Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Ranged Strikers - more "aggro" mechanics?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Immolate" data-source="post: 4141204" data-attributes="member: 62381"><p>I don't know about you, but if you're going to be crunching umbers, you might as well make peace with it taking time 'cause those bastages are tougher than a turtle-shell taco. You're better off just dropping a house on 'em.</p><p></p><p>Something that hasn't been mentioned (unless I missed it) is that what we can do to them, they can do to us. With the emphasis now shifting to multi-monster, tactically-supportive encounters, your favorite squishy can look forward to fighting a lot more bow-wielding bad guys than in the past. How long is your wizard or warlock going to last under the withering fire of two or three enemy archers concentrating fire and all doing bonus damage?</p><p></p><p>I agree with the 'reality' of the restriction in that the closest target will be the most vulnerable, on average, to the most decisive shots. We can stipulate that this isn't a reality game, but we expect things to make sense, and this is supportable from that perspective.</p><p></p><p>I also agree with the concept of "choices between preferred target and optimal damage" as a mechanic to encourage movement and maneuver. Fluid, highly tactical combat is more fun to play, more fun to watch, and more often yeilds results that can't be quantified as optimal vs. non-optimal. I wholeheartedly, enthusiastically embrace giving every character choices that matter every round. Also, as was already mentioned, the changes in movement rules such as diagonals and, more importantly, not detracting from damage capacity make moving an assumption rather than a sacrifice, with few exceptions.</p><p></p><p>My hope is that, in your game and mine, the ranger-as-archer becomes a class that appeals to everyone, and not just to the "let me know when it's my turn" archetypes and min/maxxers out there. I trust that there was at least one archer fan among the play-testers who would have mentioned if the new ranger wasn't as fun to play as the old ranger. And yes, the word "trust" is a qualifier.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Immolate, post: 4141204, member: 62381"] I don't know about you, but if you're going to be crunching umbers, you might as well make peace with it taking time 'cause those bastages are tougher than a turtle-shell taco. You're better off just dropping a house on 'em. Something that hasn't been mentioned (unless I missed it) is that what we can do to them, they can do to us. With the emphasis now shifting to multi-monster, tactically-supportive encounters, your favorite squishy can look forward to fighting a lot more bow-wielding bad guys than in the past. How long is your wizard or warlock going to last under the withering fire of two or three enemy archers concentrating fire and all doing bonus damage? I agree with the 'reality' of the restriction in that the closest target will be the most vulnerable, on average, to the most decisive shots. We can stipulate that this isn't a reality game, but we expect things to make sense, and this is supportable from that perspective. I also agree with the concept of "choices between preferred target and optimal damage" as a mechanic to encourage movement and maneuver. Fluid, highly tactical combat is more fun to play, more fun to watch, and more often yeilds results that can't be quantified as optimal vs. non-optimal. I wholeheartedly, enthusiastically embrace giving every character choices that matter every round. Also, as was already mentioned, the changes in movement rules such as diagonals and, more importantly, not detracting from damage capacity make moving an assumption rather than a sacrifice, with few exceptions. My hope is that, in your game and mine, the ranger-as-archer becomes a class that appeals to everyone, and not just to the "let me know when it's my turn" archetypes and min/maxxers out there. I trust that there was at least one archer fan among the play-testers who would have mentioned if the new ranger wasn't as fun to play as the old ranger. And yes, the word "trust" is a qualifier. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Ranged Strikers - more "aggro" mechanics?
Top