I started playing D&D a couple of years ago. And really, the only thing that made me want to play was reading the stats on the Deepwood Sniper from Masters of the Wild.
Back then, I had always played as a ranger focusing on the longbow. Nowadays, having aquired Complete Adventurer, I've switched over to the scout class. ( I always focused more on archery and clever skill usage than magic or the animal comp, so the scout was a given for me...)
But what happened to the Deepwood Sniper?
I mean, several other presiege classes from MOTW are in Compete Adventurer (bloodhound, beast master... ) but why not the sniper?
And, as a side note; are there any other archery based prestiege classes out there?
-Kurocyn
I don't see that sniper, but there is a Darkwood Stalker in the Complete Warrior... also for archery classes of the top of my head is the Arcane Archer from the DMG and Order of the Bow Initiate from the Complete Warrior (also of course the Darkwood Stalker if that isn't what you were looking for).
Regarding the deepwood sniper not being in 3.5 I can only guess. I would however like to make an educated guess. Here are a few changes from 3.0 to 3.5.
Changing improved critical and keen to no longer stack would seem to indicate that the 3.0 DS would not be as strong but it shows a change from having criticals dictate the victor in a fight, essentially taking away more of the luck factor and leaning more towards character's actions and teamwork being a deciding factor.
The ranger does more damage to favored enemies. Since this extra damage applies to criticals it makes the DS x5 that much more deadly.
The combination of the Oathbow and DS would give a potential x6 damage available to a 12th level character.
The ranger spell-exacting shot from Comp Adv. causes the next attack to be an automatic critical.
The was a 3.0 archer PrC in FR that had the ability to use power attack with ranged attacks. This PrC also failed to be converted to 3.5.
I have been focusing on the critical damage aspect because a ranged attack specialist will use their full attack action more often than a melee specialist. Thus causing an unbalance in the favor of the archer.
Concealment was changed. The remainder of the abilities have been mostly converted into feats. So if you are looking for a DS and favor is the most important reason you should be able to build on with feats.
Deepwood Sniper can still be used in 3.5 with very little tweaking.
The FR archer PrC you speak of is in Silver Marches and is known as the Peerless Archer. That, too, can still be used with very minor tweaking.
I've used them both in my 3.5 games. We never had a problem adjusting it a little. What does need a good fixing is Forsaker from Masters of the Wild.
What kind of tweaking would be required to run a Deepwood Sniper?
And when I would look at both the Order of the Bow Initiate and the Deepwood Sniper, I can't help but favor the sniper.
As for the Peerless Archer, I haven't seen that one. Need to research a little bit...
What class abilites/benifits does it get?
the peerless archer got one of its best special abilities stripped out and replaced by the core feat improved precise shot. other than that, a peerless archer may craft magic arrows (enhancement bonus only) as if he had the craft magic arms and armor feat. there are a couple other things, but those are the main points to the peerless archer.
tog
That's it? Some enhanced arrows?
Bleah...
Yeah, I still favor the sniper.
Thank you by the way. I didn't know anything about it. What was this ability they stripped away and replaced?
i dont recall the name of it (my silver marches book is a couple hours away from my university address), but it was an incremental version of the improved precise shot feat, and made the prc very cool when it was printed. i hated that they destroyed the peerless archer by adding in one new feat... that ability was the true hallmark of the class, and to take it away with a core rules feat that circumvented most of a 10 level prestige class was unneeded, imo.
tog
The moon elf scout in my party is moving toward deepwood sniper. He might only take two levels in the sniper for the improved critical bonus and that first increased multiplier, which will make him a truly deadly archer.
I've house-ruled the stacking of keen and improved critical, so deepwood sniper works nicely in my campaign.
I personally don't understand the logic behind the change. Keen is a magical property applied to the weapon. Improved critical comes from the skill of the wielder. Of course they stack.
|
Why not just go for the Order of the Bow Initiate? If what you're keen on is the Bad-@$$ use of archery skills then that would seem to the best route. And then theres always the various Classes proposed by other D20 Products by other companies, check out Path of the Sword for the Legends And Lairs line, or the books Evil, and Wild from AEG (the Evil book does well evil, much better then Book of vile Darkness). There is a Prestige class in Evil called the Blood Archer, it allows for ranged sneak attacks, and makes an evil Ranger (or Scout) really scary.
