ZordonAndAlpha's page

lets all FAQ button my question at the very end of the previous page! Ready GO!

Question:

How does when a light source comes into effect end up effecting spells like deeper darkness?

I believe I'm seeing some massive support in my favor on this.

Majuba, do you have a link to Jason actually saying that? Be it video, transcript from the con, or maybe even a which year he said that at paizocon? Then maybe I can possibly youtube it to see if he is recorded as saying it. Just because that'd win me the bet outright.

actually its a wager against another player. not the gm

If Malachi is right... I think I am owed $40...

Is he right guys?

I like malachi's explanation. It seems really to the point of the matter.

But by suppressing it does it mean it stops the magic from working at all, or lessens its effect two levels.

the jeff that is out of context when you put that "in such an area" part in from the FAQ.

That is in regards to a sunrod. Not the light spell.

And no deadman and the jeff. I do not agree with that at all.

Because say you simply have a bigger torch. What then?

Or if you have light cast on your feet say. Like I did when the whole thing started. And said, no it'd only be 20 feet darkness then deeper.
I only used the torch example because it was easier than arguing with him falsely saying it was dispelled. When no, the light cast on the shoes was suppressed two levels. Not outright gone.

(Getting to the core beginning of why we made the bet.)

I am ok with a wash.
But I still wish the gods would decide this for us.

People need a good hard ruling.

And thank you all for your help in solving this and your helpful opinions.

I hope wrath too can accept it being a wash.

Otherwise we forever wait the gods to see who gets $40.

zavarov both seem correct. Thank you. And I don't expect you to copy paste.

I think I should point out the definition of ambient.

Ambient:

Of or relating to the immediate surroundings of something: "ambient temperature"

Ambient light would be the light of the area.

I'm the player disputing this. (And in my opinion he is the mistaken one.)

I've seen other places where people have supported my ruling and said things such as "The ruling states that mundane sources does not /increase/ the light level"

And I believe their emphasis is to state that a torch lit after the spell cannot increase the level of darkness. However, being lit before the spell means that was already the natural light of the area once the spell set in motion. (I'm open to the idea a torch could be lit after and raise supernatural darkness to darkness though, but that isn't the focus of the argument.)

However. If a torch is lit, then following that the spell is cast say on a rock at the person's feet, both have the same origin point ideally this way when we are talking radius on the x-y axis (not z which would be vertical or toward the ceiling as opposed to the walls.)

So since the torch was already lit, that 20 feet radius around it is normal light as per the rules for a normal torch. After that 20 feet is 20 feet of dim light. Then 20 feet of darkness.

So after the spell is cast on the pebble the area turns to this:
20 feet out from center is darkness (dark-vision works since it isn't supernatural)
Then because the dim light was turned to supernatural darkness the next 40 feet is entirely supernatural darkness.

Reason being: The "ambient" light was the light in the area at the time, or the light around the area. Thus the torch is the ambient light at the time. So notch it down two steps. You end at darkness.

Here is a table to help:
Beginning light / Ending Light

Bright light / Dim light
Normal light / Darkness
Dim light / Supernatural Darkness
Darkness / Also Supernatural Darkness

And you only use this table one time. You do not go Bright light becomes dim, which dim becomes supernatural darkness. So bright light is turned to supernatural darkness. This method is wrong. Instead you simply start at bright, end at dim. Do not continue. Stop there. That is how you use this table.

___________________________________________________
Bit off topic:
Way of looking at it ideally but not the actual argument, just a way it seems simpler to think of.
Since the spell says it lowers light two levels I think of it like being a "Light Dampener". The spell essentially creates a source of "un-light" that can only dampen so much light. The same way a torch is a light in a room, it can only get a room just so bright, a deeper darkness spell works an equal and opposite amount (although better range). So a deeper darkness spell creates an aura of "un-light" that dampens light around it. But once it goes so far out it can't dampen any more, just light a torch can only shine so far in a room before it dissipates. Also, a candle can only make it possible to read from just so close, and a normal darkness (not deeper) can only make an area equally dark or harder to read in.

He thinks it's just. Nope everything is supernatural dark always within 60 feet.
____________________________________________________

And to add to my argument, why would they bother putting the line in, "objects radiate darkness in 60-foot radius and the light is lowered by two steps." If the light-level is always supernatural darkness because all light is mundane (even sunlight) and thus not ambient unless made by magical means, thus, deeper darkness causes supernatural dark always. Because if that was the case why not word the spell closer to as follows:

"Deeper darkness creates a 60-foot radius of supernatural darkness regardless of other light sources. Deeper darkness can only be dispelled by a spell with the light descriptor such as daylight, this spell must also be of equal or higher level than that of deeper darkness. Deeper darkness can also be dispelled or counter-spelled as per normal dispel magic and counter-spell rules."

