Is Strength-Focused Archery Viable?
- Thread starter Kaodi
- Start date
HeapThaumaturgist
First Post
Yea, I'd mix in 4 levels of fighter to otherwise straight ranger, for the bow feats that ignore Dex, if nothing else, but the better skills are also quite nice.
What's really nice is if you can get a bow with enough strength lovin' is that Enlarge Person ups the bow base die to 1d10, while doesn't affect thrown weapons.
--fje
What's really nice is if you can get a bow with enough strength lovin' is that Enlarge Person ups the bow base die to 1d10, while doesn't affect thrown weapons.
--fje
Inigo Carmine
First Post
Stalker0 said:
It's a little lengthy, but I'll try...
There are two ways at looking at %s. One is the easy way. One is the insane difficult aneurism-inducing way. They way you're doing it isn't the easy way. It can be done that way, but it's much much more difficult. In fact, I might not even be able to do it that way without a few days to kill. They way I look at it, a D20 roll of 11 is not 5% higher than a 10. it is 10% higher, because 11 is 110% of 10.
Also, there are two different types of "damage" you have to keep in mind. There's average damage, and then there's average damage per hit. I did not distinguish between those two things in my post above, and I hope that doesn't cause confusion. Average damage per hit is what most people think of. 1d8+6 has an average damage per hit of 10.5. Actual average damage though depends on that, and the chance of you actually hitting, or:
Average Damage = (Average Damage per Hit) x (% chance of hitting).
Chance of hitting is not a static number like Average damage per hit is. It depends on the difference between your attack bonus and the enemy's AC; aka what you need to roll on a d20 to hit. Your average damage will be much less for something you need a 19-20 to hit than it will be for something you need a 2-20 to hit.
Therefore, whether or not an increase in damage or to-hit is more beneficial (increasing average damage) will depend on your average damage per hit, and the d20 roll needed to hit.
Each of them is equally important in Average Damage. IE, doubling Average damage per hit and leaving chance to hit alone is the same thing as doubling chance to hit and leaving average damage per hit alone, keeping in mind that chance of hitting can never go above 95%.
Now, the math that I used to come up with my above post is a bit long, and would be near unreadable in a message board format, so what we'll do instead is 2 case studies: the break even point (where +1 to damage is the same as +1 to attack), and one demonstrating the trend, where there is a difference in importance between the 2.
BREAK EVEN POINT
Ok, lets say your attack bonus is 15, and the enemy's AC is 26. You weapon does 2d6+3 damage. You need to roll an 11 or higher to hit. Your average damage per hit is 10.
(21- min roll to hit) = (21-11) = 10. [10/20 => you have a 50% chance of hitting].
Average damage = (average damage per hit) x (chance of hitting) = 10 x 50% = 5.
Now, this is the break even point, where +1 to hit or to damage are worth the exact same.
+1 to hit => You now hit on a 10-20.
(21-min roll to hit) = 21-10 = 11. [11/20 => you have a 55% chance of hitting]
Average damage = 10 x 55% = 5.5
+1 to damage => Your average damage per hit is now 11.
Average Damage = 11 x 50% = 5.5 (The same average damage reached by increasing to hit by 1).
SHOWING TREND
Ok, lets say your attack bonus is 15, and the enemy's AC is 26. You weapon does 2d6+8 damage. You need to roll an 11 or higher to hit. Your average damage per hit is 15.
+1 to hit => You now hit on a 10-20.
(21-min roll to hit) = 21-10 = 11. [11/20 => you have a 55% chance of hitting]
Average damage = 15 x 55% = 8.25
+1 to damage => Your average damage per hit is now 16.
Average Damage = 16 x 50% = 8.00 In thise case, +1 to hit is worth slightly more than +1 to damage. This holds true with what I said.
If (21-min roll to hit) = average damage per hit: + to attack and damage are treated equal.
If (21-min roll to hit) < average damage per hit: + to attack is worth more than + to damage.
If (21-min roll to hit) > average damage per hit: + to damage is worth more than + to attack.
Hopefully this was somewhat understandable.
Someone
Adventurer
Another way to do it would be this:
We´ll call probability of hitting P and damage D. P will be a number between 1 and 20 (we´ll ignore auto misses and crits for this simplified demonstration).
Therefore, average damage per attack will be: (P/20)*D
Now, let´s suppose both P and D start very low. In fact, we´ll suppose they are both 0, and you have a limited amount of points, X, to spread between both of them. Therefore:
P+D=X
Substituting in the preceding formula:
Average damage=(P/20)*(X-P)
We want to maximize average damage per attack. If you know or remember anything about calculus, that´s when d/dP(Average damage)=0. Therefore:
(X/20)-(P/10)=0 ; P=X/2
If P=X/2, then P=D.
Maximum damage, supposing you can transfer points between attack and damage (like when you´re power attacking, or making the character) happens when both probability and average damage are equal, unless you´d hit rolling less than a 2, in which case is always advantageous to shift points because you always fail with a 1 (and it´s impossible to roll less than that
).
Notice that in game terms “probability” means the number of die sides that would get you a hit. If you have a +10 to hit and are attacking AC 25, you need to roll a 15,16,17,18,19 or 20. That´s 6 valid results, therefore P is 6.
Also, notice how if your average damage is 20 or higher (no too difficult to get with a not so high level 2 handed weapon fighter), power attacking lowers your average damage per attack, unless you need less than a 2 to hit.
We´ll call probability of hitting P and damage D. P will be a number between 1 and 20 (we´ll ignore auto misses and crits for this simplified demonstration).