Why not just go for the Order of the Bow Initiate?
Because, I find the true threat in archery lies in the range of the attack. And the Deepwood Sniper class extends it's range increment very nicely...
With range comes lethality. And, as a Deepwood Sniper, you're able to make shots from ranges that most chars can't even hope to pass a shot check from...
Yes, the abilities of the Bow Initiate are nice, but it lacks the range... And to me, that's the whole point of being an archer.
As for an evil archer, what is scarier than knowing there's someone out there able to hit you from hundreds (if not thousands) of feet away and crit with almost every shot?
|
I had a rough experience with the Deepwood sniper back in 3.0 --
I had a character who focused on being an archer and took the Deepwood Sniper and the Order of the Bow Initiate.
If you remember, not only did keen stack with Improved Critical, but the enhancement bonus on bows stacked with the enhancement bonus on arrows. So, a couple of greater magic weapon spells later (which also gave a +5 bonus much sooner than 3.5) and the (already powerful) archer is now getting a bonus +10 to hit AND damage. Combine that with a crit range of 18-20 with a x5 multiplier to damage and you have +50 damage just from the enhancement bonus. Now combine that with the ranged sneak attack damage from Order of the Bow initiate and the ability to use the bow in melee without provoking an attack of opportunity made the archer an incredibly lethal character. (This also doesn't take into account any additional damage potential -- flaming, holy, etc.) There wasn't a fighter that could match the amount of damage that this character was dishing out and they could do it 2 feet away or 300 feet away.
I am glad that they have banned the keen/improved critical stacking. Every time he hit with a critical, it was as if a bazooka hit the creature. I think that the x5 multiplier was a bit much -- even for a prestige class, but especially one where the requirements are feats and skills that the class would be taking anyway.
Overall, I liked the concept, but I would like to see it re-done for 3.5 before I allow it in my campaign again as currently written.
...with a crit range of 18-20 with a x5 multiplier...
Not to nit-pick, but the threat range actually becomes 17-20... ^ ^;;
And what's wrong with the x5 multiplier? The point of the Deepwood Sniper is to snipe; generally meaning a 1-hit kill, thus the enhanced threat range and multiplier.
Do you not like the idea of an archer dropping a critter with one arrow like that?
If so, then use the obvious solutions. Pit him against numerous targets at varied ranges. Or against targets with Deflect Arrow/Snatch Arrow. Reduce his line of sight via smoke, fog, rain, flying pigs, whatever...
Personally, instead of picturing the target getting blown in half ( image created by using "bazooka" lol... ), I've always imagined a crit with an arrow to be like hitting the target in the eye, or the throat.
As for not liking the requirements, why is that?
Do you mean that an archer prestiege class should need sword & board feats? Or a spell caster prestiege class require the ability to rage?
Why wouldn't you require skills and feats that the prestiege class focuses on? ( Deepwood Sniper = farshot , Exemplar = 13 ranks in multiple skills )Isn't that the point?
-Kurocyn
the peerless archer got one of its best special abilities stripped out and replaced by the core feat improved precise shot. other than that, a peerless archer may craft magic arrows (enhancement bonus only) as if he had the craft magic arms and armor feat. there are a couple other things, but those are the main points to the peerless archer.
tog
Actually, you can still use Peerless Archer. Now the player of the PrC doesn't have to waste a feat slot on Improved Precise Shot. :D
And the benefit of crafting magical arrows is still awesome, because that's the problem with a friend of mine's archer-character. He always ran out of enchanted arrows sooner or later, and he sucks in melee.
|
|
...with a crit range of 18-20 with a x5 multiplier...Not to nit-pick, but the threat range actually becomes 17-20... ^ ^;;
Maybe I am reading the rules wrong, but -- Bow is 20, improved crit is 19-20, getting keen on top of that doesn't double the 19-20, it "doubles" the 20, which puts us at 18-20.
And what's wrong with the x5 multiplier? The point of the Deepwood Sniper is to snipe; generally meaning a 1-hit kill, thus the enhanced threat range and multiplier.
