I'd like to see more +1 arrows on the server for less of a cost. Yes, it gives a slight advantage to an archer, since +1 weapons are somewhat rare, but it does not compare to the current disadvantage archers have when coming up against anything will damage resistance. Where the brawler can magic up his weapon, the archer is pretty much screwed. Wouldn't have to be drastic either, 10 arrows for something under 100 gold might work as long as they are easily available.

Another option would be to have the ability to cast magic weapon on a bundle of arrows, though I'm guessing that is likely to be impossible.

Someone should correct me if this is wrong, but I think +1 arrows do not go through DR the way a normal (or enchanted somehow) +1 weapon does.

That causes me to agree though, it can be a problem if you are fighting creatures with DR, regardless of whether or not those arrows work. However-- if the price of the arrows is to be dropped, it won't be by much, and will probably remain an expensive investment like it is.

I have been considering bringing this topic back, myself. I know it was discussed (more/cheaper magic missile weapons, ability to enchant missiles/missile weapons).

I personally think it would be best to be able to enchant a bundle of missiles with the Magic Weapon spell. I can't see it being terribly overpowering (some missiles have nice bonuses, but they are inherently limited by their number). Either that, or increase the random amounts of dropped ammo from enemies. As it stands, any ranged-dependent char that doesn't have sneak attack can't even scratch some of our fairly common enemies.

I have played PnP D&D for a long time (15+ years) and this server generally follows the guidelines as well or better than the engine for NWN allows (a bit oxymoronic, but I hope you understand). I guess my basic point follows the above posts in saying we could probably handle this situation a teensy bit better.

Confirmed: +1 arrows do not go through DR.

It's the bows that do it, isn't it?

Seens a few +1 attack bows, just look harder. I think they go past DR.

It's not the damage that goes through, but the AB.. I think its the same principle as weapons with +1 attack going through DR as well as +1 enhancement weapons (which are the same, apart from extra damage).

ExileStrife Confirmed: +1 enhancement bonus arrows do not go through DR.

That's what I should have said.

Hm. Is there ANY scenario in which a missile weapon can get through DR? If so, could someone clarify which methods?

I always thought the enchanted arrows did, but the enchantment on the bow didn't affect anything except AB, not vica versa. Seems I had an archer on another server who had a +1 magic bow, and she couldn't pierce DR. But that could be faulty memory.

On a slight tangent, shortbow/longbow archers seem to be at a significant disadvantage overall, when it comes to helpful items. After about 3 months on the server, I've yet to see a "mighty" bow, let alone a magic bow. Yet I regularly see all manner of melee weapons with enhancements.

I have been on the server for a few months myself, and have found only an enhanced bow, one with critical damage increases, which do no help with DR. I believe I have seen more occurrances of enhanced crossbows but still they are not able to handle DR.

Ranged weapons with +1 AB or +1 enchantment will go through DR. There are mighty bows, and I believe you can aquire them simply as ambient loot if you are against the higher stuff. There are also loot bows with +AB, so that can be persued too.

When I say loot, I mean that they can be aquired with absolutely no dm-intervention whatsoever.

So what's the verdict? If you build a ranged-dependent char just bust your ass on quests until you find a magic bow/sling/crossbow/throwing axes/darts/shuriken? While every standard fighter build gets to kill everything with a spell or magic charm?

I know that sounds confrontational, but I really would like a definite ruling/policy on this subject. :)

I doubt there will ever be a definate ruling regarding, "How to get +1 ranged weapons."

There is no possible way to make magic weapon work on ranged weapons, for say a +1 longbow?

I'd just like to note that the lack of magical bows might also be somewhat tied to the lack of wood. Underdark isn't exactly the fletchers heaven.

I don't care what everyone says, Strife. I think you are alright! :)

ExileStrife Ranged weapons with +1 AB or +1 enchantment will go through DR.

Does this work for +1 AB monk gloves or other gauntlets with +1 AB on them, too?

SanTelmo

ExileStrife Ranged weapons with +1 AB or +1 enchantment will go through DR.

Does this work for +1 AB monk gloves or other gauntlets with +1 AB on them, too?

Koririn I'd just like to note that the lack of magical bows might also be somewhat tied to the lack of wood. Underdark isn't exactly the fletchers heaven.