Because the above wording would fully support his idea of how it works. But by the wording given in the book when you notice it says "Non-magical sources of light, such as torches and lanterns, do not *increase* the light level in an area of darkness."
And also because what has been referred to as "ambient light" actually means "the light in the area" not "non-magical light" and also not "any light that isn't sunshine".
And the rules of darkness actual state it as "light in the area to drop one step" not "the ambient light" just to be sure I am not muddying the waters, what the book says about area, and what ambient means by definition, are the same.

So you do not minus the torches from the starting light level of the room zavarov and ansel, because that is excluding them for no reason. The rules say they don't *increase* the light level, but that doesn't mean they didn't affect the starting point of light in the room. It just means they can't make it even brighter in the area just because they lit more and more torches or started a giant fire pit next to the pebble of deeper darkness after the fact. But if the firepit was there from the start, it. is. in. the. area. that. deeper. darkness. lowers. two. light. levels.
So a fire pit making a radius of normal light, instead casts only darkness. Not supernatural dark.

Thus, the rules were never broken to begin with. You just need magic of a higher level than deeper darkness or equal to it in order to raise the light level AFTER the spell was cast. But having mundane light before can cause it to be LESS than supernatural darkness (less meaning darkness or dim) if the light level caused by the mundane factor was at or above normal intensity.
And you do not "double dip" on the darkness scale and say, "oh well daylight 'jumps' down to dim... but it doesn't really stop there, it jumps again instead to supernatural darkness, which is four levels below bright light."
Because that's just crazy and broken, and obviously you don't break the damn rules if they aren't broken, because then you are being a butt head.

TL;DR
My way works, it isn't broken, and it isn't by raw wrong. So why would you not use it. Interpreting the rules this way make sense and is playable, why do it any other way? Especially if that way is broken. (very broken)

P.S. I do notice where his confusion comes from. It can be read his way ideally, but that would become broken. This way simply makes common sense when it comes to utility. You try to light a torch in deeper darkness, cool it's lit, the darkness smothers it out because the darkness is older than the flame and thus superior even though they are the same number of levels moved in a direction on the light scale, age matters here, sorry, respect the "elder darkness". But in the case of the torch being older than the deeper darkness, the torch is the "elder light". So the elder wins. Problem solved, easy rule to live by.

P.S.S. I have $40 dollars riding on this with wrath. So please, if you don't understand part of my argument, ask me a question on it if it seems confusing, I'll calmly explain my view to you. But to me, my way is usable, makes sense to me and apparently others too given the people who right off told him he was wrong. Sorry if it's long, but please do try to fully understand it, even if you don't agree. At least see where I am coming from before you spout off all "Nope. It's broken, not even arguable." And I would appreciate if possible someone to either link where a very similar answer was given by the gods of Pathfinder/Paizo who wrote the books and ruled on it in a forum. [Don't just say the book, obviously that's the problem here.] Or if possible, somebody encourage them to look over this and get us a ruling. This isn't the only thread with this issue I know. And I would appreciate it being answered once and for all by the writers and then laid to rest if it hasn't been already.

Thank you all!

So I had the idea to create an artifact for monks after reading a real world tale about Thich Quang Duc. If you don't know the story wiki it and you'll see why this important event could perhaps be commemorated in a way here.

Artifact Name:
The Un-burning Heart [or if somebody can make something more witty that.]

