They don't stack over +10 tho :(
They don't stack over +10 tho :(
the damage output is insane
10th level bard in our party has a holy bow, when hasted he kicks out 5 arrows a round....and with all the good hopeing and singing poor monsters have no chance
it is somewhat min-maxed. but not all the way
They don't stack over +10 tho :(the damage output is insane
10th level bard in our party has a holy bow, when hasted he kicks out 5 arrows a round....and with all the good hopeing and singing poor monsters have no chance
it is somewhat min-maxed. but not all the way
and now he uses phantom steed its just insaner
Rangers are very environment-dependent, due to the fact that they get lots of somewhat low-damage attacks.
Take a typical combat character, and every +1 damage is an extra four damage per round (though Hasted would probably be another +1).
Compare this to an archer with Haste, Rapidshot, Multishot, and every +1 damage is an extra seven damage a round.
So too are they affected by DR. DR/10 that they can't penetrate is a huge amount of damage for them; when that happens, each attack can be reduced pretty close to nothing, where a character with fewer stronger attacks would be less affected. Such a character may even be a Spring Attack Vital Striker, only be affected by the DR once, and still make off with a lot of damage.
Still, such characters will often have the ability to penetrate these DRs with a little planning. Enhancement bonuses alone will eventually cause weapons to penetrate Cold Iron, Silver, Alignment, even Adamantine DR. Paladins can make their bows Lawful with their bonded weapon or somesuch. Inquisitors can use a Judgement to make their weapons considered Magical, Aligned as a part of their own alignment, and Adamantine at 10th level. It's pretty high-level, but a Zen Archer Monk 17 can also treat treat bows as unarmed attacks for his ki powers (aka, Lawful, Adamantine, etc).
And this is beyond the basic idea that a smart archer will carry small numbers of special arrows -- cold iron, silver, adamantine -- for the purposes of bypassing DR at low levels.
All the same, this sensitivity is probably skewed in such an archer's favor, since he can skew his build toward granting bonuses to full attacks where DR is situational. Heaven forbid you have an archer with Flaming Icy Corrosive arrows, and/or benefiting from an Inspire Courage that grants him +4 damage to each attack ...
The greatsword does win out over the bow...two words:
Improved Sunder
On a more serious note, the real question shouldn't be that archery is better than a double handed weapon, its that archery is better than two-weapon fighting. The reason you break out the double handed weapon is when your fighting something with DR that you can't bypass.
What is odd is that up to 6th level, archery gets as many attacks as TWF, uses the same damage every hit (unlike TWF, which switches between a normal weapon, and a light one), and is more likely to get off a full round attack, since you don't have to move.
My 2cents
add a magic weapon, strength bow, good hope, bardic song, deadly aim...DR starts to look quite slim
Sundering is harder than it use to be. A human fighter can be all but immune to sunder attempts rather easily, and you can't even damage a weapon unless your enhancement bonus is equal to the weapon you are trying to sunder. So if it's a +3 bow and you have a +2 keen great sword you are wasting your time.
Sundering is harder than it use to be. A human fighter can be all but immune to sunder attempts rather easily, and you can't even damage a weapon unless your enhancement bonus is equal to the weapon you are trying to sunder. So if it's a +3 bow and you have a +2 keen great sword you are wasting your time.
Maybe, but disarming is pretty easy when the person you're doing it to can't get attacks of opportunity off. :)
Sundering is harder than it use to be. A human fighter can be all but immune to sunder attempts rather easily, and you can't even damage a weapon unless your enhancement bonus is equal to the weapon you are trying to sunder. So if it's a +3 bow and you have a +2 keen great sword you are wasting your time.Maybe, but disarming is pretty easy when the person you're doing it to can't get attacks of opportunity off. :)
Unless they are holding that bow in a locked gauntlet.
And I can AoO you just fine with the Cestus on my other hand.
and you can't even damage a weapon unless your enhancement bonus is equal to the weapon you are trying to sunder. So if it's a +3 bow and you have a +2 keen great sword you are wasting your time.