Just an off the cuff suggestion, but how about an enchanted quiver, or some other item that is carried by the archer, that enables arrows shot by him/her to penetrate DR? A gem that is "placed" within the bow, or worn like a neckalce, or a ring? Enchanted gloves of Archery? I would think such an item not a random drop, but something much more rare. Or maybe it is a random drop from a hard to reach quest/area..an item only found on Drow patrolling around Transyr?? Just a thought, or a few at any rate.

So what's the verdict? If you build a ranged-dependent char just bust your ass on quests until you find a magic bow/sling/crossbow/throwing axes/darts/shuriken? While every standard fighter build gets to kill everything with a spell or magic charm?

There is no possible way to make magic weapon work on ranged weapons, for say a +1 longbow?

This is the heart of the problem, I believe. While enchanted weapons may be rare, the spell "magic weapon" is readily available, so much so that even fighters will pick something like a medicine bag rather than a trinket that can cast magic weapon when dividing up loot.

Archers, on the other hand, have no easily accessible equivalent. And, given that archery is likely as popular as front-lining, it seems rather inequitable.

The rarity of "mighty" bows (still haven't seen one, though rumor has it they exist) is equally as frustrating, as a highly skilled archer may do merely 1 damage with a shot, meanwhile her novice front-lining companion may easily be guaranteed a minimum of 8 damage with a swing (weapon type + damage bonuses). Heck, given standard equipment, even a 2nd-level halfling with a 12 strength will do more minimum damage by throwing a dart than a 7th-level archer with a longbow. Seems rather odd.

Throw on the risk of AoO's for using ranged weapons, and you really have to be a glutton for punishment to build a dedicated archer on this server.

Actually, I think it's so drastic that you gotta have a certain build to make your archer effective in matters of damage.

(Notice that there are certain strategies which makes an archer much more then a "damaging" tool)

JackOfSwords Heck, given standard equipment, even a 2nd-level halfling with a 12 strength will do more minimum damage by throwing a dart than a 7th-level archer with a longbow. Seems rather odd.

Average damage for a dart with +1 strength modifier dealing 1d4+1 damage is 3.5.

In other words, high minimum damage has no intrinsic value over high maximum damage (or vice versa) except in special cases.

There is no possible way to make magic weapon work on ranged weapons, for say a +1 longbow?

Back to what I think is the heart of the issue: making some limited amount of items available that give you a temporary ability to overcome DR. Can we get Magic Weapon, or an equivalent spell-like effect based from an item, that could enchant ranged weapons? This would affect the bow, crossbow, or thrown weapon stack upon which it is cast allowing that weapon to overcome DR.

Playing a fighter based archer character the lack of any way to damage DR XX/+1 creatures is a constant frustration. If I'm by myself then a single Draghzar or Chosen can spell disaster. If I'm with a party, then I just have to stand their uselessly until the melee fighter can overcome the DR or a mage can work some wonders. Worse yet if its a party of archers then we just have to run.

Of course not every encounter should be beatable/escapable/survivable, and having DR monsters is one of many ways this is achieved. I just want there to be some means of being able to confront these enemies as an archer, and I think the proposed method is fair.

Perhaps the best solution would be to pick up a sword, and use one of the many ways to enchant the sword to break damage reduction, if finding a bow to do so is so hard.

You and your character can quickly come to the realization that your bow is great, but won't always do the trick. Maybe theres an instance where they have to pick up a sword to be useful.

There are many abilities that are awesome in this game, but just aren't effective in all instances.

Archers, by their very nature, are not supposed to be one man armies. They're supposed to be protected by melee fighters. If none are present, you've two options when an enemy survives your arrows: either switch to a melee weapon or run.

I find it actually rather hilarious that at least some of you seem to desire the same kind of combat effectiveness for archers as what melee fighters have. As in, that you should have a fighter's effectiveness without having to risk your skin in the front line! Gee, that does sound like a great deal! I'm not convinced of archers "needing" even something like Magic Weapon to temporarily enchant their ranged weapon. The very concept of a ranged weapon is already a huge advantage, something particularly useful for disrupting enemy spellcasting, and it's not like there isn't any special loot available for archers as well. In fact, special ammunition -- disease bullets, sound burst bullets, level drain darts, elemental damage arrows... -- is probably among the most common types of loot to exist, even if it doesn't pierce DR.