What, x3 isn't enough? x4 isn't enough? Why did they stop at x5? Why not go to x6, or x10? When you add on strength damage to a bow, multiple attacks seem to be a little easier to come by with bows(and the Haste spell was REALLY broken at the time), the combination of +5 enhancement bonus to the bow and to the arrows for a total of +10, giving a character with a ton of attacks a much higher crit potential really unbalances things. Each crit was doing at least +70 points of damage before even rolling damage. That doesn't include the arrow damage, backstab damage, or elemental damage from the bow type. If fighters can't do it when they are right in your face, then why should archers be able to?
Do you not like the idea of an archer dropping a critter with one arrow like that?
No, it's usually pretty anti-climactic.
If so, then use the obvious solutions. Pit him against numerous targets at varied ranges. Or against targets with Deflect Arrow/Snatch Arrow. Reduce his line of sight via smoke, fog, rain, flying pigs, whatever...
I know all the things that I can do to make his world very sad. A few things regarding your suggestions: Multiple targets usually means a lot more work and prep time on my part. Also, it usually doesn't matter when the archer can take out 7 bad guys a round before they get into melee with him. Having a horde of monks feels cheesy as does having rain or flying pigs every encounter.
Personally, instead of picturing the target getting blown in half ( image created by using "bazooka" lol... ), I've always imagined a crit with an arrow to be like hitting the target in the eye, or the throat.
I understand that, but it is hard to picture that when the archer was doing somewhere in the neighborhood of 300+ points of damage a round.
As for not liking the requirements, why is that?
Do you mean that an archer prestiege class should need sword & board feats? Or a spell caster prestiege class require the ability to rage?
I simply meant that the feats 1) were too similar between the two prestige classes, so the archer didn't have to take any extra feats prolonging the progression and 2) were things that were "duh ... well of course I would take that". I feel that feats and other requirements should include things that would make sense for the class, but that they might not normally take if they were to maximize that class. The Order of the Bow initiate should probably have Dodge as a feat requirement if they can shoot a bow in melee without provoking an attack of opportunity. The Deepwood Sniper should probably have (at least) Alertness for them to pick out their targets from such a distance. Just those two feats alone would have better balanced out the character in question.
Why wouldn't you require skills and feats that the prestiege class focuses on? ( Deepwood Sniper = farshot , Exemplar = 13 ranks in multiple skills )Isn't that the point?
-Kurocyn
I feel that it should "cost" something extra to get all the goodies from prestige classes. Just getting something extra just for taking things that you would have taken anyway seems cheap to me.
At least those are my thoughts on it.
EDIT: Keep in mind that many of my thoughts on the Deepwood Sniper are due to 3.0 rules (stacking crits, Haste spell, stacking enhancement to bows and arrows, etc.) and the combination of a number of classes that the original designers never intended to be put together. When one character is stealing the show in combat to the point where the DM has to come up with scenarios that specifically target only that one character, something needs to be fixed.
I haven't looked at doing a 3.5 archer in some time, but this is what I remember about archers in 3.0:
They could get around the same number of attacks as a fighter with two-weapon fighting. However, they didn't have the "off-hand" so they got to add their full strength (as much as the bow would allow) to their damage on every attack. As I said before, enhancement bonuses stacked in 3.0 which meant that archers could get +10 to both to hit and damage on their attacks. There was no way for a hand-to-hand fighter to do this. It was easier for a cleric to get to the +5 bonus for greater magic weapon. And then there was Haste. Just looking at this, an archer was much more effective than a two-weapon fighter and they didn't have to get into melee at all. If you take away the crit range "restriction" and the attack of opportunity in melee and add on the higher crit range modifier, the class combination gets to the insane. Most of the above things have been "fixed" in 3.5. But because of this combination, I will no longer allow multiple prestige classes for the same character.
And the benefit of crafting magical arrows is still awesome, because that's the problem with a friend of mine's archer-character. He always ran out of enchanted arrows sooner or later, and he sucks in melee.
So... why not use regular arrows once he ran out?
Seems like a better option. Heck, I'd probably start throwing rocks before my char went melee like that.
-Kurocyn
Maybe I am reading the rules wrong, but -- Bow is 20, improved crit is 19-20, getting keen on top of that doesn't double the 19-20, it "doubles" the 20, which puts us at 18-20.
Actually, the sniper gets keen first, making it 19-20 ( = 2 numbers). Then, it is doubled to 17-20 ( = 4 numbers ).