Depending on your DM. There's a high probability of that mention being considered a typo/oversight (since it was an accidental carryover from *3.0* in the SRD, not in 3.5).
and you can't even damage a weapon unless your enhancement bonus is equal to the weapon you are trying to sunder. So if it's a +3 bow and you have a +2 keen great sword you are wasting your time.Depending on your DM. There's a high probability of that mention being considered a typo/oversight (since it was an accidental carryover from *3.0* in the SRD, not in 3.5).
Since it was "carried" over from an older edition than the 'last' one I have a hard time seeing it as a typo -- especially since prior threads have discussed it I *Think* one of the developers have commented on this, but I'm not sure I remember that correctly.
Since it was "carried" over from an older edition than the 'last' one I have a hard time seeing it as a typo -- especially since prior threads have discussed it I *Think* one of the developers have commented on this, but I'm not sure I remember that correctly.and you can't even damage a weapon unless your enhancement bonus is equal to the weapon you are trying to sunder. So if it's a +3 bow and you have a +2 keen great sword you are wasting your time.Depending on your DM. There's a high probability of that mention being considered a typo/oversight (since it was an accidental carryover from *3.0* in the SRD, not in 3.5).
They copied the 3.5 SRD which does not have that limitation which means it had to be hand typed in. That leads me to believe it is not a mistake.
Sundering is harder than it use to be. A human fighter can be all but immune to sunder attempts rather easily, and you can't even damage a weapon unless your enhancement bonus is equal to the weapon you are trying to sunder. So if it's a +3 bow and you have a +2 keen great sword you are wasting your time.Maybe, but disarming is pretty easy when the person you're doing it to can't get attacks of opportunity off. :)Unless they are holding that bow in a locked gauntlet.
And I can AoO you just fine with the Cestus on my other hand.
Oh, more stupid cheese? Then I'll just sunder your quiver.
Seriously, do you or your players actually play like this?
Oh, more stupid cheese? Then I'll just sunder your quiver.Seriously, do you or your players actually play like this?
Yeah actually we do -- it's not cheese -- it's playing smarter.
Sundering the quiver? Good luck with that -- which one?
Yeah actually we do -- it's not cheese -- it's playing smarter.
Sundering the quiver? Good luck with that -- which one?
It's called cheese.
Which one? All three, I get three attacks.
I'd have you suffer the -2 on attacks with the bow for using the cestus. And I don't think I'd allow you to threaten with it since, y'know, it's on your bow firing arrows.
I also wouldn't allow a locked gauntlet to work with a bow. It doesn't specifically say, but I think it's intended use is for melee weapons. But I could probably be talked into it. Meh.
But you just keep on cheesin' that cheese train, bronado.
Developer
|
It's called cheese.
"Cheese" is exploiting a loophole or wording to gain an unintended advantage through wording of the rules, not solid tactics.
I fail to see how using a locked gauntlet for its intended purpose (avoiding disarms) is cheese.
That's like saying improved sunder is cheese because you can use it to attack objects I hold. That's the whole point of the thing in question, not some corner-case consequence of poor wording.
"Cheese" does not equate to things you don't like or use.
I specifically pointed out the Cestus is on the off hand (which doesn't matter for penalties since there is no off hand when you don't two weapon fight). I threaten because I have a melee weapon readied, and I take no penalties to attack since there isn't any rules stating I take such penalties.
Heck I can even power attack while using my deadly aim with my bow and take no extra penalties since power attack only affects melee attacks and deadly aim only affects ranged attacks.
Thanks to the wonderful point blank mastery I won't be taking AoO's as I shoot you in response from point blank range, and with my weapon training, weapon focus and dodge my CMD is unlikely to be matched with the untrained sunder.
APG has a wonderful Fighter substitution trait that allows you to gain a +1 to CMD for two special attacks of your choice each time you sacrifice your favored class bonus.
One of my players already has +4 CMD against Sunder and Trip, if I recall correctly, and he will probably keep doing it until he's convinced everybody will need a 20.
