Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="irdeggman" data-source="post: 3345397" data-attributes="member: 16285">You are absolutely correct here.Storyteller01Not really. There is a relative level of balance that was inserted into the core rules. And since this is a house-rule it needs to maintain the level of balance that was built into the RAW. If it is being inserted to counter a "campaign" imbalance that is a different matter.As I recall you had a recent topic on how to get a melee warrior to realize that your game was heavily advantaged towards ranged attackers already.hongNot in this case.IMO it appears that the desire to insert a power attack for ranged attacks comes from a desire to up the power of archers. {Daaah}But most opinions on the boards (not necessarily this thread but in general over the past) seem to indicate that people think archers are more powerful to start with.Now this opinion arrises from the fact that they can do a great deal of damage at range with little danger of being harmed by melee combatants.  The "balance" comes in when one considers that melee combatants "rule" when it comes to melee. That is once they close on their targets (ranged attackers, spellcasters) they tend to deal a lot of damage in a short time. Their feats tend to reinforce this (the power attack/cleave chain is the prime example) while ranged attackers rely on their mobility and ability to attack from outside of melee range.Ranged attackers can also take advantage of the fact that their ammunition and bow can each have +10 in enhancements/properties that stack (except for the base enhancement bonus). So an archer (non epic) can have a +5 composite bow with +5 worth of other abilities added and still gain +9 worth of different enhancements on their arrows). Now this is balanced by the fact that ammunitions is destroyed so becomes more expensive than the bow - but the flexability is still there.Increasing the ranged attackers advantage would tip the scales pretty dramatically, IMO.The present RAW tends to reflect the historical roles of melee and ranged combatants.</blockquote>

Verification