What, x3 isn't enough? x4 isn't enough? Why did they stop at x5? Why not go to x6, or x10? When you add on strength damage to a bow, multiple attacks seem to be a little easier to come by with bows(and the Haste spell was REALLY broken at the time), the combination of +5 enhancement bonus to the bow and to the arrows for a total of +10, giving a character with a ton of attacks a much higher crit potential really unbalances things.
I don't find the x5 to be too much, due to the +10 enhancement rule now.
Looking at it from a 3.5 view, a x5 multiplier works. Yes, it's a large multiplier, but again, that's the point of the prestiege class. Long range, powerful crits.
No, it's usually pretty anti-climactic.
Maybe if you were going to only have 1 enemy.
I know all the things that I can do to make his world very sad. A few things regarding your suggestions: Multiple targets usually means a lot more work and prep time on my part. Also, it usually doesn't matter when the archer can take out 7 bad guys a round before they get into melee with him. Having a horde of monks feels cheesy as does having rain or flying pigs...
Yeah, it can mean more work... I'll give you that one.
But if you're so worried about him taking out every enemy in the first round, then why not use some un-crit-able monsters?
And why would they have to be monks? Almost any class can develope the same feat tree.
Why would rain be cheesy? Did you ever use weather in your game? It's not like it every encounter has to be out in the sunshine. I'm actually expecting the weather to greatly influence my upcoming campaign, both in and out of combat...
As for tailoring encounters, aren't they all, in some way, tailored for the PCs? Just because you have to try something new or use different tactics for one of the PCs doesn't mean something's wrong.
How would making an encounter harder for a Deepwood Sniper be any different from say... using a monster with spell resistance against a spell-caster PC? Or damage reduction against melee PCs?
Each PC has their own abilites, tactics, and style of play, while you as the DM have to accomodate. If not, then the PC could end up dominating the situation, or become completely useless... making it dull for the player/players.
-Kurocyn
I understand that, but it is hard to picture that when the archer was doing somewhere in the neighborhood of 300+ points of damage a round.
You have to remember, hit point loss doesn't translate into how hurt you are. It means how well you can take a hit. i.e. - Toughness : "you gain 3 hp." It doesn't say you grow an extra layer of skin, or extra organs. You just become a little bit tougher. Able to take more punishment than a normal guy.
Getting blown in half could be any amount of HP damage.
Take farmer Bob, 1st lv. commoner. We'll say he has 6 hp. Bang, a rougue wizard hits him with 2 magic missiles.
We'll say 7 damage. Oh no! He got blown in half.
Now let's take Sir Noble-Knight, 20th lv. Paladin. I don't know the paladin class/it's HD well, but let's say he has what... 300 hp? Does that sound about right?
Bang, same wizard. 2 magic missiles. 8 damage this time. Doesn't even scratch him. This could be due to divine favor, luck, how tough he is, etc...
Now let's say your Deepwood Sniper/Order of the Bow shoots him. Using your earlier statement, twang, 300 damage. Super-crazy crit of doom.
The only thing that happened, there's an arrow sticking out of his forhead.
He didn't get blown in half, just dead...
One thing that is right is the double crit, 20 is 19-20, 19-20 is 17-20, 18-20 becomes 15-20, now if we just had a class that could increase the crit multiplier on a rapier... that would be all kinds of cool.
As for everything else, when I was miss reading rapid fire and many shot, I had a ranger solo a blue dragon for over 200 damage in a round, making the rest of the party feel useless and unneeded, and it was not fun, said character was an Arcane Archer so I am glad he never saw the Deepwood Sniper because once I found the correction about Rapid Fire and Many Shot, his character became more reasonable.
And yes, if enhancement bonuses stacked in 3.0 then it was broken, I didn't know they did so I must have unknowingly house ruled them the same way that 3.5e works now, or I just never had anyone play archers, can't remember.
Assuming one allows the Keen effect to stack with Improved Crit feat, 18-20 would be the correct final threat range for a bow, due to the rules of stacking multipliers (which were the same in 3.0 as they are in 3.5).
A bow's original threat range is 20 only, which is one number. When that number is doubled by keen, it becomes 2 numbers, thus making the range 19-20.
Now, when the Improved Crit feat is applied to the weapon(assuming they're allowed to stack), it increases the threat range by 1 more number (it does not double the new threat range of 19-20, but increases the range by one more unit of the original increment). Thus, the final threat range would be 18-20.
