damage with a bow [Archive] - Wizards Community

damage with a bow [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
siriusranger87
04-03-05, 03:02 PM it seems to me that bows are getting neglected in d&d while there are feats or class abilities that allow almost any and every ability to be added to dmg with a melee weapon i have not seen any feats or classa abilities that significantly help with bow dmg.

please let me know what you think and if you find any abilities that help the bow deal damage
Norseman
04-03-05, 03:57 PM Mighty, rapid shot, multishot, weapon specialization, and improved precise shot (if you have a monk in the group). As long as you don't get any retalliation, you don't really need a more damaging bow.
siriusranger87
04-03-05, 04:57 PM all those are nice but with the exception of weapon specialization none of them increase the damage dealt with one shot of the bow
i was thinking something along the lines of a class ability that gives you intelligence or wisdom or something to dmg as well as strenth

my main reason is for sniping where you dont get the benfit of rapid shot because you only get one shot
golyrut113
04-03-05, 05:19 PM There is the order of the bow initiate (PrC form the complete warrior book) which improves damage to bow progessively, up to 5d8 i believe, but I could be wrong...
ksbsnowowl
04-03-05, 05:31 PM Check out the Peerless Archer PrC in Silver Marches; it grants the ability to make a Power Attack with a bow at 3rd level.
Norseman
04-03-05, 05:37 PM all those are nice but with the exception of weapon specialization none of them increase the damage dealt with one shot of the bow
i was thinking something along the lines of a class ability that gives you intelligence or wisdom or something to dmg as well as strenth

my main reason is for sniping where you dont get the benfit of rapid shot because you only get one shot

Mighty increases damage, rapid shot puts more arrows into them and thus increases damage, same with multishot, improved precise shot can guarantee a hit every time so it effectively increases your dmg/time.

Between a guy who hits every other time for three points of damage, and a guy who hits every time for two points of damage, you'd be better off to take the guy with two points of damage.
jazzman831
04-03-05, 05:44 PM You don't even need a non-core book. Try Arcane Archer. 1st Level every nonmagical arrow is +1 to hit and damage, increases at every level. Unless you invested in magical arrows, this is a great way to increase damage. Combine that with a magical enhancement and a mighty (i hate that it's not called anything speciall in 3.5) bow you can be dealing some good damage. I have a Ftr 6/Wiz 1/Arc 4 that deals 1d8+9 damage PER SHOT! Add that with rapid shot and you are in business. I don't even have any damage enhancments on the bow!

Don't forget also that if you are a fighter-archer you can get Greater Weap. Spec. Which adds +4 to damage. Sick.

Also there's PBS! You'd be suprised how often you are within 30ft. PBS combined with RS and WF gives you a free attack at your highest attack bonus!! If you are taking the fighter route you can take IWF and get the rapid shot off with a total of +1 to attack!
Salla
04-03-05, 06:14 PM Boosting ranged weapon damage is probably a game balance issue. I mean, if you can hang back 150 feet and deal as much damage as a melee brute, why would anybody ever use a melee weapon? A lot of monsters have to close to damage you; if archers et al did as much damage as swordsman, a lot of fights would be very over long before the monsters had a chance.

So, basically, archery is for cowards. :D
Vaelan
04-03-05, 06:43 PM Archers get more attacks than a melee-based combatant. They get to full attack basically every round and have the ability to make multiple attacks as a standard action via (Greater) Manyshot. If they had as many bonuses to damage as a melee-based combatant, then they would be far too good.
Edymnion
04-03-05, 06:52 PM So, basically, archery is for cowards. :DActually, its true. Forget the romantic image of an archer, real life medieval archers were seen as dishonorable and cowardly because they killed from a distance without putting themselves at any risk.
Salla
04-03-05, 07:17 PM Actually, its true. Forget the romantic image of an archer, real life medieval archers were seen as dishonorable and cowardly because they killed from a distance without putting themselves at any risk.

