Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="two" data-source="post: 1338003" data-attributes="member: 9002">YoHey thanks for running the numbers!A number of things to consider:&nbsp; bracers of archery, minor and major, give to hit and damage bonuses that are, generally, unavailable to melee folks.Plus, the big point:Archers in my experience get far more than one extra shot over their melee counterparts.&nbsp; Meaning, for every &quot;full attack&quot; that a melee guy gets, typically an archer gets 2 (on average).&nbsp; I think this is actually conservative.&nbsp; &quot;Normal&quot; Battle, for party prepared for something.&nbsp; (given your sample PCs).Round1 -- See bad guys at 50'.&nbsp; Archer does full attack.&nbsp; Fighters charge.&nbsp; Archer: 3 attacks.&nbsp; Fighter:&nbsp; 1 attack.Round2 -- Melee types engage, full attack.&nbsp; Archer full attack.&nbsp; Archer gets 3 attacks, melee guy 2.Round3 -- Fighter killed whatever it was it was facing the previous round,&nbsp; moves/charges to get to next guy (typically they are not neatly lined up).&nbsp; Melee attacks once, archer 3 times.Total so far:&nbsp; Archer 9 attacks, Melee guy 4.Etc.Plus, it often happens with melee guys that there is a lot of wasted overflow damage done, while an archer can simply target another bad guy (if the 1st arrow kills something).&nbsp; A fighter doing a full attack that kills it on swing1, well, he's done unless something else is within 5'.All these niggly little things add up, in my experience, in a big way:&nbsp; more full attacks, auto-targeting, ranged safety, etc.&nbsp; When you throw haste into the mix, archers are helped disproportionatly (they take more full attack actions), etc. etc.This is my playing experience; in a narrow twisty no-line-of-sight dungeon archers are very suboptimal.&nbsp; But, we don't come across that situation as much as other situations -- by far.Just my impressions -- What do you think the full attack ratio is, ranged vs. melee?2 for 1?&nbsp; 1 for 1?&nbsp; 2.5 for 1?&nbsp; 3 for 1?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="two, post: 1338003, member: 9002"] [b]Yo[/b] Hey thanks for running the numbers! A number of things to consider: bracers of archery, minor and major, give to hit and damage bonuses that are, generally, unavailable to melee folks. Plus, the big point: Archers in my experience get far more than one extra shot over their melee counterparts. Meaning, for every "full attack" that a melee guy gets, typically an archer gets 2 (on average). I think this is actually conservative. "Normal" Battle, for party prepared for something. (given your sample PCs). Round1 -- See bad guys at 50'. Archer does full attack. Fighters charge. Archer: 3 attacks. Fighter: 1 attack. Round2 -- Melee types engage, full attack. Archer full attack. Archer gets 3 attacks, melee guy 2. Round3 -- Fighter killed whatever it was it was facing the previous round, moves/charges to get to next guy (typically they are not neatly lined up). Melee attacks once, archer 3 times. Total so far: Archer 9 attacks, Melee guy 4. Etc. Plus, it often happens with melee guys that there is a lot of wasted overflow damage done, while an archer can simply target another bad guy (if the 1st arrow kills something). A fighter doing a full attack that kills it on swing1, well, he's done unless something else is within 5'. All these niggly little things add up, in my experience, in a big way: more full attacks, auto-targeting, ranged safety, etc. When you throw haste into the mix, archers are helped disproportionatly (they take more full attack actions), etc. etc. This is my playing experience; in a narrow twisty no-line-of-sight dungeon archers are very suboptimal. But, we don't come across that situation as much as other situations -- by far. Just my impressions -- What do you think the full attack ratio is, ranged vs. melee? 2 for 1? 1 for 1? 2.5 for 1? 3 for 1? [/QUOTE]

Verification