Personally, I think the ease with which this stacking effect could be confused was a primary reason that the designers ruled out stacking Keen and Improved Crit in 3.5.
I am glad that they have banned the keen/improved critical stacking. Every time he hit with a critical, it was as if a bazooka hit the creature. I think that the x5 multiplier was a bit much -- even for a prestige class, but especially one where the requirements are feats and skills that the class would be taking anyway.
I do see your point, and I agree to a certain extent, but a mid- to high-level elf with a bow should be able to put an arrow into the face of his target. One shot, one kill. I'd be careful allowing deepwood sniper, but in certain cases, and in the hands of the right person, the bow and arrow should be frighteningly lethal.
|
|
Maybe I am reading the rules wrong, but -- Bow is 20, improved crit is 19-20, getting keen on top of that doesn't double the 19-20, it "doubles" the 20, which puts us at 18-20.Actually, the sniper gets keen first, making it 19-20 ( = 2 numbers). Then, it is doubled to 17-20 ( = 4 numbers ).
I had to double-check -- but you are wrong. (It's been a while since I looked at the 3.0 Player's.)
From the 3.0 Player's Handbook --
IMPROVED CRITICAL [General]
Choose one type of weapon, such as longsword or greataxe. With that weapon, you know how to hit where it hurts.
Prerequisites: Proficient with weapon, base attack bonus +8 or higher.
Benefit: When using the weapon you selected, your threat range is doubled. For example, a longsword usually threatens a critical on a 19 or 20 (two numbers). If a character using a longsword has Improved Critical (longsword), the threat range becomes 17 through 20 (four numbers).
Note: Keen magic weapons also double their normal, nonmagical threat range. As with all doubled doublings, the result is triple. A magic longsword with a doubled threat range in the hands of a character with Improved Critical (longsword) would have a threat range of 15 through 20 (six numbers: 2 for being a longsword, +2 for being doubled once and +2 for being doubled a second time).
Special: You can gain this feat multiple times. The effects do not stack. Each time you take the feat, it applies to a new weapon.
|
|
I don't find the x5 to be too much, due to the +10 enhancement rule now.
Looking at it from a 3.5 view, a x5 multiplier works. Yes, it's a large multiplier, but again, that's the point of the prestiege class. Long range, powerful crits.
Let's look at it a little different way --
This has a lot to do with the combination of larger crit range and larger crit multiplier.
If the archer has a crit range of 18-20 (which is the correct range) and gets 7 attacks normally (5 attacks base plus two additional with feats) and gets a bonus one due to haste for a total of 8 attacks a round the archer should be expected to connect at least one of the attacks as a critical. (15% chance of a critical -- 1 attack represents 12.5% of your attacks -- trust me, on average this archer should crit at least once a round.)
Usually this archer should expect to hit most every round (barring a natural 1) so assuming that they hit one critical, it is around the equivalent of 12 attacks (7 attacks at normal strength and 1 critical at x5). Combine this with the fact that the bow (longbow) has one of the higher die of damage of any/most weapons and that you get to add your full strength (as much as the bow will allow) on every attack and it becomes an incredibly lethal combination.
Now a number of people have mentioned that they don't think that this is overpowered. Name one other class that allows them to do this kind of damage potential -- at range no less. Even a sudden maximized meteor swarm doesn't have this kind of damage potential. And the archer can do it every round. Even raging frenzied berserkers don't have increases to their crit range or an increase to their crit damage and I have heard of a number of people who ban that prestige class because of the damage potential that they can put out (and they have to get into melee to do it).
I don't know of any other way for any class to increase their damage potential of a critical hit. (Anyone else know of one?)
It is the combination that makes it a bit extreme.
|
|
I am glad that they have banned the keen/improved critical stacking. Every time he hit with a critical, it was as if a bazooka hit the creature. I think that the x5 multiplier was a bit much -- even for a prestige class, but especially one where the requirements are feats and skills that the class would be taking anyway.I do see your point, and I agree to a certain extent, but a mid- to high-level elf with a bow should be able to put an arrow into the face of his target. One shot, one kill. I'd be careful allowing deepwood sniper, but in certain cases, and in the hands of the right person, the bow and arrow should be frighteningly lethal.