Archers also get some pretty awesome feats. In addition to Weapon Focus, and Weapon Specialization for fighters, you can get Point Blank Shot for an additional +1 ab and a +1 damage when the target is within 15 feet (the sneak attack range). Even if you're using an ordinary longbow, PBS coupled with Weapon Specialization ups your average damage to a respectable 7.5 per arrow. Called Shot, too, is very useful for an archer, since a successful Called Shot: Leg means that you can outrun your enemy if needed; and Called Shot: Arm, then, can make you particularly useful for your melee teammates when they're being beaten up. But most importantly, you've access to Rapid Shot, which means a free extra attack given that PBS effectively halves the AB penalty and the other half is negated by the fact that an archer's AB ability, Dexterity, is the bonus ability of elves and halflings -- the two races most likely to become archers. (Halflings even get a +1 ab when using throwing weapons, which includes slings. Add the size bonus and you're looking at the best AB attainable in EfU without adding loot to the equation.)

In conclusion, if you're playing an archer and feel that there's some serious cause for you to whine, don't. Try to rather capitalize on your strengths since you're obviously not doing that yet.

erglion

Playing a fighter based archer character the lack of any way to damage DR XX/+1 creatures is a constant frustration. If I'm by myself then a single Draghzar or Chosen can spell disaster. If I'm with a party, then I just have to stand their uselessly until the melee fighter can overcome the DR or a mage can work some wonders. Worse yet if its a party of archers then we just have to run.

When we find a Draghzar or Chosen, my rogue pwns him, the only need is someone to hold him up. I don't even need magic.

If you're a fighter, well, you have Called Shot, or switch weapon to sword and enchant it with that trinket or the other.

Bows are rare, and it makes it as twice as special... I don't want -everyone- have that cool looking bow, it makes the other, well earned, bows less special.

Bows are awesome as it is, other then that 1 quantity bludgeoning arrow which is annoying, I think everything is pretty good regarding it.

((Although earning a duskbow at that stew goblin is annoying, and I've seen a lvl 2 char gets it >_>))

Anthee for the win!

Arrows and magical bows may of course be given out on DM quests, or for excellent roleplay and contributions to the gameworld via your character.

Yep. I'm afraid Anthee may have hit this one out of the park. An excellent argument.

Its nice to see someone use a bit of common sence for once. Even without focus and specialisation archers are great. The best archer, well at least i think is still the ranger simply because of the favored enemy that while dosnt do yo much good against the DR monsters unless you happen to get a critical hit is still a great advantage. I have favored enemy undead and the number of zombies i can drop during the staircase quest for example is crazy. I have played combat tanks and magic enhanced nutters with great weapon before but as was said the humble archer is a parties ace in the hole. Dropping off the bad guys the big guns dont bring down letting them lay into the rest of the spawns doing what thay do best. While magic bows would be nice its not needed. The only thing i would like to see more of would be that the number of elemental arrow types going up. I have only ever seen fire and ice ones but then until now if arrows where found i just ignored them being more combat aligned. Come to think of it i dont think i have ever seen a weapon with a +1 enchantment on here, have seen a few +1 to hit (what would be masterwork weapons if this where PnP DnD) around the place.... a bow with that would be nice but seeing as a sword like that cost my cleric nearly 1000 gold i'm out of the running for that anyway, at least with my current character

I haven't seen the basic flaws of the system addressed yet. There is still inequitable damage among missile weapons, and still inequitable ability to defeat DR. To build an effective archer, you shouldn't have to either make it a rogue for sneak bonuses, or a fighter so you can load up on feats.

In conclusion, if you're playing an archer and feel that there's some serious cause for you to whine, don't. Try to rather capitalize on your strengths since you're obviously not doing that yet.

Making suggestions and opening up dialogue is not "whining". It would be constructive if you avoided insulting/bullying the opposing view in the future.

I don't want to HAVE to make a "mega-build" to make an effective archer. For nearly every other class/specialty, I've been impressed with this server in how forgiving it is in allowing you to build a character for RP, without resorting to mega-builds, and still have an effective character for questing. The same does not hold true for those who wish to make an archer.

