Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="WaterRabbit" data-source="post: 7519771" data-attributes="member: 2445">No disagreement on this from me.  Calvary charges with sabers were still present at the start of WWII.  However, the primary weapon of engagement has been firearms since their widespread introduction, with melee weapons relegated to backup or specialized missions.  Melee weapons fell out of use as primary weapons from at least the mid-18th century forward with few exceptions (7 Years War, American Revolution, Napoleonic wars, etc.).  And also cannons started dominating the battlefield as well.-----To me, what I find most fascinating about D&D is that there isn't a technological progression in most settings -- especially with regards to magic.  The traditional trope is that in the past magic was much more powerful.  But then there really isn't a Dark Ages equivalent for magic.The reason to me this is fascinating is in a world where magic is common place, like the Forgotten Realms, one would expect to see something more akin to modern squad tactics.  One could see fielding wizards, but it would be far more effective to have wizards making fireball wands and seeding squads with apprentices to fight in battles.  Massed armies get decimated against skirmish tactics with pocket artillery.  Magic missile wands then become more useful than bows/crossbows since they hit unerringly.If we toss aside the hit point assumption and assume that for regular folks a hit with a weapon is sufficient to remove them from the battlefield (if not kill them outright).  Spells like cloudkill are the fantasy equivalent of mustard gas and can be used by skirmish troops to easily wipe out masses of orcs or whatnot.  Spell research would go toward making these spells have longer ranges and greater areas of effect.Ultimately, the assumptions for D&D combat are based upon small groups using infiltration tactics.  It would be cool to see a well-thought out D&D setting that really thinks about how magic affects economic, social, and military aspects.Going back to firearms replacing melee weapons because of economics.  You could see a major innovation of a magical technological break through that allows mundanes to use wands of magic missile that could be produced like early firearms were done.  Perhaps they don't have the unerring property but have greater range (40 yards is fairly short compared to the longbow's 200 yards).  [It is also of note that D&D sets a longbow's range to its effect range and not its actual maximum range which is closer to 400 yards.]You quibbles are quite correct.  I was trying to be brief.----The point about dexterity being added to the damage is the major change I see from 3e to 5e and what makes archery more effective.I am not sure that removing the damage bonus for ranges greater than 30' will fly with most tables, but it is an understandable choice.  Frankly the problem is that archery needs the SS feat to stay competitive, but then also become a bit overpowered because it gives too much.  To me it should give either the -5/+10 option or the ability to ignore cover not both.  It is why SS and GWM feel overpowered is that they give two really good abilities when most of the other feats only give one.</blockquote>

Verification