Eat *THAT*, Legolas Fanboys! :D :evillaugh :dancin: :devil: :fight!:
Leobardis
04-03-05, 07:58 PM If you look into the Arcane Archer PrC, here's another suggestion. Since your arrows will already have a magical enhancement from the PrC, and since they only do damage on a one to one basis, consider this. Instead of loading up your bow with enhancment bonuses (since you get those from the arrows) load up on elemental damages.
So if you've got a +4 longbow, that does an average of 8 - 9 damage a hit, you could instead have a +1 flaming, frost, shock bow that does 1d8 + 3d6 + 1 a hit. That bumps the average damage to about 13 - 16 a hit. You do run into problems against monsters with immunities across the board, but for most encounters this combo is pretty strong.
TheDragonmaster
04-04-05, 02:27 AM Archers were not always treated as cowards. It takes a little to be a good archer. The real cowards is the crossbow maksmen. EVERYONE can kill a fully plated ... horseback knight with a crossbow, after training in about two hours.

As for the Order of the Bow Initiate, their extra damage applies only to their precise shot class feature.
Big Tom
04-04-05, 02:38 AM Archers get more attacks than a melee-based combatant. They get to full attack basically every round and have the ability to make multiple attacks as a standard action via (Greater) Manyshot. If they had as many bonuses to damage as a melee-based combatant, then they would be far too good.

The greater number of attacks (and thus hits) it out wieghed be the reduced per-hit damage that the various Bows cause. I have found that avaraged out over time a melee combatant and a bow-armed combatant end up doing comprable amounts of damage
Will Brandiman
04-04-05, 06:51 AM The greater number of attacks (and thus hits) it out wieghed be the reduced per-hit damage that the various Bows cause. I have found that avaraged out over time a melee combatant and a bow-armed combatant end up doing comprable amounts of damage I've not found this to be the case. We have 2 archers in my group and they consistently do more damage than the melee fighters, despite doing far less damage per hit. The problem got so bad that we've introduced a number of houserules to limit the effectiveness of archers in the game. Otherwise it just got to be the case that the archers win initiative and the BBEG turns into a pincushion or everything we met cast Wind Wall.
beaver1024
04-04-05, 07:48 AM Enhancment bonus stacking may have been removed from bows and arrows but arrows and bows can have different damage types and they can stack For example if you have Bane, Holy, Frost Mighty Composite Bow +5 (Str to damage +4) you can pile on more damage by having Flaming, Acidic and Shocking arrows.
Neely
04-04-05, 07:58 AM Actually, its true. Forget the romantic image of an archer, real life medieval archers were seen as dishonorable and cowardly because they killed from a distance without putting themselves at any risk.

It's common to call someone coward if someone defeats you with a simple, yet effetive, methode without 'putting themselves ar any risk'. :)

We should look at the present too, allmost all arms consist about ranged weapons. People might have called ranged combatants cowards in the past, but it seems they all have seen the effectiveness of range combat. People wouldn't have researched balistics weapons if it wasn't.

Let us remember how Henry V defeated the french at Agincourt with a bunch of cowardisch archers ;)

As for the topic: I think the arrow damage is just fine. We should also not forget some units are good against others while weak against others, they all have their function.
Rogues are good at the first devastation strike.
Wizards are good against the fighter with low willpower/reflex.
While Archers on their turn are good in taking out the wizards fast before they kill the fighters.
Kinghappo
04-04-05, 10:25 AM I have had quite a few DM's and DM'ed my self quite a few times and I can count the amount of times a group was able to even have an enemy at 150' away that wasn't running away on one hand, most encounters happen at less than 25' and by then it's either an ambush or they are chargeing/popping out the walls/ or causeing you to make a save/vs death. And if they were running they were either smart to dissapear somehow or turn the corner in a dungeon. Another point is that most npc casters choose the long range guys as their first targets with spells from long range so if they did make half their saves, most archer wielding type characters (aside from rogues and rangers) did not survive that barrage. I have no problems with boosting up characters or bending this or that house rule, it just opens up my selection of baddies i can throw at them lol. (each rule bent = +1 ECL) ::evil grin::
Drachasor
04-04-05, 10:39 AM As for the topic: I think the arrow damage is just fine. We should also not forget some units are good against others while weak against others, they all have their function.
Rogues are good at the first devastation strike.
Wizards are good against the fighter with low willpower/reflex.
While Archers on their turn are good in taking out the wizards fast before they kill the fighters.

Well, a Wizard with any prep time will have a bit of energy resistance (stopping any from arrows), and protection from arrows or something equivalent up (stopping almost all arrow damage). Otherwise good points.

-Drachasor
Aki Warren
04-04-05, 10:58 AM I agree, Bows are kind of...cowardly.

Now a smoking powder rifle...that's a proper Man (Dwarf too!) weapon! No Legolas fan boys here, guns over everything!