Also, Sunder is argued by many to be a Standard action. I'm not going to claim that's the end-all result of the argument, but still, there's as many people saying you can't do it more than once a round (excluding monks as a special case) as there are people saying you can.
|
With all the bonuses combined, your chance to hit is going to factor in a lot.
Target ac comes from the bestiary, 19 for level 6, and builds are using cheesy 25 point buy for stats.
Str 21
Dex 16
Con 16
Int 7
Wis 7
Cha 7
Attack bonus: (Str +5, WF +1, BAB +6 +Weapon Training 1, +2 weapon)
Normal attack damage: 19 total: 2d6(7)+(7 str)+(1 weapon training)+(2 specialization)+2(weapon)
Normal attack dpr: =((19*0.85)+((19*0.1)*0.85))+((19*0.6)+((19*0.1)*0.6))
Total normal dpr: 30.305
Power attack damage: 25 total: 2d6(7)+ (7 str)+(2 specialization)+(6 power attack)+(1 weapon training)+2(weapon)
Power attack dpr: =((25*0.85)+((25*0.1)*0.85))+((25*0.5)+((25*0.1)*0.5))
Total power attack dpr: 37.125
Feats: Weapon Focus, Power attack, Cleave, Furious Focus, Dodge, Weapon Specialization, Great Cleave, Vital Strike
Gear: +2 Greatsword
Str 19
Dex 20
Con 13
Int 7
Wis 7
Cha 7
Attack bonus: (Dex +5, WF +1, BAB +6+ Weapon Training 1, +2 weapon)
Normal attack damage: 14.5 total: 1d8(4.5)+(4 str)+(1 weapon training)+(2 specialization)+2(weapon)+1(point blank shot)
Normal attack dpr: =((14.5*0.9)+((29*0.05)*0.9))+((14.5*0.65)+((29*0.05)*0.65))
Total normal dpr: 24.7225
Rapidshot, deadly aim, manyshot attack damage: 18.5 total: 1d8(4.5)+ (4 str)+(2 specialization)+(4 deadly aim)+(1 weapon training)+2(weapon)+1(point blank shot)
attack dpr: =(((18.5*0.7)*2)+((37*0.05)*0.7))+((18.5*0.45)+((37*0.05)*0.45))+((18.5*0.4 5)+((37*0.05)*0.45))
Total dpr: 45.51
Manyshot attack damage: 14.5 total: 1d8(4.5)+(4 str)+(1 weapon training)+(2 specialization)+2(weapon)+1(point blank shot)
Manyshot attack dpr: =(((14.5*0.9)*2)+((14.5*0.1)*0.9))+((14.5*0.65)+((14.5*0.1)*0.65))
Manyshot total dpr: 37.7725
Feats: Weapon focus, point blank shot, precise shot, rapid shot, dodge, weapon spec., point blank master, manyshot
gear: +2 composite (+4) longbow
Disclaimer* Neither build used archetypes. The archer build was completed assuming point blank shot was in effect.
The long and short of it is that the fighter is, at best, running 37 damage per round, while the archer at best is running 45 damage per round. Even if we take point blank shot away, the archer is still running 39 damage per round on the best combination.
Now, if the creature in question has damage reduction that applies, the archer build falls behind quite a bit.
I specifically pointed out the Cestus is on the off hand (which doesn't matter for penalties since there is no off hand when you don't two weapon fight). I threaten because I have a melee weapon readied, and I take no penalties to attack since there isn't any rules stating I take such penalties.
The Cestus does apply a -2 penalty to "all precision-based tasks involving that hand". It's unclear whether wielding a weapon would count for that or not, but as a GM I'd say it would. You're much better off with armor spikes, all around. No attack penalty (or the possibility of one depending on the GM), it doesn't encumber your hands at all, and you still threaten all adjacent spaces.
|
|
Of course, archers have some pretty glaring weaknesses too.
Put them in a building with a lot of sharp corners, and not a lot of big rooms or space, and they'll be struggling to fire through soft cover penalties. Assuming they're in a position to see the fight in the first place. Lighting can play havoc with them as well, more so than the melee guy.
