Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="two" data-source="post: 1339496" data-attributes="member: 9002">As I said...As I said, no serious disadvantages.1)&nbsp; Archers provoke an AOO.&nbsp; True.&nbsp; That's why they 5'step and full attack a lot, or more typically don't get within melee with the bad guys.&nbsp; This is a slight disadvantage.2)&nbsp; Ammo?&nbsp; Are you serious?&nbsp; Who the heck cares?&nbsp; Pile up 1,000 arrows in your bag-o-much-stuff, or your quiver-o-mighty-capacity, etc.&nbsp; A non issue in D&amp;D which is very high magic by default.3)&nbsp; No AOO, No flanking.&nbsp; This is more of an annoyance than a disadvantage.&nbsp; The archer does not want to be flanking, does not want to be taking AOO's.&nbsp; The archer wants to be 25' away from the enemy.&nbsp; Is it a disadvantage that wizards can't cast spells during an AOO?&nbsp; Sure.&nbsp; Do they care?&nbsp; Naw.&nbsp; They don't want to be in a position to TAKE AOOs.4) Mighty Bows are not limited in 3.5.5) Yes they do.&nbsp; That's a slight disadvantage to archers, after all, most of these options are not used often.6)&nbsp; Feats?&nbsp; You don't need that many archery feats to be good at archery.&nbsp; That's a disadvantage?7)&nbsp; Two hands used up -- same as the typical greatsword fighter.&nbsp; Eh.&nbsp; Even.8)&nbsp; Cover penalties; yeah, melee guys have them too on occasion.&nbsp; Slight annoyance, most of the time.I still maintain these are not &quot;serious&quot; disadvantages.&nbsp; They are disadvantages, but not a big deal.&nbsp; Honestly, I don't WANT to flank with a bow if I'm an archer, even if I could.&nbsp; I don't want to be that close.&nbsp; Is that really a disadvantage?&nbsp; Ditto AOO's?None of these compare in any way to the huge advantages of ranged combat, namely:&nbsp; that dragon is not doing a FULL ATTACK on your posterior.&nbsp; Or the Orc, or the Goblin, or the etc.&nbsp; That's a serious advantage, to the tune of 10, 20, 50, 100 hit points.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="two, post: 1339496, member: 9002"] [b]As I said...[/b] As I said, no serious disadvantages. 1) Archers provoke an AOO. True. That's why they 5'step and full attack a lot, or more typically don't get within melee with the bad guys. This is a slight disadvantage. 2) Ammo? Are you serious? Who the heck cares? Pile up 1,000 arrows in your bag-o-much-stuff, or your quiver-o-mighty-capacity, etc. A non issue in D&D which is very high magic by default. 3) No AOO, No flanking. This is more of an annoyance than a disadvantage. The archer does not want to be flanking, does not want to be taking AOO's. The archer wants to be 25' away from the enemy. Is it a disadvantage that wizards can't cast spells during an AOO? Sure. Do they care? Naw. They don't want to be in a position to TAKE AOOs. 4) Mighty Bows are not limited in 3.5. 5) Yes they do. That's a slight disadvantage to archers, after all, most of these options are not used often. 6) Feats? You don't need that many archery feats to be good at archery. That's a disadvantage? 7) Two hands used up -- same as the typical greatsword fighter. Eh. Even. 8) Cover penalties; yeah, melee guys have them too on occasion. Slight annoyance, most of the time. I still maintain these are not "serious" disadvantages. They are disadvantages, but not a big deal. Honestly, I don't WANT to flank with a bow if I'm an archer, even if I could. I don't want to be that close. Is that really a disadvantage? Ditto AOO's? None of these compare in any way to the huge advantages of ranged combat, namely: that dragon is not doing a FULL ATTACK on your posterior. Or the Orc, or the Goblin, or the etc. That's a serious advantage, to the tune of 10, 20, 50, 100 hit points. [/QUOTE]

Verification