Description:
This soot covered human heart is a well respected artifact to any monk of any faith. So well respect that a monk that is known to disrespect the relic will be forever marked with the symbol of a tattooed flame over his brow. This mark is easily noticeable and any other monk will treat a monk with this mark unfavorably.
The heart is said to be that of an ancient monk warrior who saved an innocent village in war by engulfing himself in oil and lighting himself ablaze to block a narrow passage even in death allowing others to survive without actually harming the opposed forces. This sort of self sacrifice from a monk is highly renowned. Even monks who believe in only fighting to benefit themselves see this as a sign of determination, they use it to inspire themselves to fight harder and win at any cost.
While held by a monk in quiet meditation for an hour every morning they receive a spiritual benefit of untold riches. A monk who does this receives a base attack bonus equal five levels above his current level.
He also receives DR/5 against fire as the heart bestows it's heat suppressing power to the worshiper.
Also the monk gains a +5 to his Will and Fortitude saves but a -3 to Reflex saves.
Also he receives the ability to cast himself aflame without any matches or oil. His body is entirely burnt to ash after 5 minutes have passed. This kills the monk that burst into flame this way, however, the heart remains in tact allowing reincarnation or resurrection to be cast on the fallen monk. [But not giving the ability to cast this spell, the necessary components and a proper caster must to be found to cast either spell.]
Any attempts to reincarnate or resurrect made on the actual artifact itself causes The Un-burning Heart to instantly become the shape of the original monk sitting cross-legged in the lotus position. He then begins self-immolation and burns for a full day in a magical fire that cannot be extinguished. This sight demoralizes onlookers one stage. Also any onlooker who sees this act will forever gain a +1 to knowledge religion and knowledge history checks for having witnessed the religious and historical event themselves, because even though this is not the first time the event occur-ed, it is re-enacted in the exact same way it was first enacted. [The +1 bonus to checks can only be gained once by any character.]

Destruction:
The only way this item can be destroyed is if a monk with the flame tattoo over his brow openly displays his mark while dousing himself in oil in a public setting, sitting lotus style holding the Un-burning Heart, and immolating himself while saying aloud. "This is nothing. Anyone can do this. It is not important. It means nothing. I am no one."
This sort of disrespect to the item causes it to lose all heat suppressing power and burn with the disrespectful monk who held it crumpling to dust. However, if the monk screams or moans while burning alive the act causes him to burn slower and the heart remains unaffected to show that this act is not so easily accomplished.

So if you've read into the wiki enough to understand the story let me know your creative ideas. What you think of this sort of relic. And any other bits you wish to share. I hope for some positive feed back from everyone. Please don't be overly critical since this is my first idea submitted, and if you feel it's wildly overpowered remember it is for a artifact please. You can't simply go out and buy it. THANKS!

I gave my explanation of rules that make sense to me. Hope it helps.

And my GM has come to me and said Manyshot and Rapid Shot cannot stack since both are Feats and blah blah blah they both change damage output so blah blah blah aren't passive... blah blah don't stack. This seemed fair. But if Vital Strike doesn't stack with manyshot either then I'm forced to basically have a lot of options on how to fire my bow, but none of them are really all the superior to just simply firing my bow as a full round action or running and then firing my bow. So really, when does a ranger's damage output ever become that good being a strait forward ranger. If you don't allow some of the feats to stack then the ranger seems as a lone class to be a total dud. You'd have to dip into other classes which would put you far behind the progression, just to be capable of having mediocre damage later on. And since you don't have a whole lot put into constitution most like since Wisdom for spells, dex for accuracy, and strength for bonus damage probably took your 3 top stats you rolled, you are basically going to die before you ever reach the stage where you get a lot of damage. Luckily my GM is not trying to be a meanie anymore so he's letting me play my ranger as a Manyshot & Vital Strike Stacking machine who can still deal a med-high amount of damage. Although I no longer am stacking Rapid shot to get an additional attack per turn at the -2. But I can make it up with the BAB giving me another attack at a lower bonus later anyway, so oh well.

But if you can't power game a ranger this way, I don't see any real way to power game a normal ranger without doing multiclassing or a bunch of trait changes for races or possibly using an advance race guide to try and maximize what you can. But even then I feel you come up a little short. So you'd have to go zen or something like alchemist to even bother, which makes ranger a waste of time for paizo to have ever included. Unless things for him are fixed.

Which also, I've seen some oversights in the ruling of certain magic items in the new ultimate equipment guide. In some places where "Wisdom" should be I've seen "Charisma" in it's place. I've seen weapons titled as one thing, then mentioned in the text beneath as having a different name. I've seen text limiting an item to a +5 bonus but having price listings for it up to a +7 bonus. That didn't make any sense.

So my ultimate complaint is essentially. Is paizo simply getting sloppy with things? I mean if they need someone to spell check things and check grammar and things to make everything a bit easier to understand I'd be happy to apply for the position. [And I say spell check since I've noticed some "Dexerity" checks being mentioned... and I'm not quite sure what those are but I have a feeling it's "Dexterity checks" they just misspelled it. But leave it to somebody on the forums to say you must have ranks in "DEXERITY" [missing a T] as a skill to have whatever do whatever cool thing, making it impossible.]

Ok this is my understanding of what would make sense.