Increasing both the crit range and the crit multiplier is a bit much. I think that a better balance might have been to increase the die of damage (from a d8 to a d10, then from a d10 to a d12 or 2d6) instead of the crit multiplier. This would still represent a greater damage potential without the additional multiplication to the enhancement bonus and strength bonus. People who like the class might be disappointed, but I think that it would be much more balanced.
One of my players is headed for this class. I'll let ya'll know how it turns out. After looking it over, the main weaknesses seem to be 1. Spotting distance, and 2. Melee suckage, ESP with the ranger getting d8s for hd now (A mod we made when he said he wanted to use the PRC). Should be interesting.
|
|
Maybe if you were going to only have 1 enemy.No, it's usually pretty anti-climactic.
So, do you normally have 10 ubber bad guys running around with 800 hit points? The fights that lead up to the main bad guy don't matter that much except that the rest of the group is usually standing around wondering why they are there.
I know all the things that I can do to make his world very sad. A few things regarding your suggestions: Multiple targets usually means a lot more work and prep time on my part. Also, it usually doesn't matter when the archer can take out 7 bad guys a round before they get into melee with him. Having a horde of monks feels cheesy as does having rain or flying pigs...Yeah, it can mean more work... I'll give you that one.
But if you're so worried about him taking out every enemy in the first round, then why not use some un-crit-able monsters?
And why would they have to be monks? Almost any class can develope the same feat tree.
Why would rain be cheesy? Did you ever use weather in your game? It's not like it every encounter has to be out in the sunshine. I'm actually expecting the weather to greatly influence my upcoming campaign, both in and out of combat...
As for tailoring encounters, aren't they all, in some way, tailored for the PCs? Just because you have to try something new or use different tactics for one of the PCs doesn't mean something's wrong.
How would making an encounter harder for a Deepwood Sniper be any different from say... using a monster with spell resistance against a spell-caster PC? Or damage reduction against melee PCs?
Each PC has their own abilites, tactics, and style of play, while you as the DM have to accomodate. If not, then the PC could end up dominating the situation, or become completely useless... making it dull for the player/players.
I really feel like you are missing the point. My point is that I would be going out of my way to bring the archer down to scale with the rest of the group. I should not have to do that with any character. Part of the problem is that (as a general rule) if I make an encounter more difficult for the archer, the rest of the melee fighters suffer as well. Anything else feels like I am picking on the archer.
What was happening was that if I targeted the archer, everyone else had a chance to shine. If I didn't target the archer, no one had a chance to shine. No one character should require that much effort to take them down a notch.
I like to have scenarios where each character has their time to shine. Just having the archer in the group made this much more difficult than normal. Every encounter was "tailored" to the archer.
Here is the bottom line -- it was taking away from the enjoyment of the game. Even the person playing the character felt that it was broken and commented on that fact a number of times. He wasn't having fun. The other players weren't having fun. I wasn't having fun. It was time to change things.
Can it be done? Probably. I just felt that there were better and easier ways to enjoy the game. No one had a problem with getting rid of the class -- including the player and moving on to something with a bit more equal footing.
You want to play the character, great. It just feels to me more like you just want to play the class because of the awesome powers rather than taking a look at how balanced it may or not be and looking at the game as a whole.
|
|
You have to remember, hit point loss doesn't translate into how hurt you are. It means how well you can take a hit. i.e. - Toughness : "you gain 3 hp." It doesn't say you grow an extra layer of skin, or extra organs. You just become a little bit tougher. Able to take more punishment than a normal guy.
Getting blown in half could be any amount of HP damage.
Take farmer Bob, 1st lv. commoner. We'll say he has 6 hp. Bang, a rougue wizard hits him with 2 magic missiles.
We'll say 7 damage. Oh no! He got blown in half.
Now let's take Sir Noble-Knight, 20th lv. Paladin. I don't know the paladin class/it's HD well, but let's say he has what... 300 hp? Does that sound about right?
Bang, same wizard. 2 magic missiles. 8 damage this time. Doesn't even scratch him. This could be due to divine favor, luck, how tough he is, etc...
Now let's say your Deepwood Sniper/Order of the Bow shoots him. Using your earlier statement, twang, 300 damage. Super-crazy crit of doom.
