Being a lowly Ranger without a ton of feats or gold - Quarterstaff. The weapons free and for a Ranger the two-weapon feat is free. And with a quarterstaff you can switch from two-hand to two-weapon as needs must. And you can play at "simple traveller with a walking pole" when passing the city guard. For other classes I can see how it might not be worth the feat, but for a Ranger its my choice over the bow skil (they sound much sexier but in most fights I've found that the chances of getting more than a single shot before being in melee are low).
Thanks guys, I hadn't spotted the loss of AC Dex bonus when running so that's something at least. Still think there should be a little more when an attacker is silly emough to run directly along the line of fire rather than going slower and weaving but rules are rules. After all the AC Dex loss would also apply against another archer standing off 90 degrees to the side of their run even though technically (ie. in the real world) he has the harder shot. I did take precise shot and point blank but the character, a ranger, chose the two-weapon feat at 2nd level and prefers the longsword/shortsword combo once the enemy has closed. Sadly the groups complement of melee fighters isn't large enough to allow the ranger to stand off and provide ranged fire support against spell casters etc. Meanwhile the rapid shot and a +3 composite bow are on the wish list if he survives a little longer.
I'm a fan of letting the dice roll to create a character and then seeing what I can do playing the results of random chance. However, beyond height, weight and age in the PHB and a character trait table in the DMG there's very little else official in the WOC books. Has anyone done d100 table for things like background, craft skill, profession, personality, scars. If its just left to players to dream it up then we'd all be the long lost child of some king whose throne we one day will regain. Reality is most of us probably started as the wastrel offspring of a pig herder or a dwarven miner before the adventuring bug struck.
I'm a recent returnee to the world of D20 having had a long break since AD&D days. I'm getting the hang of things but I'm also starting to agree with some comments I've seen about ranged weapons being too weak. Using the example of a simple sceanrio. A band of goblins come into sight at the edge of effective bow range, 100 feet. According to my DM and the rest of the team I only get one shot before they cover the distance and I have to drop the bow and switch to melee weapons. I'm okay that they could cover the ground at 4x speed in that time, ie. a maximum speed full pelt sprint. But I can't see how that doesn't impose some penalty on them. Surely the maximum they could do and still be in control of shields, dodging incoming missles, waving weapons and keeping balance, etc would be double speed. Also if I were to attempt such a rush, I would need to need to slow down as I arrived. So surely they suffer some armour penalty or open up an addition attack opportunity. Yet from what I can get out of the PHB that seems to be the way it is. So if a ranged weapon only gives you one chance of a shot before the enemy is in your face I can see why high amour class and a large sword is the preferred route.
Mr. Vex, Mature (too old and too fat) player, long time out of the loop and itching to get back. Based just outside Wewlyn Garden City, Herts. ex. cleric/thief/paladin/ranger/assasin - ie. flexible, done a lot and died alot in my time. If interested try sizbut@btinternet.com. Altair Vex wrote: DnD ref with own detailed 'gritty' campaign looking for grown up players to join. Players ought to be fond of generally good characters, political intrigue, swashbuckling, grand quests, etc.
|