SEEKING - This property is applied to a bow, it bestows it's property to ammunition fired from it like other properties such as corrosive bust, flaming, or icy bust. An arrow fired from a bow is said to have the seeking trait since it was aimed at a target square and an attack was made.

MECHANICS OF THE ATTACK. - A Seeking bow only ignores miss chances caused by blur effects or concealment or similar effects. It still must allow the target it's AC to defend against the attack since the target still has armor on and still has a dexterity modifier allowing it to dodge the attack [however clumsily it might do so.] If a target is for example invisible, the bow need only aimed at the correct square the target occupies and fired to ignore the miss chance due to the invisibility. However, if the target is invisible the arrow does not automatically confirm the hit. Instead the attack must still overcome the AC of the target. [Special feats or abilities that change the AC to flatfooted AC or touch AC may still apply.]

If the attack was deflected [missed] by an amount equal or lesser than that of the armor bonus or natural armor bonus then the arrow is seen in flight as having suddenly bounced off the invisible target. If the arrow was deflected by an amount equal to or lesser than that of the targets dexterity modifier then the arrow is said to have been dodged or ducked suddenly by the target and can be seen making a sudden drop or curve in its path seemingly unexpectedly. This change in flight is caused by the target's dodge creating a small vacuum between the target and the arrow, sucking the arrow in the direction the target veered, however still not striking the target.

If the arrow missed by equal to or less than both the dex modifier and the armor bonus of the target then the arrow is said to have bounced just narrowly off the armor or hide of the target. This causes a larger redirection in flight than from a dodge but less than from a bounce off armor.
The bounce or dodge may be accompanied by audible noise such as a sudden change of stance causing a scuffing noise on the floor or the armor that is hit causing a loud twang once struck.

This solves the problem of knowing the DM had to check the AC of the target and you can see that he did out of game. Thus solving the fact you may or may not have meta-gamed to figure out he is currently in that square.

For a hit you simply see the arrow stuck in mid air, and possibly even moving up and down as the invisible creature breathes or even moves.

However, shooting at the wrong square the arrow simply zooms through the air and comes to a sudden stop falling silently strait to the ground followed by a possible "tink" noise against a hard floor. An arrow caught in flight by arrow snatching may appear to have simply been a choice of a wrong square if the invisible creature prompt drops the arrow to the ground without any further motion of the hand.

This to me makes the most sense. However the rules don't say enough about it as is. So just saying the arrows gain that quality once fired makes sense since you wouldn't throw the stupid bow at them and some magician must have thought that a bow that could fire things without missing would be a good idea. They wouldn't have thought throwing the bow at the opponent would have been a good idea. Otherwise they weren't a very wise/intelligent wizard to craft such magic now were they?

It's an over sight. The bow is supposed to make the arrows fly straighter basically. Or you can say the bow makes the wearer able to shoot more accurately. Either way were saying the bow shoots the arrow as if there was no blur or concealment. But to say you are throwing the bow... that's just a huge bunch of bullocks. So yes, the simple fix is to add that little "2" to things like distance and seeking properties. However we still leave the brilliant energy alone just because it says we should put it on the ammunition not the bow to avoid OP.

If they could just find better wording [or even use mine if they want] it'd make a bit more sense to everyone I think.

Does this make sense to everybody easier?

Because a bow that has to be thrown at the enemy does to me. And if it does to you then it's probably because you just hate rangers or bow users, in which case you should notice you don't have to play one, but you still might have a really nice ranger in your party who saves your favorite character you've spent so much time on from death. So don't be afraid to help him out a little by agreeing to the simple idea he shouldn't have to throw his bow at things to ignore the miss chance from things like blur. Instead he should just be able to shoot at it and ignore the miss chance that way. Anything else is silly.
---------------------------------

"Is this an issue of nitpicking the wording of the rules or is this an actual issue?"
---------------------------------
For my DM and me it has been an issue. He argues I have to throw my bow now because he read a post somebody wrote elsewhere explaining by rules raw the bow must be thrown to get the effect. And I'm not going to throw my bow at the enemy since it won't do any damage that way. It's just asinine.

So yes it's an issue. Let's fix it. I don't like having to go on "intended" rules with things. I'd like them to just be rules. You know? Especially if they make sense that way.

Don't know about the vital strike not working with many shot. But I know manyshot would cause both arrows to hit because it is one attack roll for both arrows. So if that attack roll is a confirmed crit, you crit... on both.

Also Seeking deals with cover too, hence why IPC isn't needed.