The only thing that happened, there's an arrow sticking out of his forhead.
He didn't get blown in half, just dead...
Yes, and no.
This is really a minor argument, but --
Godzilla shrugs off nuclear blasts. It doesn't mean that it wasn't a nuclear blast.
In my opinion, a precision strike from a bow at a very high level should be around 50 to 80 points of damage (4.5 pts die damage from arrow, +4 str, +5 enhancement -- even at x5 that puts us at 67.5 pts of damage from a critical).
I just feel that it has little to do with the recipient, and a whole lot more to do with the source of the damage. That the recipient is tougher and can withstand the damage better is irrelevant.
|
|
One of my players is headed for this class. I'll let ya'll know how it turns out. After looking it over, the main weaknesses seem to be 1. Spotting distance, and 2. Melee suckage, ESP with the ranger getting d8s for hd now (A mod we made when he said he wanted to use the PRC). Should be interesting.
I am curious to see how it turns out.
As I said before, simply the new 3.5 rules have "fixed" a lot of the issues that I had with this class. "Melee suckage" was overcome by my player by the Order of the Bow Initiate -- just be warned in case they wish to take that class as well.
Yeah, I know all about OoBI. My house rule is that once you start a PrC, you CANNOt multiclass into another one until the current one is done. So the PC take shtis one @ 7th, they will not be able to multi class again until 17th or 18th level. Which is a long way away. Prestige classes are suppossed to be PRESTIGIOUS, you know? Once again, if the story dictates, I can be flexible; say you die and get reincarnated as a wolverine. I'm not gonna make you finish bow initiate before you take something more fitting. Plus, they can always go back to level in any of thier base classes.
On the upside, I have only ever had one player who would have tried to min/max like this, and he's grown up a lot. Maturity goes a long way in keeping things un-broken, joo know?
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32
|
I don't know of any other way for any class to increase their damage potential of a critical hit.
Another 3.0 PrC from the Sword and Fist has a critical multiplier enhancing ability: the Weapon Master.
I actually like the Weapon Master PrC and still allow it in my games today (even with 3.5). I also still allow the Deepwood Sniper but I made a few changes:
1) Keen and Improved Crit do not stack. I added Improved Crit to the prereq's for the class, so its already a given. Also, as per 3.5, bow and arrow enhancements do NOT stack.
2) The sniper must actually be SNIPING. The increased critical multiplier is only applicable if the target is flat-footed. (The improved invisibility spell is great for keeping yourself concealed while raining hell on targets.)
3) I increased the range increments slightly, adding an additional 10 ft. increase at 1st level in the PrC.
|
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32
|
I just feel that it has little to do with the recipient, and a whole lot more to do with the source of the damage. That the recipient is tougher and can withstand the damage better is irrelevant.
I'm actually going to disagree with you on this one, Moff. The recipient's toughness is what makes the hit point system remotely plausible. I use the experience and toughness of the recipient to reflect the imperfections of the hit point system all the time, especially when it comes to spells.
Scorching Ray, right? 4d6 damage. Scorching ray will MELT a 1st level Commoner. When you nail a 10th level barbarian with it, though, he twists at just the right moment and it scorches across his arm and shoulder but avoids being completely obliterated by it. Is the 10th level barbarian more resistant to magic than the first level commoner? No, not really. Then, if they're both human and both made of the same biological material, why would the results of the spell be any different? Because of the toughness and experience of the barbarian. He knows how to avoid the worst of an attack.
The same applies to physical damage. If you crit someone with an arrow for 60 damage and that person has 10 hp, that arrow went right through their eye socket. If the person has 200 hp, you buried it in their gut but their armor (or the angle of the attack) prevented it from punching all the way through.
Following the "it has little to do with the recipient, and a whole lot more to do with the source of the damage" notion, if a wizard reduces a horde of 2 HD zombies into smoldering ash with a single fireball... why does the horde of 12 HD zombies make it through the same exact fireball with only superficial burns?
I think we're just going to have to disagree on this one here. To each his own, though.
|
|
Following the "it has little to do with the recipient, and a whole lot more to do with the source of the damage" notion, if a wizard reduces a horde of 2 HD zombies into smoldering ash with a single fireball... why does the horde of 12 HD zombies make it through the same exact fireball with only superficial burns?
