Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ilbranteloth" data-source="post: 7115837" data-attributes="member: 6778044">That's where we disagree. It's never been an essential part of our fantasy gaming. Sure, there's an awful lot of sword fighting, but that's because it's hard to avoid in most combats. Any time one opponent has a significant advantage (ranged vs. non-ranged), then they either need to eliminate the advantage, or run away. I'm not interested in the rules "making something attractive" nor are we concerned with melee builds, or character builds in that sense whatsoever.Combat is a means to an end in our games, and it's often not the means chosen. On the other hand, I think that we arrive with somewhat compatible results.Historically 60 to 90 yards was the most effective range for bows, crossbows, and early firearms. And while they were very effective, a charge against their position from that distance often meant that the archers would barely have time to drop their bow and draw a weapon before the charge arrived, barreling into them shield first with a significant advantage. In game terms, you'd have your best shot from about 30 to 60 yards, and disadvantage from about 60 to 90 yards. But if you wait to take your shot against a charging target and didn't drop them, they would most likely have an advantage on their first melee attack against you.The fact is, ranged attacks from inside about 60 yards are typically a one-shot deal. If the charging enemy had a thrown weapon, such as a hand axe, you'd be open for attack since you couldn't use a shield with your bow (although you could use a pavise, a shield that was mounted on a post stuck into the ground for cover, usually by crossbowmen). So long-range archery should be much less effective than in the rules. The second area that's lacking is the idea that you can shoot into melee and hit a specific target. Imagine being a safety in a football game with a bow and trying to hit a specific target on the line after the ball is snapped. Why is 30 yards sort of a magic number for hunting? Because when hunting you're aiming for about a 3" to maybe 6" target for a one-shot kill through the heart. You're concealed and waiting for the perfect moment. If you're targeting a deer, outside of about 30 yards, the sound of the bowstring can startle the target and they move enough to miss the kill shot. That is, it takes longer for the arrow to reach the target then the sound and their ability to react.Now people don't have the reaction time of a deer. But in combat, everybody is in motion. You're attempting to guess who will be where and hit the target you want. The OP with an early firearm? The same problem, except exacerbated by moving so far out of range. Early firearms didn't have better ranges, nor did they have better aim (although an untrained individual could learn to aim acceptably quite quickly). It was penetrating power. Otherwise the same 60 yard range applies.So, reduce the effectiveness of long range.Reduce the ability to shoot into melee (in AD&D you just rolled for a random target). That places the effectiveness of ranged weapons in close combat to 30-90 yards, you get one shot off, and then they close for melee. Also, shooting on the run - when you're running away, you aren't shooting. You stop to turn around and aim and you're right back to where you started, too close for a good shot without getting skewered immediately afterward.Your solutions also work, and I don't have a problem with them for folks that want to go that route. But you can also be more historically accurate and also solve a lot of the problems you raise. For us it makes it a more interesting game in addition to reigning in the overpowered abilities.</blockquote>

Verification