[Magic Item] Thumb Ring of Might

[KarinsDad]

No, you are comparing apples and oranges if you are comparing Mighty bows to Holy.

Am I?

I compared Mighty to Flaming Burst weapons above. The DMG indicates that Flaming Burst at 3.5 extra damage on average = Holy at 7 extra damage, but only against Evil.

Mighty does +0 to +5 extra damage (assuming the ring as written, not normal Mighty). For most characters that use such a ring, it will be in the ballpark of +3 to +5, not +0 to +2.

So, how is +3 to +5 extra damage (vast majority of time) NOT equal to +1 to +6 extra damage for Flaming Burst?

How is +6 to +10 extra damage (vast majority of time) NOT equal to +2 to +16 extra damage for Flaming Burst when doing a critical?

Mighty can be stopped or reduced by Damage Reduction, but the Flaming Burst can be stopped or reduced by Element Resistance (or Endure Elements).

Granted, Holy does more damage, but is limited to Evil creatures. Hence, it has a utility limitation that brings it down on par with these other special abilities. At least the DMG indicates it is on par with Flaming Burst and I agree.

Seem about equal to me. Why would they not be?

 

[KarinsDad]

I'm thinking use Bull's Strength and Limited Wish, which would up the cost a bit. Something like that.

Maybe Polymorph Any Object?

The problem is that there is rarely a one to one correspondence between Wondrous Items and spells.

 

[Astlin]

Hmm. Does anyone else think it's a little strange to allow a ring made with bull's strength to alter the molecular structure of a bow so that it can be shot with more power by those with the strength to do so?
...
I just think there should be another spell to craft the ring with that would better explain this. After all, once a bow is made, it is what it is.

Hmm, does a combination of Ironwood and Bulls Strength as prerequisites suit it better?


Astlin

 

[Numion]

A Sorcerer wants to take GMW instead of Fly, or Haste, or Fireball, or Dispel Magic as one of his four 3rd level spells? Just to help out the party archer?

A Bard wants to take GMW instead of one of his five 3rd level spells? Just to help out the party archer? Maybe if he is an archer type himself, but otherwise…

Well, they should at least, if they got any sense in them. IMC 80% of arrows hit their targets. 12th level caster can thus 'deal' 0.8 x 50 x 4 = 160 points of damage with a single spell, criticals not included. Not too bad, eh?

Better yet, the archer could quite easily buy a pearl of power, and lend it to the caster, so no slots were lost due to this. Or get a spell storing ioun stone or whatever. Lot cheaper than buying 'real' magic arrows

And didn't bows bestow the magical +'s upon the arrow, so that the bows plusses counted towards penetrating DR?

 

[Storm Raven]

Oh, so the party has to have one or more of these classes (or Paladin) if it has an archer type?

Well, I don't know very many parties that don't have one or more Wizards, Clerics, Sorcerers, Bards, or Paladins. Perhaps you are used to playing with parties that are entirely lacking in this sort of character, but my experience is that most parties have two or more characters in this group.

A Sorcerer wants to take GMW instead of Fly, or Haste, or Fireball, or Dispel Magic as one of his four 3rd level spells? Just to help out the party archer?

Sure, since he can use it for any number of weapons. In many cases the bonus granted by GMW will outstrip the bonus of actual weapons carried by the party. Being able to cast GMW several times in a day can be highly useful.

A Bard wants to take GMW instead of one of his five 3rd level spells? Just to help out the party archer? Maybe if he is an archer type himself, but otherwise…

And to help himself out, and the party tank, and the party cleric, and so on.

The Paladin cannot do it until level 11 at the earliest. Even then, they are +1 arrows. +2 arrows at level 12, +3 arrows at level 18. Not very helpful against Stoneskin or powerful demons at equivalent levels.

This would be one of the reasons I didn't bother to include Paladins in my list.

That leaves Wizards and Clerics. Most of the Wizards I know would rather memorize a Fireball or Haste or Slow or something that does more than a few attacks per round. Especially since in non-DR circumstances, magic arrows will only do an extra point or two of damage if they hit. Third level spells are especially precious for Wizards.

Essentially you are talking about one third level spell per day, at most. For a reasonably high level Wizard (say ninth or tenth or so), this becomes a trivial cost, and gains significant benefits to the party. Leaving aside the bonus that accrues to the archer in his attack rolls, the damage bonus alone is more than worth using the spell slot.