I never disputed that average damage with a bow is greater than average damage with a dart. However, strength should be allowed as a factor to BOTH weapons, not just darts, else an archer with great stength can actually do less minimum damage with an arrow than a mildly strong character can do with a dart.

As well, the average damage gap closes quickly as strength of the dart-thrower increases, regardless of the strength of the archer. That's completely unrealistic. An arrow has much greater surface area and makes contact at a considerably higher velocity -- giving it more penetration, more shock to the system, and greater laceration/piercing.

As for comparing archery to the front-line, fact is, given a well armored opponent, an arrow is likely to do more damage than a blade -- it's more likely to penetrate critical areas of the body. It's also very taxing on a person to continue moving around in combat filled with arrows that are constantly inflicting pain with every slightest movement, and potentially continuing to do damage with that same movement. So, yes, I do expect an archer to be able to closely match a front-liner for damage done. The weakness of an archer shouldn't be in the damage they do, it should be their vulnerability to being overrun, which is what the front-line is for.

I find it actually rather hilarious that at least some of you seem to desire the same kind of combat effectiveness for archers as what melee fighters have. As in, that you should have a fighter's effectiveness without having to risk your skin in the front line!

I find it odd that you seem to feel the front-line should be more effective than the archers when it comes to damage. Archers ARE effective as damage-producing-machines. Archers AREN'T effective in close-combat -- again, that's what the front-line is intended for. And this is properly accounted for through AoO's, and by requiring a feat to avoid "to-hit" penalties at point-blank range.

A flaw I do see, however, is that armor doesn't properly penalize "to-hit" (try drawing back a bow and accurately aim while wearing full-plate and a pot helm), and point-blank should not see a damage increase (in fact, should probably see a damage decrease.)

Historically, battles have been won or lost with missile weapons. The front-line was meant to hold an enemy back so that artillery could do their job of picking them off.

I have favored enemy undead and the number of zombies i can drop during the staircase quest for example is crazy

As it should be for an archer - the front-line holds back the hordes while the archers pick them off one by one.

I don't see where suggesting better availability of "mighty" bows and better availability of missiles that can penetrate DR is all that much to ask, really doesn't deserve the negative feedback it's produced, and certainly isn't a game-breaker.

I think that somewhere my main point was missed, and misconstrued for complaining or whining about archers. I love archers. They are great for many purposes.

erglion Of course not every encounter should be beatable/escapable/survivable, and having DR monsters is one of many ways this is achieved. I just want there to be some means of being able to confront these enemies as an archer, and I think the proposed method is fair.

(Proposed method = some spell or effect to temporarily enchant missile weapons (NOT more magic arrows or bows))

Archers have their strengths and they have their weaknesses just like any class or build. In general some weaknesses can be mitigated by building your character a certain way. Others can be mitigated by joining a party with people who have complementary abilities (the best approach, but not always practical). Some others can be overcome with magic and items.

Apparently the majority of people think that creatures with DR should remain one of the weaknesses of archers.

If that's the case, then I'll just let other party members, weapon finesse with my sword (properly enchanted of course), or a drink of fleeing get rid of these dreaded monsters.

Historically, battles have been won or lost with missile weapons. The front-line was meant to hold an enemy back so that artillery could do their job of picking them off.

For the majority history this is blatantly untrue. Certainly some early Mesopotamian armies relied on massed archers, but they were quickly replaced with chariots and armored infantry who could survive the arrow barrage. The Persians used numerous archers, but they were also frontline troops. These archers didn't do a lot of damage to good, armoured infantry, as evidenced by their poor performance against the Greeks.

The Greeks rarely used archers, and neither did those who used Greeks tactics; this includes Carthage, the Greek Colonies, much of Italy, Hellenic Egypt, Mesopotamia and Asia Minor as well as early Roman troops. The Romans also rarely used archers. The Gauls did use them somewhat, but mainly relied on their heavy infantry.

Early medieval armies were small and also did not use many archers. High Middle Age armies relied on heavily armoured knights, so again no archers. The Mongols were an exception, they used bows almost exclusively and were highly successful with them. However this relied on very large armies with very long range bows, with draw weights of 150 pounds or more. This would likely be a mighty bow in the DnD system.

