EFUPW Forums

EDIT: Actuall suggestion:
Magic weapon to add +1 AB to ranged weapons
Flame weapon & darkfire to add "Unlimited amunition 1-4 fire damage" on ranged weapons.


I'd like to suggest magic weapon weapon to have effect on amunition, adding the damage, not the attack, a simple +1 damage doesn't change it to a magnum, but it adds to the damage, making it more usefull, slightly.

Flame weapon/darkfire would be nice too, but considering the advantage of not being at the range of weapons, might be too much. Maybe if it could be changed, so that it added 1d4 fire damage to arrows without the +something modifiers it could be balanced. I can imagine even a sling, doing 2d4 + 1 damage would be quite usefull, it might also allow people to use a ranged weapon without having to be rogues, or to rogues be more effective then fighting constructs/undead.. etc.

So, damage would be:
(not counting mighty darts and axes)

Shuriken 1-3 + 1-4 + 1 = 3-8 average 5 damage.

Sling 1-4 + 1-4 + 1 = 3-9 damage, 5 average damage.

Shortbow 1-6 + 1-4 + 1 = 3-11 damage, 6 average damage.

Longbow/light crossbow 1-8 + 1-4 + 1 = 3-13 damage, average 7.

Heavy crossbow 1-10 + 1-4 + 1 = 3-15 damage, average 8.

So as you can see, the minimun damage reamins pretty low, the maxumun damage isn't really awsome unless we're talking about the heavy crossbow wich can't shoot multiple times a round (unless one gets rapid reload, but even then is 1 less attack per round) i don't think it would be imbalanced, considering you would likely run out of arrows before the spell ends. Think about it, that way we might have more non-rogue archers arround?

Some info pertinent to (though not necessarily the same thing as) your suggestion can be found here (http://www.escapefromunderdark.com/forums/showthread.php?t=22003).

I'm not 100% sure, but there may be issues with trying to apply temporary properties to stacks of items like arrows.

It would be far easier to add a temporary +1 AB to bows so that they can pierce DR (and of course, are more accurate).

Alternatively, we could have Magic Weapon make bows +1 Mighty, which would just be +1 to damage (and does not beat DR), assuming the user has a positive STR modifier.

I like your suggestions, ScottyB. It always seemed a little unbalanced to me that weapons and even gloves can be enchanted temporarily, yet bows couldn't (making it even harder for a dedicated archer to be useful against creatures like nightrisers for instance).

If something along one of these lines could be implemented, it would be a good thing, IMO.

I have to agree, letting bows be enchanted to bypass DR (among getting a bonus) would be nice. If Darkfire / flame weapon can be made to give a small amount of fire damage as well that would be awesome. Maybe 1-2 until after level 5 or 6, then 2-4 or something. I've never played an archer but they should at least be viable in all situations, even though their risk is not as great.

Damage can only be applied to ammunition, which I just said may be buggy.

Our best bet is to apply bonuses to the bow itself.

Our current options are:
1) AB bonus
2) Mighty
3) AB + Mighty

Like the thread before us, we're just waiting for one of the game-balance-minded DMs to say that this is (or isn't) overpowered, and then it's a relatively easy change to make.

Yeah. I agree. Unless you have huge strength (which a dedicated Archer PC isn't likely to have more than 12 of for Mighty bows), carrying a Jergali crossbow and/or +1 darts so you can damage undead and Lycanthropes isn't really feasible.

Mighty Bows are good, but if you've built for archery you won't really get the most out of it I know one 10 STR PC who got a Mighty +3 bow as DM loot and ended up hoarding Strength and Rage pots. THat said, we could do with some Mighty +1 Shortbows. There's 3 mighty Longbows I know of, but I've only seen Mighty Shortbows as DM loot.

Ive recently discovered the joy of poisoning arrows to make a ranged attack more nasty, and also Bless adds On hit: Slay Rakshasa to bolts, so temporary properties on arrows are certainly possible.

I would love to see this. Buffs on arrows wouldn't just open things up for teamwork, they'd make "arcane archer" type builds more workable for any race and any buff class. Battlemages MWing their crossbows and launching flaming bolts in between lightning bolts. Halfling Paladins crushing undead with Bless Weaponed sling shots. Elf Clerics Truestriking Darkfired Purple Crystal Arrows between the eyes of undead (Although, an elf domain Cleric is one of the few decent non-rogue archer builds normally).