Suppose you have a five round combat (pretty typical in my experience). The archer (with Rapid Shot, since very few dedicated archers don't have Rapid Shot) can make three attacks per round. My general experience is that archers rarely miss once they get a magic bow, Bracers of Archery and get to the mid levels. In that five round combat, the GMW spell accounts for up to 45 points of damage inflicted (15 arrows). A Fireball cast by a 9th level Wizard maxes out at 54 points of damage, and only inflicts 31.5 points of damage on average. And that assumes that none of the foes make their Reflex save (a dubious proposition).

And the archer still has 35 more GMW arrows available for several hours. I'm thinking one of the best uses for a third level slot for a Wizard from a damage dealing perspective is to cast GMW on a pile of arrows and hand them out to his archer friend.

A Cleric taking GMW is not taking Neutralize Poison or Restoration or something equally helpful in the areas where mostly only Clerics can help. Yes, the archer helped kill the Wyverns, but not before they poisoned 4 characters, 2 of whom died.

Do your clerics avoid memorizing any offensive spells at all? That seems odd, and counterproductive.

Yes, having an ally take GMW COULD happen and probably does in higher level campaigns. But, unless you know ahead of time you are running into DR creatures that this can even affect before preparing in the morning, it probably will not happen most days in most mid or lower level campaigns.

Well, then the groups of characters who you are used to dealing with haven't thought things through, and are doing a lousy job of leveraging their resources.

Plus, casting it the morning for a morning encounter will probably not help much late that night due to duration without the Extend feat (even higher level spell) or multiple castings.

At ninth level, that single casting of GMW lasts nine hours. More than enough for the day's activities. You might need some later than that, but then again, a Wizard can go through his other attack spells early in the day too. This limitation is no greater than the limitation of anything else counted in slots per day.

Mostly, archers are on their own to acquire magic arrows however they do it.

Not in my experience. But then again, the groups of PCs I'm used to dealing with worked thorugh this issue and came to the conclusion that GMW was an extremely good use of a spellcaster's resources.

 

[doktorstick]

And didn't bows bestow the magical +'s upon the arrow, so that the bows plusses counted towards penetrating DR?

No. For purposes of DR, the arrow is all that counts.

 

[KarinsDad]

Sure, since he can use it for any number of weapons. In many cases the bonus granted by GMW will outstrip the bonus of actual weapons carried by the party. Being able to cast GMW several times in a day can be highly useful.

That is total BS.

We could take a poll here and maybe one player of a Sorcerer out of fifty might actually take GMW if it fit his character conception, but it would be rare. There are just too many better third level spells for Sorcerers to take, both in core rules and in supplements. The other reason that GMW is typically a poor choice for Sorcerers is that they can be metamagic specialists and the only useful metamagic that stacks with GMW is Extend Spell.

Essentially you are talking about one third level spell per day, at most. For a reasonably high level Wizard (say ninth or tenth or so), this becomes a trivial cost, and gains significant benefits to the party. Leaving aside the bonus that accrues to the archer in his attack rolls, the damage bonus alone is more than worth using the spell slot.

You have GOT to be kidding. Yes, in a situation where players are expecting a DR encounter, sure the Wizard might study it.

But, on a re-occurring basis? Our players are too smart for that.

GMW is more a specific situation spell than a general use spell unless your players are lazy and get into a rut.

Suppose you have a five round combat (pretty typical in my experience). The archer (with Rapid Shot, since very few dedicated archers don't have Rapid Shot) can make three attacks per round. My general experience is that archers rarely miss once they get a magic bow, Bracers of Archery and get to the mid levels. In that five round combat, the GMW spell accounts for up to 45 points of damage inflicted (15 arrows). A Fireball cast by a 9th level Wizard maxes out at 54 points of damage, and only inflicts 31.5 points of damage on average. And that assumes that none of the foes make their Reflex save (a dubious proposition).

The DC for most 9th level Wizards on the spell is a minimum of 16. Most 9th level opponents would have less than a 50% chance of saving on that. Assuming 50%, that's an average of 21 points of damage per opponent in the area of effect. Since this tactic is generally only useful in the first round or so when opponents have yet to close, that means that typically, several opponents are damaged either 15 or 31 points on average. 9th level challenges tend to have an average of about 60 hit points, so assuming that you hit two thirds of your opponents with the spell, a third of your opponents are half damaged in round one and another third are quarter damaged. You wouldn't use this spell if you could not get multiple opponents in the blast.