Also with seeking so long as you can see them or know where they are if they are invisible, you will hit if you confirm the attack. However, if there is a wall between you and them so you cannot see any part of them, you can't shoot an arrow the way they do bullets in the "Wanted" movie most everyone has seen. You simply can't attack them, or if you try you automatically hit the wall. Unless you have some sort of ricochet feat of course.

Essentially seeking is a type of magic that so long as you have something to aim at any miss chances are completely negated, you will always have your arrow hit exactly where you intend to place it. If you shoot however for an invisible enemy you don't have to worry about seeing him, just knowing which square he is in. Footprints, someone having cast light on their armor or body so they produce light no matter where they go even if invisible, or any other trick you have for finding the invisible foe. Once you found him, your arrow will strike him so long as you beat his AC. He won't get any bonuses to AC because in short no matter where he is, you aren't aiming for where he has additional cover, you are aiming for what you see clear as day.

Seeking states, "The Weapon veers towards it's target, negating ANY miss chances that would otherwise apply, such as from concealment." Don't confuse "such as" to mean "only" because that possibility is negated when you have a word such as "any" before it in the sentence.

Also vital strike says it is used when you use the "attack action" not the "standard action". Since a full round attack is an attack I'd think that'd make it an attack action. But I'll look in combat a second...

Doesn't actually in any way say that a full round attack is not an attack action. So it'd be to DM discretion. [After all it could just as easily be called the "full-round attack action" and make sense.]

EDIT:
Also with manyshot the crit does happen on both arrows, you just total all the damage first and then multiply by the crit multiplier once. Rather than multiply by crit multipliers separately for each arrow. In crunch it kind of dims the fact you crit by a few small points of damage in the end. But it still remains ridiculous. Also manyshot is essentially a single clustered shot for overcoming damage reduction is how it reads to me. But clustered shot will still be good for adding damage up throughout the turn before applying DR. [I will most likely take it at 9th level. 10th gives me an opening for pinpoint targeting 6 levels before it is normally available to me thanks to ranger combat feats. So I will only need to overcome their dex bonus to hit. Essentially making my attack a ranged touch attack. At 11th level taking improved critical I'll be getting plenty of damage.

I stick by my original statements.

And I should maybe add that alpha will by the time I hit level 11 be large, wearing leather armor, possibly magical, have toughness, be stealthy, fast, well trained, and great for keeping everyone else far far away. He might even start taking intimidate to scare them right until they run away screaming.

Basically getting a Co-Hort for free? Why not add to the party? Also why not have something between you and the enemy besides your parties front line fighters? Something you can tell to stay and protect you rather than charge off uncontrollably as other players will often enough do.

Hi, my name is Zordon, the ORIGINAL Power Ranger.
[Btw in my group that is my ranger's actual name, no lie.]

To tell you the honest truth I think normal rangers can be very OP with the right feats and equipment.

For example, don't take improved precise shot [IPS]... EVER! I have a seeking bow with covers that much better than IPS ever would.

My ranger has as follows at lvl 8

---Race: Elf---

---Stats---
HP: 68

STR: 16 +3
DEX: 20 +5 24 +7 [With cat's grace]
CON: 10 +0
INT: 12 +1
WIS: 12 +1 14 +2 [headband of inspired wis]
CHA: 10 +0

AC: 22 = 10 + 5 + 3 + 2 + 2
[AC With Cats Grace: 24]

Touch AC: 18 [or 20 with cats grace]

Flat-Footed AC: 17

CMB: 11

CMD: 26 [or 28 with cats grace]

BAB: +8/+3

---Saves:---
Fort- 8 =6+0+2
Ref - 13 =6+5+2
Wis - 6 =2+2+2

---Feats:---

1st lvl:
Point Blank Shot
1st Favored Enemy [Human +2]
Track
Wild Empathy

2nd :
Precise Shot [combat style feat]

3rd lvl:
Endurance [free feat]
1st Favored Terrain [Urban +2]
Deadly Aim

4th lvl:
Hunters Bond [Wolf] (And yes my wolf's name is Alpha, because I'm zordon so we constantly make jokes about him goin "OH NO ZORDON!")