Adding extra AB would be nice, bu it wouldn't help much with the isseuse, it would likely be good for rogues, but not as good for anything else, because even a +1 mighty +1 AB bow that always hits does mere 2-9 damage, even if it always hits the damage is near insignificant and it's simply better to be fightig melee. Rogues do have great damage with the bow (sneak attack) but lower AB limitg the times they hit, because of this it would benefit rogues much more, others not so much.

But, even if buggy, i'd say the extra damage is the best alterative, flame weapon/ darkfire adds 1/3 of the damage on melee weapons, the bows can't be damage dealers without that attack, except if there was GMW (wich no one will ever spend on an archer).

Another thing that ocurs me is that casting magic weapon on a bow to temporaly add the prpiety of unlimited amunition: arrow +1 on a bow, arrows cost too little for this to be inmbalanced, and you'd have to chose between arrows +1 over whatever special amunition you had, flame weapon could add the propietey "unlimited amunition 1d4 fire damage" to the bow as well.

The problem here being, special damage from amunitions coudln't stack, nor could magic weapon and flame weapon/darkfire, nor could you poison arrows etc. Also it might be too east to say "hey, i'm out of arrows, anyone got magic weapon?" then again arrows are too cheap and no cumbresom at all, so maybe it isn't as imbalanced.. However if this were added, seeing how the effects could stack i would suggest:

Magic weapon add +1 AB to the bow
Flame weapon/Darkfire add the temporal propiety "unlimited amunition, 1d4  fire damage".

But enchating the amunition would be best IMO.

EDIT: removed the +1 damage, 1d4 is pretty good as it is after i tested it.

Or just add a custom crafting system of arrows for PC's.

Rangers mostly, IMO.

Yes that's what i don't like.

You know, bows are powerfull weapons, in RL there were soldiers who used them. I want to see fighters using bows and crossbows, babrarians usning slings, not only as a secondary weapon, not only rangers and rogues.

And... here we go again.

Yes, bows were powerful weapons, however, only when used right.
You didn't go bow vs. axe in close combat. The use it could have seen as such was maybe in an ambush, before you picked up your own sword/axe.

When people speak of for example, the frenchmen being massacred by the english longbowmen, it was due mostly to foolish french tactics. The English lined up in an inverted wedge with knights at the point and archers along the sides. Due to some stupid honour code, the french didn't charge the archers, but the knights, which meant they had to charge through a couple of hundred meters of a deadly rain of arrows, before either having to flee due to being completely massacred by arrows, or due to being so low number when they finally reached the english knights, that they were completely massacred then and there, even if they had been in greater number to begin with.

Who would've thunk that beating a dead horse long enough would mean something came out of it?

Your point being? i never said bows should be usable on melee, that's stupid. But you'll agree an arrow across the chest is as lethal as an axe though the skull. Mind you in NWN unless you have sneak attack or are an AA a mundane bow with mundane arrows does little damage, not comparable with, for example that of a rapier, wich could pretty much be the same thing. The reason being: rapiers can be enchanted, bows cannot.

An arrow that pierces your armor and gets through your chest likely pierced something important, as much as a rapier that does the same does as well.

A sling bulled to the head likely breaks your skull (becuse you know, they weren't pebbles, we're talking about a baseball made of stone) as much as a mace would

A shuriken rips your flesh apart as much as a dagger would.

A crossbow pierces bone with little problem.

Why then, raged weapons, mundane and without sneak attack/magic arrow do so little damage in NWN?

I'm not asking to add the full extent of the enchantments to the bow, melee weapons will still do more damage, plain and simple, my actuall suggestion is buffed bows/slings/crossbows and maybe also darts, shiurikens and throwing axes be be somewhat upgraded with flame weapon/dark fire and magic weapon/greater magic weapon.

I actually tested a halfling slinger, and simulated the tank with a summoned wild boar buffed with mage armor, and the mage with 1d4 fire damage bullets, a +1 sling and a wand of cat's grace. Buffed with this three spells, if the tank manages to hold the enemies for 5 rounds, the slinger can be devastating, a true damage dealer: simply because he had a really high AB and two attacks per round, he was no rogue. But he must be specialised, as he is no good with the shortsword and has a crappy skillset. I made a good raged weapon user, who used a sling and wasn't a rogue. Pretty good hmm?

