that could hurt the villain has a chance of killing off an ally instead! If only any of the wizards who founded and ran my college had thought for a moment about the value of taking longer or more energy to cast a spell that strikes with greater precision!" While the Archer beside him says "I know how you feel, the epic level archer who mentored me has feats with names like 'Greater Precise Shot' and he still has a one in twenty chance of sqewering an ally every time he shoots. Maybe we should stop adventuring and found a school for this sort of thing?"Over the top? Sure. But there is flanking so there is Uncanny Dodge, so there are rules for being "higher enough" level to overcome uncanny dodge. There are spells so there is spell resistance so there is spell penetration. Introducing a combat wrinkle like this with no feats spells or level that will overcome it is, imo, bad house rule design.</blockquote>

Verification