D&D 5E Missile weapons atk and dmg.

[The Crimson Binome]

On another note, how do you all keep track of ammunition in games? What is your opinion on it and what do the rules say?

The rules say that you need one piece of ammo for each attack you make, so it's simple enough to buy a quiver of twenty arrows (for 1gp, and it only weighs 1lb), and then make tally marks for each one spent. Spend a minute after the combat to retrieve up to half of the spent ammo. That's just straight what it says in the book, though.

For a dedicated archer, who might need more than twenty arrows, I would probably place a limit of three quivers that can be carried, and only one of them can be readied at a time. At some point, the bulk has to matter more than the weight. And then, of course, you can always make more arrows when you rest at night, as long as there are suitable materials around.

 

[Andor]

You can also recover half your expended ammo after a fight by spending a minute scavenging.

 

[drjones]

I don't think that anyone is arguing for archers using Strength to hit with their bow attacks. I think they just want some sort of reason for an archer to even want Strength, instead of dumping it as low as you possibly can since it does nothing for you. If a country is known for the strength of their archers, then they should be feared as a military power on that grounds, rather than being a complete joke.

Firing a bow in melee range gives you disadvantage, STR does not do nothing for you, unless you stick to finesse weapons and don't plan on carrying anything or engaging in any skill checks. A really weak archer might be fun to roleplay, but optimal it is not.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

Firing a bow in melee range gives you disadvantage, STR does not do nothing for you, unless you stick to finesse weapons and don't plan on carrying anything or engaging in any skill checks. A really weak archer might be fun to roleplay, but optimal it is not.

I suppose I was taking it for granted that an archer, who has every reason to emphasize Dexterity as the defining factor in ranged supremacy, would take the obvious solution of using a finesse weapon when it got down to melee combat.

Off the top of my head, I can't actually say whether an archer would be better off with significant Strength investment and a greatsword, rather than relying purely on Dex and using a rapier. I mean, if you really threw everything into Strength as a second priority, you could get a 16 that would put you at +3 to hit for 2d6+3 damage, compared to just caring about Dex so that your sole 20 will give you a melee attack for +5 to hit and 1d8+5 damage.

Even if it does work out favorably, I think you would probably still be better off with putting your second highest stat into either Con or Wisdom, or even Int/Cha for skill purposes. If you're not using it to hit, then Strength doesn't do much besides carrying capacity.