But he was not all-so mighty either: as i said before he had a crappy skillset and a lame AC. Also if enemies decided to ignore the tank i was in trobule. Also take into account monsters there aren't as powerfull as in EFU:A, so as devastating as he was, probably just very good at EFU:A.

I responded to your post and the part being:

QuoteYou know, bows are powerfull weapons, in RL there were soldiers who used them. I want to see fighters using bows and crossbows, babrarians usning slings, not only as a secondary weapon, not only rangers and rogues.

I would agree that the hp system reflects poorly on damage taken, but that is what we have to live with.

However, the tests you've run still seem to reflect a wish that the ranged weapons would be as effective against someone using a melee weapon.

QuoteAlso if enemies decided to ignore the tank i was in trobule.

Yes, if the French had ignored the knights and routed put the archers first, the brits would be using the euro instead of the pound. (Exaggerated for shits and giggles.)

Quoteas i said before he had a crappy skillset

This points at the important part of efu that is different characters/builds having different roles.

Quote from: Oskar Maxon;126636I responded to your post and the part being:....I would agree that the hp system reflects poorly on damage taken, but that is what we have to live with.

However, the tests you've run still seem to reflect a wish that the ranged weapons would be as effective against someone using a melee weapon.

Why yes, like thouse wild orc guerilla hunters hide behind the orc warriors and deal damage to frontliners/support alike, so i would like to see archers, crossbowmen and slingers taking down orc warriors from behind the frontliners.

But no, if you thought i was suggesting to make players use a sling in melee range you are wrong. Even if we added +10 slings to the game the slinger is too vulnerable to AoOs and taking into account ranged weapon users usually can't afford carring a heavy armor, and that you can't carry a shield and a bow, they would just be cut down in a matter of rounds.

Quote from: Oskar Maxon;126636Yes, if the French had ignored the knights and routed put the archers first, the brits would be using the euro instead of the pound. (Exaggerated for shits and giggles.)

I agree, and that is why archers would remain balanced, they might be more powerfull but they are still very vulnerable.

Quote from: Oskar Maxon;126636This points at the important part of efu that is different characters/builds having different roles.

And the crappy skillset makes sure you don't have a healer/trapp handler or something who also is an exelent slinger, just as you can't be a jack of all trades AND a mighty tank/damage dealer.

The "weakenesses" it mentioned are in fact advantages that show that it is nor really imbalanced, IMO.

Are you suddenly just agreeing with everything I posted? >_>

QuoteWhy yes, like thouse wild orc guerilla hunters hide behind the orc warriors and deal damage to frontliners/support alike, so i would like to see archers, crossbowmen and slingers taking down orc warriors from behind the frontliners.

This is the only part I take real note of otherwise, as I got the feeling (taking into account the testing you mentioned of other builds) you were complaining about how no one but a rogue could do good damage with a ranged weapon. I'd just make a note of the fact that Orc Guerillas have sneak attack.

Wich is what disapoints me. You can do great damage with bows, not sure with slings, but with bows and crosbows you can kill most things before they come close... if three people are firing at once. One will do nothing, and then, you can stop 1, 2? but not three enemeis comming at you.

As an archer, Isendel is pretty good. The sneak attack damage is enought to justify his existance as he often does as much damage as a frontliner. But i would like to see a non-rogue archer/slinger/crossbowman.

You'll agree the ability to pierce DR when enchanted isn't as.. "ZOMG IMBALANCED!!!111" since most fighters witha  longsword can do so already. As it is now, only rogues can effectively pierce DR with a bow, but not when something is inmune to sneak attack.

1-4 fire damage isn't that much either, considering the frontliners get 1-4+caster level, usually +5 so they get like twice the enchantment. But the combined effect of +1 mighty bows, point blank shot, +1-4 fire damage and rapid shot can make a good archer even without sneak attack.

The thing is, why do you disagree with this? is it because you think bows are powerfull enough? i've never seen a non-rogue archer with the exeption of wizards trying to save spells, and they hit for 5 damage evey 5 rounds anyway. If they are so powerfull why aren't there more character speciallised in bows? Most use ranged weapons as a secondary alternative to melee fighting for when they are low on HP or being shoot from a cliff.

Is it because you think it's unrealistic? I don't see why, if globes can be enchanted, weapons can be enchanted, bows can't.

Come on, if this thread turns like the last one the first reply linked me to it will lead to nothing. If you have something wich you think makes this suggestion not viable, please say it.

