Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mustrum_Ridcully" data-source="post: 106505" data-attributes="member: 710">Somehow, you`re all getting total off topic. The original question was wether precise shot is unbalanced or not. (Can`t you let the horse rest in peace? Why have you still to beat it? <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> )----I say it is not. You take a feat, and loose a penalty. (Like with Wepaon Profiency). You still suffer some other penalties - targets engaged in melee might give cover to each other. And many fighters and barbarians really love to be hit by the archer`s arrows. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />---But for beating the dead horse: Somewhere, Someone gave some clues why two weapon fighting might make sense for a ranger:Two Weapon Fighting is a option for the ranger, not a duty.Imagine someone trying to sneak through the forest (or some other "natural enviroment". Sneaking means: I avoid heavier armors, because you don`t get better in it with armor. So, you let the shield at home, take a chain shirt / leather armor or whatever light armor you might have.But who knows what happens? If you get attacked, you will want a weapon. Hmm. Greatsword is a fine weapon - but on the other hand, it is very large. Not really good for sneaking and moving. Let`s take a smaller one - longsword perhaps?Hmm. But we still have some place - one hand is free. Perhaps, just to have still another fighting option, get a dagger and a short sword. Now let`s go.What can we do, if we are getting attacked now? We get out the sword. Hmm. But we aren`t well armored. And our weapon doesn`t have such a great reach. Perhaps you should take the second weapon in the off-hand, to be able to hit more often.Even if not all of this is reflected by the core rules, it may make sense. I am fine with the ranger...</blockquote>

Verification