Stacking +1 ammo with +1 Weapons

[Bad Paper]

I have been irritated by archers in all versions of D&D, always wanted to do something about them, never bothered because they're always below my RADAR.

This is a good thread, and I will add my two cents:

Based on the earlier suggestion of "make arrows unenchantable," what if we instead do this:
1) bows/crossbows/slings/other launchers can only carry non-enhancements bonusses like flaming, bane or holy. They confer these abilities to their ammunition.
2) arrows/bolts/bullets/ammunition can only carry enhancement bonusses like +2.

Bonus: This system works with both 3.0 and 3.5 flavors of damage reduction.

 

[ElectricDragon]

I would like to add that the economic perspective has yet to address the fact that if the melee fighter gains a magic item that increases his Strength or adds a point to his Strength score because of level advances; he does not have to buy or make a new weapon to take advantage of his new Strength score. An archer does.

Ciao
Dave

 

[green slime]

This has long been a bone of contention of mine.

The problem, IMO, is not whether arrows and bows stack, but with GMW, which guarantees that there will always be powerful magical arrows available in the first place.

1e, 2e, and 3e, all had bows and arrows stack.

In previous editions of the game, magical arrows were at a premium. It didn't matter what "+" the bow was, when it came to penetrating DR. Given that 50 +2 arrows cost a small fortune, and was a limited resource (unlike a +2 sword, which lasts a lifetime), players would not use those arrows unless it was really required.

In 3e, a high level (10th+) character could easily burn through 50 arrows in 10 rounds or less. Allowing GMW to be cast on multiples (batches) of ammunition was stupid.

The opportunity cost was no longer 18,000 gp for 50 +3 arrows (limited resource), but a mere 4th level spell slot (renewable resource) or, for the more cost-efficient: 36,000 gp for a wand of divine greater magic weapon (CL 12), and easy access to 2,500 +3 arrows...

Given that there is no core way for an archer to increase damage beyond strength, other than adding on magical abilities ( power attack), surplus "to hit" is wasted.

If GMW was reduced to affecting only one arrow, and the bow "+" does not affect DR, then you have an opportunity cost for a +5 arrow at 1,000 gp each, turning the "stacking" problem into a non-issue.

 

[Nonlethal Force]

I would like to add that the economic perspective has yet to address the fact that if the melee fighter gains a magic item that increases his Strength or adds a point to his Strength score because of level advances; he does not have to buy or make a new weapon to take advantage of his new Strength score. An archer does.

I personally don't see a problem here. The archer's main attack statistic is DEX, not STR. When a fighter increases his STR he doesn't have to get a new weapon simply because that's his main attack statistic. When an archer gets a new item that increases his DEX he need not get a new weapon, either.

Now, if you want to talk about important sub-abilities and compare those, and archer does have to buy a new weapon to take advantage of an increased STR - but then again only if they are using a bow. Slings confer their STR to damage from a bullet or stone, and crossbows never allow STR to begin with. But yes, the bow user needs a new piece of equipment when his STR goes up. However, the fighter typically also needs a new piece of equipment when his DEX goes up, too. It's just not his weapon, its his armor. The archer build tyically has less of a problem with this because they've done their build with an increasing DEX in mind.

I don't think mechanically there is a problem in this regard because from an attack perspective STR in a fighter should be compared to DEX in an archer. Neither of which need a new weapon. But then again, I've already made it clear that from my perspective I am much more concerned about the balance/unbalance of the BAB modifiers than I am about the damage modifiers. Again - that is because hitpoints increase much more than AC ever does.

 

[irdeggman]

Flavour text it. Since they're lost or destroyed, you might describe all such incidents in melee as 'destroyed' rather than 'lost' - shattered by a parry, or breaking on the opponent's armour, or whatever.

Or the entire text about what happens when "missed" can be seen as "color" text to describe the fact that only about 1/2 of arrows shot (and having missed their target) can be "recovered". Which is what it really seems to be saying - only they tried to get "fancy" when writing.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Or the entire text about what happens when "missed" can be seen as "color" text to describe the fact that only about 1/2 of arrows shot (and having missed their target) can be "recovered".

Well, "An arrow that misses has a 50% chance of being destroyed or lost" is a mechanic. The mechanic should influence the cinematic description, rather than the other way around... otherwise you end up with "You can't Cleave with a rapier - it's a Piercing weapon!"

-Hyp.

 

[Shin Okada]

Hey! There still be DR/Epic in 3.5e. If we allow enhancement bonus stacking, an archer with +3 bow and +3 arrows can bypass DR of, say, Aspects. While melee fighters can only bypass this unless he has a +4 or better weapon with appropriate bane ability or an artifact.

 

[green slime]

Hey! There still be DR/Epic in 3.5e. If we allow enhancement bonus stacking, an archer with +3 bow and +3 arrows can bypass DR of, say, Aspects. While melee fighters can only bypass this unless he has a +4 or better weapon with appropriate bane ability or an artifact.

Godmorgon Yxskaft!

+3 arrows with a +3 bow does not surpass DR/Epic. pretty simple. Basically, as previously explained above, only the magic of the arrow would count towards defeating DR.

 

[Shin Okada]

Godmorgon Yxskaft!

+3 arrows with a +3 bow does not surpass DR/Epic. pretty simple. Basically, as previously explained above, only the magic of the arrow would count towards defeating DR.

Wasn't that a 3.0e rule? I have been thinking that this thread is talking about allowing enhancement bonus stack of bow and arrows in 3.5e rules.

 

[Nonlethal Force]

Yes, this thread is about debating all stacking from bows and arrows and whether that would be unbalanced. Thus, it is not to much to throw out the possibility of a +3 bow and a +3 arrow stacking to make an "epic" appropriate weapon of +6. To me, that adds further evidence to make it unbalancing without further changes to the rules ...