Therefore, average damage per attack will be: (P/20)*D
Now, let´s suppose both P and D start very low. In fact, we´ll suppose they are both 0, and you have a limited amount of points, X, to spread between both of them. Therefore:
P+D=X
Substituting in the preceding formula:
Average damage=(P/20)*(X-P)
We want to maximize average damage per attack. If you know or remember anything about calculus, that´s when d/dP(Average damage)=0. Therefore:
(X/20)-(P/10)=0 ; P=X/2
If P=X/2, then P=D.
Maximum damage, supposing you can transfer points between attack and damage (like when you´re power attacking, or making the character) happens when both probability and average damage are equal, unless you´d hit rolling less than a 2, in which case is always advantageous to shift points because you always fail with a 1 (and it´s impossible to roll less than that
). Notice that in game terms “probability” means the number of die sides that would get you a hit. If you have a +10 to hit and are attacking AC 25, you need to roll a 15,16,17,18,19 or 20. That´s 6 valid results, therefore P is 6.
Also, notice how if your average damage is 20 or higher (no too difficult to get with a not so high level 2 handed weapon fighter), power attacking lowers your average damage per attack, unless you need less than a 2 to hit.
Last edited:
nittanytbone
First Post
Something that might be fun is a level or four of Sorcerer combined with Dragon Disciple. DD gives nice stat boosts and compensates somewhat for weak sorcerer HD; the Sorcerer levels give you access to Truestrike, which means your high-damage shots will strike true even with low dexterity. Could be very nice if combined with Multishot.
Thanks for the explanations all...Someone, I especially liked the math you put out there, very elegant. So let's put it to a little practice.
Let's assume we have a 5th level archer, with weapon focus on the composite longbow facing off against an AC 20 opponent (I believe at CR 5 opponents AC of 20 is a reasonable number, one the PCs would face fairly often).
We will assume a str10 and a dex18...that means he has a +10 to hit, and deals 4.5 damage on average. So what we want is to equalize P and D. P is currently equal to 10, D=4.5. At str 12, dex 16...P=9, D=5.5. At str 14, dex 14, P=8, D=6.5. At str 16, dex12, P=7, D=7.5 so right around this spot is optimum damage.
So in this scenario a high str low dex archer will actually do better in the long run then a high dex low str archer...and gets more money out of his point buy.
Scaling this up, there are two trends in dnd that are fairly consistent as you go up in levels.
1) More DR
2) Attacks tend to hit more often as they scale faster than AC.
The first gives a damage limit...if the archer isn't doing X damage he might as well not be firing at all. The second puts in increasing trend on P...P naturally goes up as level increases. Therefore, the math surprisingly indicates that in many situations an archer would do a better job if they increase their strength over their dexterity.
Let's assume we have a 5th level archer, with weapon focus on the composite longbow facing off against an AC 20 opponent (I believe at CR 5 opponents AC of 20 is a reasonable number, one the PCs would face fairly often).
We will assume a str10 and a dex18...that means he has a +10 to hit, and deals 4.5 damage on average. So what we want is to equalize P and D. P is currently equal to 10, D=4.5. At str 12, dex 16...P=9, D=5.5. At str 14, dex 14, P=8, D=6.5. At str 16, dex12, P=7, D=7.5 so right around this spot is optimum damage.
So in this scenario a high str low dex archer will actually do better in the long run then a high dex low str archer...and gets more money out of his point buy.
Scaling this up, there are two trends in dnd that are fairly consistent as you go up in levels.
1) More DR
2) Attacks tend to hit more often as they scale faster than AC.
The first gives a damage limit...if the archer isn't doing X damage he might as well not be firing at all. The second puts in increasing trend on P...P naturally goes up as level increases. Therefore, the math surprisingly indicates that in many situations an archer would do a better job if they increase their strength over their dexterity.
Hypersmurf said:
"You could put an eye out with that!"
HeapThaumaturguist said:
The SRD for enlarge person is self-contradictory and illogical on this point:
SRD said:
What it's saying is the damage of a projectile weapon is dependent upon the size of the thing propelling the weapon, not the weapon, but the damage of a thrown weapon is dependent upon the size of the weapon, not the thing propelling the weapon. So big bow shooting little arrow means big damage, big person throwing little javelin means little damage.
[And 1d8 damage increased a size category is 2d6, not 1d10...]
I've always ruled that any weapon leaving the possession of an enlarged creature only does damage based on its normal size.
There is a feat in PHBII which requires Str 15 and BAB +10 which allows a single ranged attack, taken as a standard action, to attack a line of targets (separate attack roll for each target in the line). You'll also want Ranged Weapon Mastery from PHBII.
Cheers, Al'Kelhar
Ridley's Cohort
First Post
Good work with the maths, Someone. Well presented.
One thing to keep in mind is that if you are a tactically savvy player then you are not necessarily best served by maximizing damage output. Consistency has its advantages. The archer is particularly well-suited to distributing or concentrating his attacks for the situation on hand. IME archers rack up the most kills because they are both efficient at moping up any enemy with 10 hit points or less and the most likely to get a full attack on a BBEG.
One thing to keep in mind is that if you are a tactically savvy player then you are not necessarily best served by maximizing damage output. Consistency has its advantages. The archer is particularly well-suited to distributing or concentrating his attacks for the situation on hand. IME archers rack up the most kills because they are both efficient at moping up any enemy with 10 hit points or less and the most likely to get a full attack on a BBEG.
With regards to enlarge person, for archery its not really worth it. While you gain 1 average damage, you lose 2 off your hit; 1 from dex and 1 from size. Unless you get a composite bow with a str bonus designed for your enlarged form, then its +2 average damage for -2 hit. That would be ok, but then when you aren't enlarged you'd take a hefty penalty to hit.