Not until the late middle ages were archers deciding elements in battles, and even then the front line still killed and captured many more than the archers. By the seventeenth century bows were mostly obsolete, replaced by firearms, pikemen and heavy yet mobile cavalry.

For the majority history this is blatantly untrue.

Seems you and I could probably have a long debate about the effectiveness of missile weapons, which would turn into a rather long-winded tangent. For example:

The Greeks rarely used archers, and neither did those who used Greeks tactics

Alexander regularly supplemented his army with mercenaries (Cretan archers, Rhodian slingers) or allies (Agriannes javelinmen, Thracian peltasts).

These archers didn't do a lot of damage to good, armoured infantry, as evidenced by their poor performance against the Greeks.

Though the popular saying among military historians dealing with the era is that “cavalry was the hammer and phalanx the anvil of the Macedonian army”, more extensive scrutiny clearly indicates that the use of "psiloi" (missile-wielders) made it possible for the Macedonian army to keep the opponent's archery/skirmishers in check, else their own phalanx were quite vulnerable to enemy artillery. Also, the use of such allowed them to be effective in hazardous conditions, such as in mountainous regions. (By it's nature, the phalanx requires level ground to fully utilize its strengths.)

Not until the late middle ages were archers deciding elements in battles, and even then the front line still killed and captured many more than the archers.

The english were quite effective with the longbow. So effective, it was not unusual that for each archer lost, the enemy suffered a loss of over 100. The french, for example, had little experience with bowmen and mistakenly believed their heavily armored knights would be impervious to arrows. However, narrow-tipped arrows were quite effective at piercing their armor, rendering the knight useless in the face of bowmen.

There are many determining factors involved on why archers were not specifically employed by an army or culture, most of which has to do with expertise: tactical experience, training demands and manufacturing bows. Effectiveness was not often the issue.

You are quite correct in pointing out that both calvalry (including chariots) and firearms neutralized/negated the opponents use of archers. Neither of those are a factor in NWN.

If you placed a plate-armored knight fighting another plate-armored knight in face-to-face combat, I'd place my bets on a skilled archer with proper equipment to bring down either one of them as they fought, quicker than either knight could bring down the other.

NWN combat has no relationship to any real world comparisons.

More magic arrows have been added to the loot chests, although as mentioned that won't help with the DR.

Enchanted bows will be handed out to exceptionally roleplayed characters that accomplish awesome things.

While the topic is obviously concluded I just wanted to fight one argument that was posed.

Anthee I find it actually rather hilarious that at least some of you seem to desire the same kind of combat effectiveness for archers as what melee fighters have. As in, that you should have a fighter's effectiveness without having to risk your skin in the front line!

Anthee here is comparing apples to oranges. In fact, she fails to offer a relative comparison. So I have chosen to do so to add a bit of weight to this topic should it ever arrive again.

The Half-Orc Fighter...

20 strength is easilly attianable to add their pertainant modifier to AB and DB with or without special equipment. They don't need Int, Wis, Cha or Dex (my example wears plate so why waste points on dex?) Weapon Focus and Specialization Knockdowns Power Attacks The ability to gain attacks of opportunity (often of -more- importance when fighting casters than ranged damage) The ability to attack invisible opponents without suffering an AoO The ability to wear plated armor without suffering AB *ahem* and the ability to not have to quest for months for a means to penetrate DR.

Now that we have a fair comparison, lets take it to the arena.

Your archer vs. my fighter. You don't need to ask who to bet on here... My half orc will slap you silly. Run little man, run. I get a free attack every round you shoot. I do more damage and I have a higher AC in all likelyhood. Your only hope lies in your called shots to the legs before my knockdown.

2 of your archers and 2 of my warriors. Same scenario, it's just going to happen in two seperate battles. Your hope lies in both of my warriors chasing one archer who won't shoot while the other slowly picks them off him. If your runner shoots, he gets two AoO on him every round. If my warriors split up and chase you both, you're still going to lose. 2 shots per round (maybe 4 with RF) against one of my heavily armored warriors at a time, though both of your archers will each suffer 2 attacks when you add in my AoOs. I have the higher AC and better damage. Odds are your archers will be worn down.