5th lvl:
2nd Favored Enemy [Outsider:Evil +4] (we were fighting a lot of devilish stuff)
Rapid Shot

6th lvl:
Manyshot [combat style feat]

7th lvl:
Woodland Stride
Vital Strike

8th lvl:
Swift Tracker
2nd Favored Terrain [Underground +4]

At 9th which is still to come I'm considering many feats, but the free feat of evasion is nice to have because it means I can literally dodge lightning, and that my friend is a very nice feat to have for free. =]

My equipment is as follows:
+1 Seeking Composite Long Bow (+3 str) of Undead Bane
+2 Leather Armor
Greatsword [in case things get too close for comfort]
Efficient Quiver
500x Arrows [I have them taking up the majority of my inventory]
Lvl 2 Perl of Power [Casting cats grace after it has run out is always nice.]
Rope of Entanglement [keep the enemy at bay while others slash away]
Slippers of Spider-climbing [limited room? The ceiling has room...]
Some Potions of Cure Light Wounds [for when the cleric is out of order]
Ring of Protection +3
Cloak of Resistance +2
Headband of Inspired Wisdom +2
Mask {it's covered with "True Color" Ink which is different colors based on viewers alignment, handy for tricking possible foes into giving away alignment if you don't know if you should kill someone.)

Since the mask is a vicious looking red to those of evil alignment, I must be the "Red Ranger" lol.
(I have no problem making tons of power ranger references for hilarity through the course of our campaign. It seems like Zordon was actually racist long before the television show where he gave everyone rather racist judgements on what color they would be. (Aryan white guy gets to be red ranger since hitler had a red flag, asian girl gets yellow, black guy get black, and the blue/pink just got whatever was left.)See since a ranger gets favored enemies my play group believes that makes him racist toward whatever favored enemy he has because essentially he is more angry at them than the rest of the evil that attacks him. I don't condone racism, but it is a funny running joke my campaign has had going for awhile now.)

Anyway,
With the bow I ignore mischance even on invisible creatures so long as I aim for the correct square. With precise shot I ignore the -4 of combat. Point blank is a nice +1 for within 30 feet [which is almost always]. Deadly aim is a nice occasional damage increase, if I'm pressed for time I'll take a gamble and try to hit for more damage, when you stack it with manyshot the attack does a lot of damage. Rapid shot is just more chances to hit. Manyshot only works on the first attack, which is too bad, except when deadly aim and Vital Strike stack on it because then it's 2 arrows for 2d8+6 and then plus any other bonuses I have for it. Vital Strike also works with the great-sword for added bonus. Favored Enemies give me a nice bonus against what I can possibly critical on that I run into lots of. Undead bane gives me a small cover over the gap that is un-critable undead, who also don't take damage from deadly aim.

My wolf, Alpha, has a few random feats but he's mostly just something to put between me and the enemy until he gets large at [my] level 10.

I managed to get an "Oathbow" which will be good for the BBEG at the end of a given quest chain in the campaign. But don't expect one to be handed to you the way mine was. Everything else was bought/crafted/found along the way.

After my dex bonus on attacks, magic, point blank, vital strike, deadly aim, rapid shot, manyshot, and my highest possible favored enemy bonus, I end up with this for attacks and damage:
+14/+14/+9
First shot does this damage on hit:
first arrow - 17 to 31 damage =2d8+6+1+1+4+3
second arrow - 17 to 31 damage =2d8+6+1+1+4+3
critical: x3 [one critical success means both arrows crit]

Second Shot does:
16 to 23 damage =1d8+6+1+1+4+3

Third Shot:
[Another] 16 to 23 damage

If all shots hit possible damage is: 66 to 108 damage
If all shots crit possible damage is: 198 to 324

And my spells which can buff my damage output and my accuracy to hit just make me amazing all the dang time. It's near impossible for me to miss every shot in a round, and a single hit still does decent damage, especially when I use Gravity Bow to make my bow do one size category more damage, meaning 1d8 per damage roll becomes 2d6, and a vital strike+manyshot attack means essentially 4d6+bonuses and another 4d6+bonuses... and it could still crit for x3.

I went against a Behir that had enslaved all of my party but me into mining away for hours, I was only buffed with cat's grace didn't have gravity bow to use, and I had taken a negative level earlier in the dungeon. I positioned myself in a doorway it couldn't get through to melee me, I shot and killed it in three rounds. I only took 16 damage. I asked the DM what CR it was, it was 8, with my negative level I was set at 7. I killed it single handed, like it was nothing...

I am now going to try and get my DM to allow me to get an Ioun Stone that plays music whenever I want, and the only song I need it to play is, "GO GO POWER RANGER!".

So in short, become one of the power rangers, I'm one, and I'm Zordon, so you can be too!
"OH NO ZORDON, EVERYONE WANTS TO BE A POWER RANGER!"
"Shut up Alpha..."