As compared to maybe 33 extra points of damage (to be totally fair, you have to realize that not all 15 shots will hit, maybe 75% will hit typically, just like maybe 50% of opponents will make their saves) spread over multiple opponents over 5 rounds over what the archer would have done anyway? Plus, the archer often wastes damage. An opponent with 2 hit points remaining taking 12 or more points (assuming your example of +3 arrows, Bracers of Archer, Weapon Specialization, probably Point Blank range, and possibly a Mighty Bow). The extra +3 damage from the arrows does not really help there. Fireballs tend to be cast early on and none of the damage is wasted.

The important point here is that the Wizard shifts the battle towards victory in round one. The archer slowly but surely finishes it. The Fireball for the Wizard does as much damage in one round against one opponent than the GMW does for the archer does over all of his opponents over the course of the entire battle. This means that with the Fireball, more opponents fall earlier in earlier rounds which results in the battle taking fewer rounds, the party taking less damage, and the resultant healing requirements being less.

All in all, Fireball when you can use it, kicks butt big time over GMW.

And, this is not even talking about the Slow spell. I've seen Slow virtually decimate the fighting capacity of a Dragon several times in 3E.

Or the Haste spell cast on that same archer, or the Wizard, or a Fighter with Greater Cleave. Haste on a Fighter tends to give him Full Round Attacks every single round and most melee feats are superior than ranged missile feats.

And the archer still has 35 more GMW arrows available for several hours. I'm thinking one of the best uses for a third level slot for a Wizard from a damage dealing perspective is to cast GMW on a pile of arrows and hand them out to his archer friend.

Well, then you are thinking incorrectly. GMW is a fine tactic, but one of the best? Not even close.

Even firing and hitting with all 50 arrows (which won't happen) at 9th level only results in 150 extra points of damage. I've seen Fireballs do that much (rarely, but it happens). But, I suspect that most of the arrows are still in the quiver most days. If not, then your archers are going through 50 arrows a day and must be carrying around bags of holding, just to pull out their crates of arrows.

Well, then the groups of characters who you are used to dealing with haven't thought things through, and are doing a lousy job of leveraging their resources.

Actually, two of the players in our current group are some of the best tacticians I've ever played with in 24 years of playing DND. I cannot even remember the number of times they have turned a losing battle into a victory or saved the entire party from nearly certain death. It sometimes gets really tough to even challenge them. They are always prepared. My latest attempt at challenging them was to portal them into a place where only their magical items (except their bag of holding) and anything touching their skin showed up. So, they are 8th level in a different dimension designed for 10th to 12th level characters and they are holding their own, even though they lost nearly all of their mundane items (including arrows). Losing their arrows sounds like it might cripple your group, psychologically if not actually.

GMW is not great. It is ok. It can be absolutely required in some circumstances. But at 10th and lower levels, it will hardly be taken every day in most groups. The only reasons it might be taken at higher levels is because GMW is more potent at higher levels and casters at higher levels tend to have more spell slots available, hence, they have more flexibility with their spells.

But, it's real simple SR. Ask the people here on the boards how often their players use GMW and what level their characters are. Put up a poll and let's find out.

Not in my experience. But then again, the groups of PCs I'm used to dealing with worked thorugh this issue and came to the conclusion that GMW was an extremely good use of a spellcaster's resources.

Then, you are not challenging them as a DM.

In my campaign, our 8th level characters never take GMW (of course, I have a house rule that MW can be cast on 10 arrows, but it is rare that they do that). But, just on Saturday, they took on a 12th level Sorcerer with Stoneskin and Minor Globe of Invulnerability and kicked his butt, even though he was throwing spells like Web (before he put up the Globe) and Heightened Empowered Lightning Bolt (which averages 50 points of damage against characters with 40 to 70 hit points). This was after they had about two thirds of their spells gone and no fourth level spells left and most of the characters were partially damaged already.

As seen time and time again, good tactics do not rely on specific spells.

I think you are too caught up in a tactic your group has latched on to, regardless of how good other tactics may be. Yes, your group may do it. But, I doubt most groups do it on a steady basis until they get to higher levels. Yes, pumping up your allies is often a good choice, but one Dispel Magic can wipe that out quick. Most groups learn that the hard way.