1 of your achers and 1 of my warriors vs 2 of my warriors. Similar to the last situation, but suddenly you're a bit better off because one of your guys doesn't have to suffer the AoOs anymore when he's swinging for more damage. Thank god you had my warrior with you, but you are still likely going down in the end.

With only the options of a specialized melee or archer to fill your ranks and with equal numbers on both sides. The only most likely winnable situation is all warriors and no archers.

Archers have their place in quests though I won't doubt. Environment can often spin things to even the odds or possibly put them in the archers favor. We can assume that the roles will both pull their weight evenly. Archers get in a bit more damage as beasties approach, but once the melee begins the warriors will quickly catch up. If a beasty breaks through the line and gets on the archer though, you have a problem wherein your archer is somewhat nullified. It's evenly comparable in my opinion.

The problem posed by the original poster though, was that when it comes to quests which involve killing a majority of opponents that have DR, there sure as hell is no reason to have an archer come along unless you want to feed him some undeserved exp or unless he has one of the rare magical bows on this server. Name for me one non role specific quest which so easilly nullifies any help offered by warriors.

Nothing? Alright then, can we at least have some silver arrows or something so we can make this an even comparison again? DR creatures pose a rough problem in low magic situations and it's effects on archers should be addressed. In a typical mid magic campaign the majority of characters should have at least 1 +AB weapon that fits their role by level 5, but for those who don't, all but archers have easy means of penetrating DR without sacrificing their strengths. While my own archer has the duskbow and the +2 mighty shortbow (unnamed to prevent spoiling). He is utterly useless against chosen, and the bottom line for every post in this topic should be "How fun is it?" Let me just say... this is none so.

Certain builds do makes the shooting useful. I know that, because yesterday we had some spiced quest with the uber chosen. The chosen had to kill me first, cause the fight held him while I took him down fast.

I have two points to lay: 1. Not all archer builds are strong/effective, but hey, so it is with fighters, no? And yes, even though most if not all fighters can, eventually penetrate DR, they are not strong enough/built well to survive.

2. I think more kinds of arrows could do the trick: Silver tipped (with reduced ab or so, it's end is too heavy), stronger poison arrows (I found it ridiculously useless against creatures against NPCs) Perhaps even special arrows, which allows one to enchant them with a spell (works on 1-7 arrows each spell or so)

The arrows idea mechanics should be left for DMS. Also, the ability to create poison tipped arrows (one at a time) with poison would be neat (Again, take 1 arrow, take 1 poison vile and combine)

This would also add more cooperation, strategics new builds and perhaps even usefulness.

Anonymous While the topic is obviously concluded I just wanted to fight one argument that was posed.

Anthee I find it actually rather hilarious that at least some of you seem to desire the same kind of combat effectiveness for archers as what melee fighters have. As in, that you should have a fighter's effectiveness without having to risk your skin in the front line!

Anthee here is comparing apples to oranges. In fact, she fails to offer a relative comparison. So I have chosen to do so to add a bit of weight to this topic should it ever arrive again.

The Half-Orc Fighter...

20 strength is easilly attianable to add their pertainant modifier to AB and DB with or without special equipment. They don't need Int, Wis, Cha or Dex (my example wears plate so why waste points on dex?) Weapon Focus and Specialization Knockdowns Power Attacks The ability to gain attacks of opportunity (often of -more- importance when fighting casters than ranged damage) The ability to attack invisible opponents without suffering an AoO The ability to wear plated armor without suffering AB *ahem* and the ability to not have to quest for months for a means to penetrate DR.

Now that we have a fair comparison, lets take it to the arena.

Your archer vs. my fighter. You don't need to ask who to bet on here... My half orc will slap you silly. Run little man, run. I get a free attack every round you shoot. I do more damage and I have a higher AC in all likelyhood. Your only hope lies in your called shots to the legs before my knockdown.