That said, Ranged combat has it's uses. You can really benefit from a full BAB since you can do 4 attacks (or more) every round instead of spending most of combat trying to come to terms.

Whenever I see melee builds, often the problem is "How will you reach the enemy?" With ranged builds it's "Can I do enough damage?"

Quite frankly, I'd rather be a little weak and be able to hit the SoB
primemover003
04-04-05, 11:22 AM There are plenty of low-level spells to deal with archers. Give yourself a miss chance (Bink, Blur, Entropic Shield, Darkness, Obscuring mist) or complete immunity (Wind wall, Protection from arrows).

Class ability/feat: Deflect arrows

Equipment: Tower Shield

Hell just find some damn cover or concealment!!!
Fenris Frost
04-05-05, 03:36 AM Eat *THAT*, Legolas Fanboys! :D :evillaugh :dancin: :devil: :fight!:

Don't you mean fangirls?
Awesome_Man
04-25-05, 05:01 PM Archers may be cowardly, but they are effective and get the job done, with little damage to themselves.

You have the lone archer inflitrate the enemy encampment, kill the general and leave. May not be glamorus, but is alot more effective than running straight into a camp full of bad guys screaming and yelling.

Not to mention they are great at taking down morale. If you can kill the leader right from the start, the troops will think twice about confronting you, and could possibly break.
GaffeR
04-25-05, 06:13 PM Damage with a bow? Head over to the CO boards and check out some of the cleric archer builds. With all those tasty persistant buffs and a comp longbow you'll be churning out the damage without putting yourself at much risk :D
Netstorm
04-26-05, 12:07 PM Try a deepwood sniper, its a 3.0 core class that fires keen arrows and the crits at lvl 4 (deepwood sniper lvl) x 5 :P
there for your dmg :evillaugh
Awesome_Man
04-26-05, 02:05 PM A deepwood sniper with Order of the Bow and improved critical, ouch that would do alot of damage. It would be like 17-20 for critical, x5 plus 5d8 damage within 60ft. Thats a good deal of damage.
Zherog
04-26-05, 02:23 PM Don't forget the feats in Complete Warrior such as Ranged Disarm, Ranged Pin, etc. While they don't increase damage, they allow you to do some pretty nifty things with ranged weapons.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
siriusranger87 04-03-05, 03:02 PM	it seems to me that bows are getting neglected in d&d while there are feats or class abilities that allow almost any and every ability to be added to dmg with a melee weapon i have not seen any feats or classa abilities that significantly help with bow dmg. please let me know what you think and if you find any abilities that help the bow deal damage
Norseman 04-03-05, 03:57 PM	Mighty, rapid shot, multishot, weapon specialization, and improved precise shot (if you have a monk in the group). As long as you don't get any retalliation, you don't really need a more damaging bow.
siriusranger87 04-03-05, 04:57 PM	all those are nice but with the exception of weapon specialization none of them increase the damage dealt with one shot of the bow i was thinking something along the lines of a class ability that gives you intelligence or wisdom or something to dmg as well as strenth my main reason is for sniping where you dont get the benfit of rapid shot because you only get one shot
golyrut113 04-03-05, 05:19 PM	There is the order of the bow initiate (PrC form the complete warrior book) which improves damage to bow progessively, up to 5d8 i believe, but I could be wrong...
ksbsnowowl 04-03-05, 05:31 PM	Check out the Peerless Archer PrC in Silver Marches; it grants the ability to make a Power Attack with a bow at 3rd level.
Norseman 04-03-05, 05:37 PM	all those are nice but with the exception of weapon specialization none of them increase the damage dealt with one shot of the bow i was thinking something along the lines of a class ability that gives you intelligence or wisdom or something to dmg as well as strenth my main reason is for sniping where you dont get the benfit of rapid shot because you only get one shot Mighty increases damage, rapid shot puts more arrows into them and thus increases damage, same with multishot, improved precise shot can guarantee a hit every time so it effectively increases your dmg/time. Between a guy who hits every other time for three points of damage, and a guy who hits every time for two points of damage, you'd be better off to take the guy with two points of damage.
