Nonlethal Force said:+1 arrow with bane (_____) ability: 8,000 gold.
Except that is the price for 50 arrows and not one.
Nonlethal Force said:+1 arrow with bane (_____) ability: 8,000 gold.
irdeggman said:Now composite bows also have a Str rating which applies to damage (and is not considered an enhancement) - melee weapons do not have anything similar to this that can apply.
irdeggman said:An archer can fire a number of arrows based on his BAB and at range so that a melee combatant won't reach him until suffering through several rounds worth of attacks.
irdeggman said:Except that is the price for 50 arrows and not one.
Nonlethal Force said:Since each bundle of arows is 50 arrows
Grog said:I wonder how many of the people claiming that bow and arrow enhancement bonuses stacking is too powerful have actually done some math on the subject.
Nonlethal Force said:I think you are missing the greater point of the thread. I'm still out as to which can do more damage. I've personally always assumed that a raging barbarian with Power Attack out-damages most others personally. Yet, the fact that an archer with far shot and a composite bow can nail a person even outside the average person's run distance can make a difference in this. Throw an intercepting meat shield and now that archer looks real good. Additionally, I am a firm believer that where combat takes place is largely campaign specific. For example, I am running a campaign here at ENWorld that has yet to see combat taking place in a dungeon. Honestly in my experience, dungeon combat is in the minority of the combats I do. But like I said, that is largely campaign specific and really can't be taken for granted on either side of the issue.
Nonlethal Force said:The main point of this thread so far has been to argue the aspects of whether allowing bow/arrow enhancements to stack. Economically, I believe it to be unbalanced. As a bonus to attack, I also see it as unbalanced because it might allow for as much as a +10 to attack when no melee character could gain more than a +5 from their weapon. As a bonus to damage, this is the one that I am the most neutral on. The bonus to damage is much less significant in comparison to an enemy's total hitpoints. But even with this regard I still think 2 out of 3 coniderations are definately unbalanced - and possibly the third.
mvincent said:Allowing them to stack wouldn't be too unbalanced. Since the arrow could just as easily be made with special abilities (which are just as effective, if no moreso, than straight enhancement bonuses), the only advantage is that the requisite, initial +1 enhancement isn't wasted.
Pyrex said:...until you factor in Greater Magic Weapon.
Putting +8 worth of overlapping properties on the bow & arrow then casting GMW for a combined effective bonus of +18 is sick, wrong and broken.
Grog said:Well, the designers of 3.x have said that their goal in making the system was to go "back to the dungeon," so to speak. And most published adventures focus mainly on dungeons. I will grant that, in a campaign where most combats take place outdoors, during the daytime, in good weather, in places with clear terrain and good visibility, archery will be much more useful and effective than it otherwise would be. But I don't think most campaigns fall into that category.
This is where the economic argument falls down. Sure, you can have a higher bonus by dropping an enhancement from the bow and increasing the arrows... but the melee fighter's sword isn't going to run out of ammo.Grog said:Only +16 (weapons have to have a +1 enchantment before you can put other stuff on them). And you can do the same thing with a meele weapon. And you have to be 20th level to get that huge bonus. And you only have it for 50 shots (10 rounds if you're using Rapid shot, 12.5 if you're not).
Zustiur said:This is where the economic argument falls down. Sure, you can have a higher bonus by dropping an enhancement from the bow and increasing the arrows... but the melee fighter's sword isn't going to run out of ammo.