I neither agree nor disagree with this suggestion, I disagree with a couple of points brought up. As the first "Soldiers used bows, you know!" I think, however, that most of these problems lies with the hp system, which there won't be a change to.

Quote from: Listen in Silence;126632Who would've thunk that beating a dead horse long enough would mean something came out of it?

Lol.

As my dad says, D&D really nerfed ranged weaponry, to the point where archers are more of a nuisance.

That's right, in D&D, Legolas would be worthless as a member of the fellowship, so no killing a Mumakil for him. Guess Gimli gets the bigger kills since Legolas is nerfed.

Having played a archer without pwr building, I did do decent damage, but that was only against orc warrior meatbags. I really only got kills when someone knocked 'em to Near Death and I got the lucky shot it. This is sort of why most archers have secondary abilities, IE, stealth, spells, etc., to make them valuble. A Ranger is useful for tracking, so it's worth having him along even if he isn't a damage-dealer with his bow. However, against Nightrisers, suckily enough, a FE: Undead ranger with a bow has to rely on spec ammo and aiming at weaker risers to get damage done. . . and that's assuming he can get past their DR, of which Arrows cannot break in EfU without being rare already (I'm talking about the magical ammo that drops in 3-12 sets!)

Just making a point about how archers have to be pwr built to do decent damage around here in EfU, discounting DM loot of course.

Quote from: Luke Danger;126700As my dad says

That's pretty tight.

Also, this thread?

Here it Goes again! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pv5zWaTEVkI)

Quote from: Luke Danger;126700As my dad says, D&D really nerfed ranged weaponry, to the point where archers are more of a nuisance.

Actually in D&D archers are a good asset when used correctly.  In D&D you can get +1 arrows so that when you hit a foe with a DR of 5/+1 you do 4-12 damage each shot instead of 0-6.  Plus you can get rapid shot which is nice especially at lower levels.
 
On EfU I think there are some who are afraid to add the +1 arrows because then maybe some builder will decide to give them to the enemies, and they don't want to have to rescript the quests where the warriors drink their far-to-widely-available blur potions and run through a hail of archers sacking each one in turn.  (oh by the way the damage ranges above were for longbows, a shortbow in the hands of a non-fighter will do 1-6 damage.  That's right, assuming you can bypass the AC of the guy with the blur potion, you have to then roll a 6 on your damage roll to even do anything, which is 1 damage.  The only hope you have is a rigged dice with a few extra 20s)
 
Really, throw in some +1 arrows into the module, and if they're already somewhere in the module make them SLIGHTLY more common.  I say slightly because I don't want them as ridiculously available as blur potions.

Unfortunetly, +1 arrows won't solve the problem. That is because +1 arrows only add to the damage, they cannot add to the attack nor pierce damage reduction. The only solution is a +1 bow.

Now, if magic weapon was usable as i mentioned previously, in bows, this issue would be solved, if a spellcaster acompanies the archer or if the archer has items with magic weapon charges.

Flame weapon would also allow builds of specialised archers to be more viable, as i said before, with the tests i ran, a halfling slinger can be a very powerfull damage dealer. That way we don't need archers to have "other usefull" skills to be valuable, because the raw damage could make them valuable.

Having personally played a non-rogue archer (pure fighter) and having spent most of that character wielding a bow that can be acquired from a certain quest, if you want to go all-out archer, you can, and get some sick damage rolls; but you basically have to build your character around using the bow. And this success story is coming from one of the most mechanically inept members of the community, to boot.

Quote from: Drakill Tannan;126595But, even if buggy, i'd say the extra damage is the best alterative,

Have you ever thought that we might not want buggy arrows due to exploitation potential? Not all bugs cause problems for players - some bugs are very beneficial; for those exploiting them. "Slay Rakasha" isn't a property that has many applications, so if something unexpected happens to those arrows... who cares? On the other hand, freely converting normal arrows into +1 arrows would be an issue.

I can't say I've read this thread, but I believe I've said everything I wanted on this subject about 2 years ago when the topic was first approached.

Enchanting bows/arrows isn't desirable at this time. Dedicated archers can prosper, excellent ammunition is available, but NWN just does not handle ranged weaponry very well.

Archers are as strong as they need to be given their place on the battlefield.

You're plunking away arrows from afar. It shouldn't be as powerful as a frontliner, mostly because there's less risk involved.

Consider this dead horse beaten