No single spell or tactic is the be all, end all. And, using GMW is nowhere near a great tactic in a lot of circumstances. Don't get me wrong. It's a good spell, especially at higher level. But, at 5th level, it is +1. At 8th, it is +2. It can help, but there are other third level spells which can help more since the result of GMW is a little extra damage most rounds, not a boatload of damage or the taking out of an opponent in a single round early on.

It is a slow acting spell which means that although it can do damage for a long time, it also does not quickly kill opponents which allows them to counterattack.

But, like I said, to support your position, put up a poll asking frequency and levels.

 

[Storm Raven]

That is total BS.

No, it isn't. You just haven't thought this through.

We could take a poll here and maybe one player of a Sorcerer out of fifty might actually take GMW if it fit his character conception, but it would be rare. There are just too many better third level spells for Sorcerers to take, both in core rules and in supplements. The other reason that GMW is typically a poor choice for Sorcerers is that they can be metamagic specialists and the only useful metamagic that stacks with GMW is Extend Spell.

Since metamagiced spells pretty much suck for Sorcerers (as they take a full round action to cast for them), I'm not sure where you get the idea that Sorcerers are "metamagic specialists". I have never seen a Sorcerer cast a metamagiced spell, the cost in actions is just too high.

You have GOT to be kidding. Yes, in a situation where players are expecting a DR encounter, sure the Wizard might study it.

But, on a re-occurring basis? Our players are too smart for that.

GMW is more a specific situation spell than a general use spell unless your players are lazy and get into a rut.

Or don't know what they are doing.

The DC for most 9th level Wizards on the spell is a minimum of 16. Most 9th level opponents would have less than a 50% chance of saving on that. Assuming 50%, that's an average of 21 points of damage per opponent in the area of effect. Since this tactic is generally only useful in the first round or so when opponents have yet to close, that means that typically, several opponents are damaged either 15 or 31 points on average. 9th level challenges tend to have an average of about 60 hit points, so assuming that you hit two thirds of your opponents with the spell, a third of your opponents are half damaged in round one and another third are quarter damaged. You wouldn't use this spell if you could not get multiple opponents in the blast.

And the last sentence is what makes it not that useful. You have to have the right situation, and the damage is concentrated all at once. Sure that can be useful, but in many cases, your opponents aren't going to bunch up in nice clusters for you as they approach, especially without having your allies intemixed with them.

As compared to maybe 33 extra points of damage (to be totally fair, you have to realize that not all 15 shots will hit, maybe 75% will hit typically, just like maybe 50% of opponents will make their saves) spread over multiple opponents over 5 rounds over what the archer would have done anyway?

In my experience, an focused archer character almost never misses. For example, the last such character I saw in play:

BAB +10
Dexterity +3
Gloves of Dexterity +2
Bracers of Archery +2
Magic Bow +1
GMW Arrows +3
Weapon Focus +1
Point Blank Shot (if within 30 feet) +1

For a total of +21, +22 if within 30 feet. This becomes +19/+19/+14 using Rapid Shot, better within 30 feet. Compare that to the typical ACs of most CR 10 opponents (for example, a Fire Giant, CR10 Leneraran Hydra or Retriever) and you will find that an archer's shots will almost always hit, frequently only missing on a 1 for his first two shots, and hitting well over 75% of the time on his third.

Plus, the archer often wastes damage. An opponent with 2 hit points remaining taking 12 or more points (assuming your example of +3 arrows, Bracers of Archer, Weapon Specialization, probably Point Blank range, and possibly a Mighty Bow). The extra +3 damage from the arrows does not really help there. Fireballs tend to be cast early on and none of the damage is wasted.

Lots of fireball damage is usually wasted. Against fodder type opponents lots of its damage is completely wasted: say some ogres accompanying that giant your are fighting, or a gang of harpies supporting some demon or something. In those cases, lots of the fireball damage is going to be wasted.

Further, the spread of a plain fireball isn't that great. A 20 foot radius is just not that big. Frequently you can get no more than two opponents in the area, maybe three if you get lucky. This is not such a huge advantage that it offsets the archer's ability to selectively inflict damage.

The important point here is that the Wizard shifts the battle towards victory in round one.

Actually, in many cases, the Wizard shifts the battle towards victory a little bit, and doesn't concentrate his damage enough to take out any single opponents. This is a problem, since eliminating threats early is a huge advantage. The ability concentrate or spread damage is a huge advantage. Archers can do this. A wizard with a bunch of fireballs in his pocket can't.

