Re: archery commentary

[Wright Frazier <khelek@ns1.cioe.com>]

Or for more fun, they could get ahold of a wagon, 2 accellers and
an air mage and start whipping out the d100 damage.  And yes, I have
seen this happen.

A party with access to 2-3 great bows or grahmshire crossbows will
not be a rate 10 party.  They are gonna be 20-30+, which means they'll
have a couple of magical items, and probably some high damage or high
fuck rate spells(divine word, denounce, scunner, paralyze, ect..) in
serious quantities.  For a GM at that point, the problem is not going
to be the 2-3 guys with great bows who annoy the big baddy, its gonna
be the 2-3 guys whipping of 4d6vs wil or be paralyzed, loose a round,
ect...

Further the idea of the 'single bad guy' is never going to really challenge
a party of half-way intellegent people.  It lets them gang bang it and
then drop it like a rock in 2 rounds, 3 if it has 400 DP and a 30 CDV.
Correction, the single baddie might challenge the low rate people cause
you can get your jollies wacking them 1 a round as they beat ineffectually
on it.

As far as Robs points go:
	1. Assassinations.  Yeah, suffered that one, it sucked ass,
		but no more than any other assassination because the
		GM had to go and have a clue about how an assassin
		operates.  I.e. he's shoot and then move and we
		couldn't find him.  It didn't matter if he was
		30 feet away, or 700 feet away, the man was skilled
		and very well played.

	2. Shooting enemies that are running away.  Always fun
		for the family. =)

	3. boat combat.  Yeah, pretty much.

re: unfair damage, yep.
re: only 1 serious archer in the game.  Yep.  Before that, the last I
	remember for warrior/archers were Dave Moore and his fiancee
	Erin. who played Helvita(sp?) and Ophelia.  Both were many
	rates higher(read 40 to 50) than the warrior I was playing
	at the time, but I used yee old stock standard long sword and
	kept my mobility up and I was 4-5 times the killer they were
	combined.  They fired once a round or so for 1d6 each.  They
	occasionally did 1d6+1d8 when a friendly fire mage would
	lend a hand after a busy round of fireballing(i.e. he was
	down to 2 spell units and saw some archers he could blow
	it on).  My warrior routinely did 4-5d10 damage per round,
	and since like very other meleeing warrior in the game I
	didn't wear armor, I could get into melee with no difficulty.

Bleh, enough spew...this is insane and I have to get up early.

Wright



> Right but the same argument still applies.  Any party that could get 2 or 3
> archers with the great bows
> probably has access to all sorts of resoursces and could get 2 or 3
> airmages with longeyes which as
> i stated earilier is much more deadly.  the biggest advantage of the great
> bow that i see is
> for 
> 	1. assassanations
> 	2. shooting enemies that are running away.
> 	3. boat combat, actuallly this is probably the biggest advantage
> 
> otherwies its a higher damage bow and saying thats unfair is like saying a
> long sword in unfair becasue it does more damage than a short sword.
> 
> I have played in many games with higher firing rates , mutile ranges and
> longer ranges
> it results in more bow use but i would have to say  in this case that would
> be a good thing.
> I currently only know of one person whos primary weapon is missle(could be
> more i don't play everyone regularly) and kevin went out of his way to
> specificly be an archer.  
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> -------------
> Subvert The Dominant Paradigm
>