Smart archers will be picking up the point blank master so they don't provoke aoo's, but those archers will still have lower hitpoints, since they have to spread stats into strength and dex before looking at wisdom and con.
I specifically pointed out the Cestus is on the off hand (which doesn't matter for penalties since there is no off hand when you don't two weapon fight). I threaten because I have a melee weapon readied, and I take no penalties to attack since there isn't any rules stating I take such penalties.The Cestus does apply a -2 penalty to "all precision-based tasks involving that hand". It's unclear whether wielding a weapon would count for that or not, but as a GM I'd say it would. You're much better off with armor spikes, all around. No attack penalty (or the possibility of one depending on the GM), it doesn't encumber your hands at all, and you still threaten all adjacent spaces.
A -2 penalty on tasks like picking locks and disabling devices. I would be more worried about the locking gauntlet on the bow hand honestly.
I'm much happier with the 19~20 critical range.
Though at higher levels simply having a glove of storing is always an option too. Simply put the melee weapon away as a free action with the glove fire your bow to full effect then use another free action to get the weapon back out once you are done with your full attack.
Melee weapon weapon in with no issues about firing the bow.
Besides firing a bow with a cestus isn't any harder than firing one with a gauntlet on, which would have been my answer before the cestus was available.
After reading this thread I'll actually take a look at the cestus for the first time. It sounds like a truly incredible weapon.
After reading this thread I'll actually take a look at the cestus for the first time. It sounds like a truly incredible weapon.
It's just an armored leather glove; terrible damage and really only for monks to gain something to enchant as a weapon, but because it's a simple weapon you can wear, it allows people to threaten adjacent squares even when normally unable.
Upon review, I think the Cestus is underwhelming and I would prefer to wear a locked gauntlet (with bow) and a spiked gauntlet or Armor Spikes as Bobson said.
Cestus seems to be niche for the monk.
Upon review, I think the Cestus is underwhelming and I would prefer to wear a locked gauntlet (with bow) and a spiked gauntlet or Armor Spikes as Bobson said.
Cestus seems to be niche for the monk.
I like the 19~20 critical range and better damage myself -- but yeah it's a bit much for a simple weapon in my personal opinion.
I like the 19~20 critical range and better damage myself -- but yeah it's a bit much for a simple weapon in my personal opinion.
A Spiked Gauntlet also has 1d4 damage, while Armor Spikes have 1d6 damage. The cestus only has 2 advantages: the critical range and the fact it does Bludgeoning and Piercing Damage.
It trades these for -2 to precision based tasks, and some could argue that this would also apply to attack rolls (with said bow). It is not enough for me (peronally), but I wish you a cestive time Abraham.
I would be worried about the spiked gauntlet cutting the string at that point.
If you can manage it without penalties in gauntlets -- I can't see anyone honestly claiming it would be harder with a Cestus. I mean have you looked at gauntlets?
But that is neither here nor there I guess.
Always a good idea to clear things with the GM first at any rate.
I would be worried about the spiked gauntlet cutting the string at that point.
I am worried about your spiked gauntlets. Yours seem to have the spikes on the inside, mine have the spikes on the back of the fingers and hand.
If you can manage it without penalties in gauntlets -- I can't see anyone honestly claiming it would be harder with a Cestus.
Gauntlet has nothing written about affecting skills in any way. This is unlike cestus which has a mechanical disadvantage (in pathfinder).
I mean have you looked at gauntlets?
Yes, this is a gauntlet. Gauntlet with moving fingers
But that is neither here nor there I guess.
Always a good idea to clear things with the GM first at any rate.
Quite.
|
Finally... I hate the actual visual of putting 2 arrows on a bow. I know it's a fantasy world, and people do 7 impossible things before breakfast, chalk it up as an unreasonable complaint and move on.
Absolutely!
I hated it instantly in the film where it was introduced ("Robin Hood price of thieves" I think).But after all Hollywood actors do 7 impossible things before breakfast even in films about the modern world.
There's only so many combat rounds in a day. its this sort of assumption that makes fighters useless at higher levels. So what if they can Do something 24/7? you only have what.. 20 rounds a day of combat tops?