The archer slowly but surely finishes it. The Fireball for the Wizard does as much damage in one round against one opponent than the GMW does for the archer does over all of his opponents over the course of the entire battle. This means that with the Fireball, more opponents fall earlier in earlier rounds which results in the battle taking fewer rounds, the party taking less damage, and the resultant healing requirements being less.

No, because the Wizard's damage is spread over many opponents, while the archer can concentrate his or spread it out. I know that when the last party I saw was confronted with lots of giants, the group quickly figured out that fireball and lightning bolt were virtually useless, but that concentrated archery fire was extremely effective.

All in all, Fireball when you can use it, kicks butt big time over GMW.

Well, to put it bluntly, you don't know what you are talking about, primarily because you haven't worked through the problem.

And, this is not even talking about the Slow spell. I've seen Slow virtually decimate the fighting capacity of a Dragon several times in 3E.

Against a dragon's Will save? Please. Now you are talking about fantasies. Or you are fighting things of a lower CR than you should.

Or the Haste spell cast on that same archer,

Virtually irrelevant, since it only gives him a single extra attack. The party I referenced earlier had Haste available for months of game time and used it once or twice. It is nice, but for non-spellcasters it isn't that helpful.

or the Wizard, or a Fighter with Greater Cleave. Haste on a Fighter tends to give him Full Round Attacks every single round and most melee feats are superior than ranged missile feats.

They can be, or not. An archer can target things in many different places, the melee fighter cannot, even while hasted, since he has to move between targets. Most combats I have seen involve a lot of maneuver, and foes that are spread out in many cases.

Well, then you are thinking incorrectly. GMW is a fine tactic, but one of the best? Not even close.

"Thinking incorrectly"? I guess that's what you come up ith when you don't use the tactic much and don't pay attention.

Even firing and hitting with all 50 arrows (which won't happen) at 9th level only results in 150 extra points of damage.

I've seen a dedicated archer fire 48 arrows and miss once. Archery attack bonuses get so high so quickly that it becomes very easy to score incredible hit rates if you fight lots of opponents in your CR range.

I've seen Fireballs do that much (rarely, but it happens). But, I suspect that most of the arrows are still in the quiver most days. If not, then your archers are going through 50 arrows a day and must be carrying around bags of holding, just to pull out their crates of arrows.

Or they have pack horses. I remember the party archer would routinely have 200 to 400 arrows packed onto his pack horse (which for a pack horse is a negliglble amount of extra weight). A Quiver of Ehlonna is very helpful here too.

[snip silly, unverifiable woofing and puffing about how wonderful the palyers in KarinsDad's campaign are. You are only as good as your opponent, and you may or may not be a good opponent for them, so talking them up is just empty praise on a message board).

GMW is not great. It is ok. It can be absolutely required in some circumstances. But at 10th and lower levels, it will hardly be taken every day in most groups. The only reasons it might be taken at higher levels is because GMW is more potent at higher levels and casters at higher levels tend to have more spell slots available, hence, they have more flexibility with their spells.

But, it's real simple SR. Ask the people here on the boards how often their players use GMW and what level their characters are. Put up a poll and let's find out.

Proof by popularity is not proof of effectiveness. It is proof of how popular something is. Nothing more.

Then, you are not challenging them as a DM.

Or you aren't. Perhaps your tactics play into the hands of the "fireball everything in sight" and those of myself and other DMs I have seen do not. Your assumption that your challeneges are somehow superior is unfounded.

[snip more silly puffery that out of context is meaningless, and evidence of nothing]

As seen time and time again, good tactics do not rely on specific spells.

They rely on leveraging your specific spells into usable situations. One thing you have missed out on is that the fireball happens once, while the GMW lasts for hours and mutiple combats. It only takes about 15 arrows to equal the typical damage output on a fireball, and the archer has two and a half times more enchanted arrows available if he needs them for a second fight.

I think you are too caught up in a tactic your group has latched on to, regardless of how good other tactics may be. Yes, your group may do it. But, I doubt most groups do it on a steady basis until they get to higher levels. Yes, pumping up your allies is often a good choice, but one Dispel Magic can wipe that out quick. Most groups learn that the hard way.

