Is Strength-Focused Archery Viable?

[Kaodi]

Among my ever growing list of " Backup Characters That May Never See The Light " , I have added a warforged fighter who specializes in the longbow and focuses on raising strength instead of dexterity.
At level 6, he's Str 16, Dex 14, Con 12, Int 10, Wis 12, Cha 10 (I want him to have a good spot and be a little charismatic, at least for a warforged). He has focus and specialization in the longbow, with point blank shot, precise shot, rapid shot, far shot and improved initiative as feats. Skills will be craft (bowmaking) and spot, 'cause warforged need a hobby and hes an archer. I've equipped him with a +1 composite longbow (+3 str), +2 armour enhancement, +2 buckler, +2 cloak of resistance and a masterwork longsword and an efficient quiver. Since he doesn't have one of the armour feats, he won't be great in melee, but he'll still pass for a meat shield for the wizard if something gets by the front line.
Now, with that setup, with a full attack, he could do +10/+5 or +8/+8/+3 1d8+6 damage 20 x3 165 ft. Do you think that would be sufficient? I could take just a +1 buckler or +1 cloak and instead get a flaming enchantment.
I guess the question really is whether this could work. The last attempt at an archer I saw in play was a elven or half-elven rogue. With a lot of luck, he hit often, but against the skeletons we were fighting, he barely did any damage (and at least half of what he did do was attributable to bardic music). With this warforged though, he'd do 7-14 damage per hit, or with the flaming enchantments, 7-20 damage per hit.
Any thoughts?

 

[Stalker0]

Stastically, if you look at average damage over the long haul...a +1 to damage is better than a +1 to attack until the base damage your doing is 20...if the base damage is better than 20, a +1 to attacks will actually yield more damage over time than a +1 to damage.

This does not take into accounts crits and assumes your attack bonuses are good enough that you don't need a 20 to hit, but not so high that you only miss on a 1, so its a little rough. Considering more damage also helps with DR that's something else to consider.

 

[Joshua Randall]

Isn't there some crazy feat somewhere that lets you use your Str bonus for ranged attacks? If so (and I'm pretty sure there is), then a Str-based archer is totally viable, assuming you can get a composite bow big enough to accomodate your Str bonus.

 

[Vorput]

Isn't there some crazy feat somewhere that lets you use your Str bonus for ranged attacks? If so (and I'm pretty sure there is), then a Str-based archer is totally viable, assuming you can get a composite bow big enough to accomodate your Str bonus.

Brutal Throw (CW), but it only applies to thrown weapons.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Brutal Throw (CW), but it only applies to thrown weapons.

And a thrown longbow just isn't that brutal, even with a feat.

-Hyp.

 

[Vorput]

And a thrown longbow just isn't that brutal, even with a feat.

-Hyp.

::chuckles:: Hypers my hero...

 

[Inigo Carmine]

Stastically, if you look at average damage over the long haul...a +1 to damage is better than a +1 to attack until the base damage your doing is 20...if the base damage is better than 20, a +1 to attacks will actually yield more damage over time than a +1 to damage.

Actually, the turning point is when the number of possible d20 rolls you hit with (basically 21- minimum roll you need to hit) equals your average damage. If the (21-min roll) is less than average damage, to hit is more beneficial. This is straight damage per hit, and doesn't take into account situations where the occasional hard hit is worth more than the consistant light hit (like DR, or trying to disrupt a wizard's spell).

Kaodi - Where are you getting 1d8+6 damage from? I get 1d8 (bow) +3 (str) +1 (magic). did I miss something? Also, a +2 buckler isn't *too* helpful for a dedicated archer. Remember that if you use your bow, you forfeit any benefits of the buckler for that round. You suffer no penalties for using one with a bow, except the opportunity cost of buying something that's not useable with your "forte".

All in all, it's not a bad build, but you should go about 80% archery instead of all archery. An archer's usual strength is that they almost always hit and they get a lot of attacks (pump dex, and they rarely waste time "moving", so they get to full attack). In your case, you'll hit less often, but your shots will hurt. You have another advantage with that high str though; you're not useless in melee. I'd carry a backup 2-handed melee weapon for those times when arrows just don't cut it; like for zombies/skeletons. Or, you could stick with the buckler and get a dedicated 1-handed weapon. I had an decent str archer who did just that and was universally useful for just about everything except stealth and trap removal.

 

[RigaMortus2]

The bad part about being a Str-based archer (and Wis-based for Zen Archery fans) is that if you really want to concentrate on archery, you need minimums of 15, 17, and 19 in Dex for some of the more prominate archery feats (such as Improved Rapid Shot, Manyshot and Greater Manhyshot).

 

[Kaodi]

Pumping Str

The damage is from 1d8 (composite longbow) +3 str, +1 enhancement, +2 specialization.

The +2 buckler was meant to boost AC from 16 to 19 if I got into melee, but I think I'll just a normal buckler and a +1 cloak so I can get the flaming enhancement, since it won't be for another 6 levels that I'll even want a bow with a higher str-enhancement. And he does have a masterwork longsword. I suppose it's possible it would be better to go with a +2 bow instead of flaming, but we're going to be fighting lots of undead, which aren't exactly well known for fire resistance.

As for the high dex, it'll hurt a little never being able to get improved precise shot, but for some reason, I've never been enamored to the manyshot feats (though if you had access to true strike, they would probably be freakin' amazing). Besides, there is always the minute possibility of finding a Manual of Dexterity +5 before level 18... Or maybe not, since it is Eberron... oh well...

Basically, the one encounter with the archer we had in our group left me with the impression that being able to hit stuff at a distance was great, but not if you did negligible damage.

Actually, two other questions to go with this... do silver arrows cost 2 gp 5 cp apiece? Or 3 gp for 20? And does craft (bowmaking) cover arrows as well?

 

[Stalker0]

Actually, the turning point is when the number of possible d20 rolls you hit with (basically 21- minimum roll you need to hit) equals your average damage. If the (21-min roll) is less than average damage, to hit is more beneficial. This is straight damage per hit, and doesn't take into account situations where the occasional hard hit is worth more than the consistant light hit (like DR, or trying to disrupt a wizard's spell).

Can you explain how you did the math on this one? Basically what I did was assume that a +1 to attack increases your average damage by (base) x .05....basically over the long run you are hitting 5% more often. Once the base is high enough that the average damage increases by 1, then its equal to damage +1...which is 20 in this case.