Seriously you never press your players and you allow them to get away with only fighting for 20 round/day with maximum buffs?
My NPC retreat if hard pressed and return after healing (if they can), they do sniping attacks and try to deplete player resources and so on.
It all depend on the specific situation but generally if you fight a couple of encounter and then go away for one day so you will return at full strength the enemy will reorganize and prepare for your return or vacate the area. No one with a intelligence score will stay there as nothing has happened.
BTW, even with a magical quiver the limit of the archer are the ammunitions.
A regular 20 arrow quiver can be depleted in 4 round by a 6th level archer using manyshot and rapid shot, a magic quiver in 12 rounds.
If you bring with you 5 adamantine arrow, 5 silver, 5 cold iron to cover for different targets and maybe a few +1 flaming arrow, or +1 holy or +1 bane plus a lot of standard arrows you will need a bag of holding to store all your back up ammunition.
|
|
They don't stack over +10 tho :(
Official rule about that, with reference, please.
I have seen that as a statement in the forum but not something official from Paizo.To make it clear I am interested in a official statement that the bonus from the bow and the bonus from a magical arrow don't stack together at more than a +10 total enhancement (and I know that only the highest actual +x to hit and damage count).
Official rule about that, with reference, please.
Some magic weapons have special abilities. Special abilities count as additional bonuses for determining the market value of the item, but do not modify attack or damage bonuses (except where specifically noted). A single weapon cannot have a modified bonus (enhancement bonus plus special ability bonus equivalents, including those from character abilities and spells) higher than +10.
Ranged Weapons and Ammunition: The enhancement bonus from a ranged weapon does not stack with the enhancement bonus from ammunition. Only the higher of the two enhancement bonuses applies.
Bane, Distance, Flaming, Frost, Merciful, Shock, Thundering, Anarchic, Axiomatic, Flaming Burst, Holy, Icy Burst, SHocking Burst, Unholy:
Bows, crossbows, and slings crafted with this ability bestow this power upon their ammunition.
Thus, since your bow imbues your arrows with it's enhancement bonus it cannot exceed 10 and must adhere to the basic rules of magic items.
Official rule about that, with reference, please.
Stynkk pointed out the rules, and I can confirm that it has been made very very clear that this is the official case.
Very easy to house-rule though - I certainly do.
They copied the 3.5 SRD which does not have that limitation which means it had to be hand typed in. That leads me to believe it is not a mistake.Since it was "carried" over from an older edition than the 'last' one I have a hard time seeing it as a typo -- especially since prior threads have discussed it I *Think* one of the developers have commented on this, but I'm not sure I remember that correctly.and you can't even damage a weapon unless your enhancement bonus is equal to the weapon you are trying to sunder. So if it's a +3 bow and you have a +2 keen great sword you are wasting your time.Depending on your DM. There's a high probability of that mention being considered a typo/oversight (since it was an accidental carryover from *3.0* in the SRD, not in 3.5).
This statement is not true.
They copied the 3.5 SRD, which included the reference. The 3.5 DMG, etc., did not include the reference.
Compare, both from the actual 3.5 SRD:
Hardness and Hit Points: An attacker cannot damage a magic weapon that has an enhancement bonus unless his own weapon has at least as high an enhancement bonus as the weapon or shield struck. Each +1 of enhancement bonus also adds 1 to the weapon’s or shield’s hardness and hit points.
Magic Armor, Shields, and Weapons: Each +1 of enhancement bonus adds 2 to the hardness of armor, a weapon, or a shield and +10 to the item’s hit points.
The armor section under Magic Items II also lists +1 = +2 hardness/+10 hp, and nothing about a minimum enhancement bonus.
This was all corrected on d20srd.org, but Paizo (rightfully in most ways) used the original SRD as the basis. While the +1 = +1/+1 reference was stripped out (because it's obviously contradictory), the rest of the line stayed. Could that have been intentional? Sure. Was it? Highly doubtful to my mind, and many others. In any case - this was about a very common DM interpretation, and how that can affect this situation.