jazzman831 04-03-05, 05:44 PM	You don't even need a non-core book. Try Arcane Archer. 1st Level every nonmagical arrow is +1 to hit and damage, increases at every level. Unless you invested in magical arrows, this is a great way to increase damage. Combine that with a magical enhancement and a mighty (i hate that it's not called anything speciall in 3.5) bow you can be dealing some good damage. I have a Ftr 6/Wiz 1/Arc 4 that deals 1d8+9 damage PER SHOT! Add that with rapid shot and you are in business. I don't even have any damage enhancments on the bow! Don't forget also that if you are a fighter-archer you can get Greater Weap. Spec. Which adds +4 to damage. Sick. Also there's PBS! You'd be suprised how often you are within 30ft. PBS combined with RS and WF gives you a free attack at your highest attack bonus!! If you are taking the fighter route you can take IWF and get the rapid shot off with a total of +1 to attack!
Salla 04-03-05, 06:14 PM	Boosting ranged weapon damage is probably a game balance issue. I mean, if you can hang back 150 feet and deal as much damage as a melee brute, why would anybody ever use a melee weapon? A lot of monsters have to close to damage you; if archers et al did as much damage as swordsman, a lot of fights would be very over long before the monsters had a chance. So, basically, archery is for cowards. :D
Vaelan 04-03-05, 06:43 PM	Archers get more attacks than a melee-based combatant. They get to full attack basically every round and have the ability to make multiple attacks as a standard action via (Greater) Manyshot. If they had as many bonuses to damage as a melee-based combatant, then they would be far too good.
Edymnion 04-03-05, 06:52 PM	So, basically, archery is for cowards. :DActually, its true. Forget the romantic image of an archer, real life medieval archers were seen as dishonorable and cowardly because they killed from a distance without putting themselves at any risk.
Salla 04-03-05, 07:17 PM	Actually, its true. Forget the romantic image of an archer, real life medieval archers were seen as dishonorable and cowardly because they killed from a distance without putting themselves at any risk. Eat THAT, Legolas Fanboys! :D :evillaugh :dancin: :devil: :fight!:
Leobardis 04-03-05, 07:58 PM	If you look into the Arcane Archer PrC, here's another suggestion. Since your arrows will already have a magical enhancement from the PrC, and since they only do damage on a one to one basis, consider this. Instead of loading up your bow with enhancment bonuses (since you get those from the arrows) load up on elemental damages. So if you've got a +4 longbow, that does an average of 8 - 9 damage a hit, you could instead have a +1 flaming, frost, shock bow that does 1d8 + 3d6 + 1 a hit. That bumps the average damage to about 13 - 16 a hit. You do run into problems against monsters with immunities across the board, but for most encounters this combo is pretty strong.
TheDragonmaster 04-04-05, 02:27 AM	Archers were not always treated as cowards. It takes a little to be a good archer. The real cowards is the crossbow maksmen. EVERYONE can kill a fully plated ... horseback knight with a crossbow, after training in about two hours. As for the Order of the Bow Initiate, their extra damage applies only to their precise shot class feature.
Big Tom 04-04-05, 02:38 AM	Archers get more attacks than a melee-based combatant. They get to full attack basically every round and have the ability to make multiple attacks as a standard action via (Greater) Manyshot. If they had as many bonuses to damage as a melee-based combatant, then they would be far too good. The greater number of attacks (and thus hits) it out wieghed be the reduced per-hit damage that the various Bows cause. I have found that avaraged out over time a melee combatant and a bow-armed combatant end up doing comprable amounts of damage
Will Brandiman 04-04-05, 06:51 AM	The greater number of attacks (and thus hits) it out wieghed be the reduced per-hit damage that the various Bows cause. I have found that avaraged out over time a melee combatant and a bow-armed combatant end up doing comprable amounts of damage I've not found this to be the case. We have 2 archers in my group and they consistently do more damage than the melee fighters, despite doing far less damage per hit. The problem got so bad that we've introduced a number of houserules to limit the effectiveness of archers in the game. Otherwise it just got to be the case that the archers win initiative and the BBEG turns into a pincushion or everything we met cast Wind Wall.
beaver1024 04-04-05, 07:48 AM	Enhancment bonus stacking may have been removed from bows and arrows but arrows and bows can have different damage types and they can stack For example if you have Bane, Holy, Frost Mighty Composite Bow +5 (Str to damage +4) you can pile on more damage by having Flaming, Acidic and Shocking arrows.