Assuming your foe has a dipel magic handy and figures out that the archer has some dispellable effect and targets him over someone else and wins the opposed check and doesn't have something better to do, like casting a spell that will deal damage or something. Yes it can be dispelled, but so can haste, fly, slow, cat's grace and all other spells with a duration.

No single spell or tactic is the be all, end all. And, using GMW is nowhere near a great tactic in a lot of circumstances. Don't get me wrong. It's a good spell, especially at higher level. But, at 5th level, it is +1. At 8th, it is +2. It can help, but there are other third level spells which can help more since the result of GMW is a little extra damage most rounds, not a boatload of damage or the taking out of an opponent in a single round early on.

I have never seen a fireball come close to taking out a single CR10 opponent in one round. I have seen a dedicated archer do that.

It is a slow acting spell which means that although it can do damage for a long time, it also does not quickly kill opponents which allows them to counterattack.

Fireball is the quintissential "they can counterattack" spell most of the time. Dire wolves laugh off fireball damage most of the time, giants, monstrous vermin and other types of opponents you are likely to find at 9th-10th level and beyond just giggle when you toss a fireball, and then they make full attacks.

But, like I said, to support your position, put up a poll asking frequency and levels.

Ah yes, the "Backstreet Boys" form of evidence. If someting is popular it must be good, and if it isn't it must not be. Put up a popularity contest. That proves how effective something is, doesn't it? The fact that you would suggest this sort of thing as "evidence" tells me that you are not worth bothering with.

 

[Artoomis]

Am I?

I compared Mighty to Flaming Burst weapons above. The DMG indicates that Flaming Burst at 3.5 extra damage on average = Holy at 7 extra damage, but only against Evil.

Mighty does +0 to +5 extra damage (assuming the ring as written, not normal Mighty). For most characters that use such a ring, it will be in the ballpark of +3 to +5, not +0 to +2.

So, how is +3 to +5 extra damage (vast majority of time) NOT equal to +1 to +6 extra damage for Flaming Burst?

How is +6 to +10 extra damage (vast majority of time) NOT equal to +2 to +16 extra damage for Flaming Burst when doing a critical?

Mighty can be stopped or reduced by Damage Reduction, but the Flaming Burst can be stopped or reduced by Element Resistance (or Endure Elements).

Granted, Holy does more damage, but is limited to Evil creatures. Hence, it has a utility limitation that brings it down on par with these other special abilities. At least the DMG indicates it is on par with Flaming Burst and I agree.

Seem about equal to me. Why would they not be?

The rules make them apples and oranges.

What does a Mighty Bow Cost?
What does Flamiong Burst or Holy cost?

Clearly not equivalent.

 

[Pielorinho]

Hmm...in the game I DM in, the party cleric always always takes at least one GMW spell. She's the main fighter in the group, of course, and she delights in getting a melee bonus of +14 or higher -- but it's a very effective spell for her nonetheless. The party sorcerer has a fireball spell, but I think he's only cast it once in his dozen sessions with me: usually he's casting haste, slow, or dispel magic.

In the game I play in, we currently have a sorcerer who specializes in hasting people. No one in our game has access to GMW or Fireball; instead, my druid prepares two GMFs and two Flame Strikes each day. They're both fantastic spells.

We briefly had an archer playing in our group. We were appalled at the amount of damage that puppy could dish out.

If I were a sorcerer in a group that had two archer characters, I'd be very tempted to take GMW as a spell, and cast it three times before descending into the dungeon: once on each archer's bow, and once on 50 arrows.

Assume that each archer gets +4 to damage from WS, point-blank shot, and/or strength: that's an average damage of 7.5 per arrow.

At ninth level, I'm adding 6 points of damage to each shot for 50 shots. I'm also allowing our archers to hit DR and incorporeal critters. I'm also drastically increasing the archer's chance to hit opponents. Finally, I can cast these outside of combat, freeing myself up to do other things when the going gets tough. If I'm calculating correctly, I'm doing 50 * (6 + (.3(7.5)=2.25)=8.25) = 212.5 points of damage with these three spells, not counting the benefits vs. incorporeal and DR critters or the potential benefits to crits (which will, I believe, just about balance out the few shots that miss).

I don't think it'd be worth using this tactic with just one archer in the group -- the damage would be too spread out. But with two archers, it could be downright nasty.

I think it's a good, but not a gamebreaking, tactic.
Daniel