2 of your archers and 2 of my warriors. Same scenario, it's just going to happen in two seperate battles. Your hope lies in both of my warriors chasing one archer who won't shoot while the other slowly picks them off him. If your runner shoots, he gets two AoO on him every round. If my warriors split up and chase you both, you're still going to lose. 2 shots per round (maybe 4 with RF) against one of my heavily armored warriors at a time, though both of your archers will each suffer 2 attacks when you add in my AoOs. I have the higher AC and better damage. Odds are your archers will be worn down.

1 of your achers and 1 of my warriors vs 2 of my warriors. Similar to the last situation, but suddenly you're a bit better off because one of your guys doesn't have to suffer the AoOs anymore when he's swinging for more damage. Thank god you had my warrior with you, but you are still likely going down in the end.

With only the options of a specialized melee or archer to fill your ranks and with equal numbers on both sides. The only most likely winnable situation is all warriors and no archers.

Archers have their place in quests though I won't doubt. Environment can often spin things to even the odds or possibly put them in the archers favor. We can assume that the roles will both pull their weight evenly. Archers get in a bit more damage as beasties approach, but once the melee begins the warriors will quickly catch up. If a beasty breaks through the line and gets on the archer though, you have a problem wherein your archer is somewhat nullified. It's evenly comparable in my opinion.

The problem posed by the original poster though, was that when it comes to quests which involve killing a majority of opponents that have DR, there sure as hell is no reason to have an archer come along unless you want to feed him some undeserved exp or unless he has one of the rare magical bows on this server. Name for me one non role specific quest which so easilly nullifies any help offered by warriors.

Nothing? Alright then, can we at least have some silver arrows or something so we can make this an even comparison again? DR creatures pose a rough problem in low magic situations and it's effects on archers should be addressed. In a typical mid magic campaign the majority of characters should have at least 1 +AB weapon that fits their role by level 5, but for those who don't, all but archers have easy means of penetrating DR without sacrificing their strengths. While my own archer has the duskbow and the +2 mighty shortbow (unnamed to prevent spoiling). He is utterly useless against chosen, and the bottom line for every post in this topic should be "How fun is it?" Let me just say... this is none so.

But, about quest effectiveness then. You already noted that archers do have their place in quests so I'm not gonna give you a list of situations involving Fireballs, Lightning Bolts, enemy archers on a perch or across a chasm, and correspondingly toasted tanks. Your argument was the DR problem, or "problem". Now, the reason why I so summarily dismissed this line of thinking in my post was the simple observation that DR monsters are not that common, particularly not on quests. I didn't think this was even worth mentioning. Your only example is Chosens, and it really isn't an "example" at all because it's about the only quest that has all or even most of the monsters having DR. There is a problem only if you feel that a team of archers should be able to do every quest that a team of tanks can do. I don't feel that way. My observations on archer effectiveness implied a heterogenous team, as is usually the case. If the archers really need to whore the Chosen quest for some reason, let them take up swords just as melee fighters sometimes need to resort to ranged weapons.

If DR monsters were common, the magic level of this server would be correspondingly higher and there would probably be an abundance of magical ranged weapons. But this just isn't the case: and for the reasons I already gave in my previous post, archers are quite effective under the current circumstances.

Sorry I was the one who made the lengthy post before in which I quoted Anthee. I'm also sorry for beating the strawman I just want to restate my purpose clearly because I don't like the way it seemed to have been taken.

I wasn't trying to claim anthee that you would have suggested any different results to my PvP scenarios. I merely wanted to pose them as a reference to show that archer builds are not the "lots of damage no risk" they've been made out to be. AoOs do a good job of evening it out so that melee's get a strong advantage back against archers and mages which usually try to exploit range. And there are countless more ways of nullifying archers.

Regarding the forumn topic though I only intended to state that archers aren't asking for means of DR penetration as a means of powergaming or anything similar. They only want it so that they can be useful against chosen, flying chosen, imps (as well as many outsiders), those small draconic things in the wilderness, specters and the like in hoar, vampires, etc.

I can think of 3 existing quests right now in which an archer built fighter or ranger has nearly no place at all. Chosen, flying chosen, and imps are 3 prime examples. These are quests in which there is really nothing fun for these characters to do, but stand around hoping nobody will notice them soaking exp and loot. The request is for a means of useful participation, so the intended fun of these quests isn't lost on archers.

I think we addressed everything that needed to be addressed. Lockopolis!