Neely 04-04-05, 07:58 AM	Actually, its true. Forget the romantic image of an archer, real life medieval archers were seen as dishonorable and cowardly because they killed from a distance without putting themselves at any risk. It's common to call someone coward if someone defeats you with a simple, yet effetive, methode without 'putting themselves ar any risk'. :) We should look at the present too, allmost all arms consist about ranged weapons. People might have called ranged combatants cowards in the past, but it seems they all have seen the effectiveness of range combat. People wouldn't have researched balistics weapons if it wasn't. Let us remember how Henry V defeated the french at Agincourt with a bunch of cowardisch archers ;) As for the topic: I think the arrow damage is just fine. We should also not forget some units are good against others while weak against others, they all have their function. Rogues are good at the first devastation strike. Wizards are good against the fighter with low willpower/reflex. While Archers on their turn are good in taking out the wizards fast before they kill the fighters.
Kinghappo 04-04-05, 10:25 AM	I have had quite a few DM's and DM'ed my self quite a few times and I can count the amount of times a group was able to even have an enemy at 150' away that wasn't running away on one hand, most encounters happen at less than 25' and by then it's either an ambush or they are chargeing/popping out the walls/ or causeing you to make a save/vs death. And if they were running they were either smart to dissapear somehow or turn the corner in a dungeon. Another point is that most npc casters choose the long range guys as their first targets with spells from long range so if they did make half their saves, most archer wielding type characters (aside from rogues and rangers) did not survive that barrage. I have no problems with boosting up characters or bending this or that house rule, it just opens up my selection of baddies i can throw at them lol. (each rule bent = +1 ECL) ::evil grin::
Drachasor 04-04-05, 10:39 AM	As for the topic: I think the arrow damage is just fine. We should also not forget some units are good against others while weak against others, they all have their function. Rogues are good at the first devastation strike. Wizards are good against the fighter with low willpower/reflex. While Archers on their turn are good in taking out the wizards fast before they kill the fighters. Well, a Wizard with any prep time will have a bit of energy resistance (stopping any from arrows), and protection from arrows or something equivalent up (stopping almost all arrow damage). Otherwise good points. -Drachasor
Aki Warren 04-04-05, 10:58 AM	I agree, Bows are kind of...cowardly. Now a smoking powder rifle...that's a proper Man (Dwarf too!) weapon! No Legolas fan boys here, guns over everything! That said, Ranged combat has it's uses. You can really benefit from a full BAB since you can do 4 attacks (or more) every round instead of spending most of combat trying to come to terms. Whenever I see melee builds, often the problem is "How will you reach the enemy?" With ranged builds it's "Can I do enough damage?" Quite frankly, I'd rather be a little weak and be able to hit the SoB
primemover003 04-04-05, 11:22 AM	There are plenty of low-level spells to deal with archers. Give yourself a miss chance (Bink, Blur, Entropic Shield, Darkness, Obscuring mist) or complete immunity (Wind wall, Protection from arrows). Class ability/feat: Deflect arrows Equipment: Tower Shield Hell just find some damn cover or concealment!!!
Fenris Frost 04-05-05, 03:36 AM	Eat THAT, Legolas Fanboys! :D :evillaugh :dancin: :devil: :fight!: Don't you mean fangirls?
Awesome_Man 04-25-05, 05:01 PM	Archers may be cowardly, but they are effective and get the job done, with little damage to themselves. You have the lone archer inflitrate the enemy encampment, kill the general and leave. May not be glamorus, but is alot more effective than running straight into a camp full of bad guys screaming and yelling. Not to mention they are great at taking down morale. If you can kill the leader right from the start, the troops will think twice about confronting you, and could possibly break.
GaffeR 04-25-05, 06:13 PM	Damage with a bow? Head over to the CO boards and check out some of the cleric archer builds. With all those tasty persistant buffs and a comp longbow you'll be churning out the damage without putting yourself at much risk :D
Netstorm 04-26-05, 12:07 PM	Try a deepwood sniper, its a 3.0 core class that fires keen arrows and the crits at lvl 4 (deepwood sniper lvl) x 5 :P there for your dmg :evillaugh
Awesome_Man 04-26-05, 02:05 PM	A deepwood sniper with Order of the Bow and improved critical, ouch that would do alot of damage. It would be like 17-20 for critical, x5 plus 5d8 damage within 60ft. Thats a good deal of damage.
Zherog 04-26-05, 02:23 PM	Don't forget the feats in Complete Warrior such as Ranged Disarm, Ranged Pin, etc. While they don't increase damage, they allow you to do some pretty nifty things with ranged weapons.