I think we're just going to have to disagree on this one here. To each his own, though.
We may end up disagreeing, but let me give it one more try...
I understand what you are saying. I am not talking about how much damage a person can take or where the attack is represented to have hit.
Look at it this way...
A normal non-magical arrow --
4.5 points of damage average normal hit.
13.5 points of damage average critical hit.
A buffed out magical arrow with 18 strength bonus --
13.5 points of damage average normal hit.
67.5 points of damage average x5 critical hit.
What kind of an arrow does 150 points of damage on an average critical hit. I feel that it is no longer an arrow -- it is a bazooka. It has nothing to do with whether or not the person can take it in the arm or what have you -- it is still 150 points of damage from an arrow. When an arrow does almost as much as a maximized meteor swarm, it no longer feels like arrow damage.
But, again, maybe we were meant to disagree on this one...
|
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32
|
A normal non-magical arrow --
4.5 points of damage average normal hit.
13.5 points of damage average critical hit.A buffed out magical arrow with 18 strength bonus --
13.5 points of damage average normal hit.
67.5 points of damage average x5 critical hit.
When you take into account magical bonuses, the damage can be described as a pulse of energy that ripples out from the point of impact, probably making an arrow hole resemble a hit from a shotgun slug. You're absolutely right in this respect. The amount of hit points that a given creature has, in my games, determines whether 60 damage is a 'direct hit' or a 'glancing blow.' Even criticals are not necessarily devastating hits to a creature with vast amounts of HP. It's all in the flavor of the descriptions and its up to each individual DM to describe how the physics of such attacks appear in their games. I'm just offering my take on this one.
As for your 150 damage shot... I'm thinking that you must be talking about 150 damage over the course of your entire full-round attack action. If you can find a way to make a single arrow dish out 150 damage, I'd love to see it (barring an Arcane Archer loading the arrow with a maximized meteor swarm of course).
|
|
As for your 150 damage shot... I'm thinking that you must be talking about 150 damage over the course of your entire full-round attack action. If you can find a way to make a single arrow dish out 150 damage, I'd love to see it (barring an Arcane Archer loading the arrow with a maximized meteor swarm of course).
Again, this was 3.0, but it was mostly the added enhancement bonuses...
+4 str, +10 enhancement, gives you a base for a x5 crit of 70 points of damage. Add to that elemental damage (+1d6 +1d10) from any "burst" type of weapon, 2d6 sneak attack for flat-footed characters (from Order of the Bow Initiate), +1d8 x5 for the arrow damage -- this gives you (on average) 38.5 more. Total 108.5 average points of damage on a critical.
Ok, so it was a bit of an exageration, but my point is still fairly close (and I still think that 67.5 points of damage is a bit much for a critical hit for any weapon except maybe a two-handed weapon). A fighter with a +5 battleaxe and 30 strength does on average 58.5 points of damage on a critical and has fewer attacks
The 300+ points of damage a round was not an exageration. Assuming 1 critical hit a round (easily within the odds) -- a "normal" hit was doing (on average) 29 points of damage. 7 "normal" hits plus 1 crit (with 8 total attacks) gives an average of 311.5 points of damage a round. The up front fighters were typically doing half that on a good round and the wizard was feeling really useless (sudden maximize wasn't out at the time -- I was using meteor swarm as a point of reference -- an "average" meteor swarm should do around 112 points of damage, which is very close to the "average" crit from a bow and the archer has 7 other attacks).
|
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32
|
*lots of very terrifying and yet accurate mathematical analysis*
Wow... yeah, that's unbalanced in the extreme, imo. The only way to trump that would be with 3.0's version of time stop accompanied by chain castings of meteor swarm with a disintegrate or two thrown in for good measure. When all *THAT* hits in the same round... ow.
Thankfully, with 3.5's stance on bow and arrow enhancement bonuses, this problem becomes much more manageable. That plus the fact that I never allow PCs to simply 'purchase' ideal magical equipment for their characters helps me be okay with allowing this PrC to be used in my future campaigns.
|
|
*lots of very terrifying and yet accurate mathematical analysis*
I was a Math Major. Sorry.
Wow... yeah, that's unbalanced in the extreme, imo. The only way to trump that would be with 3.0's version of time stop accompanied by chain castings of meteor swarm with a disintegrate or two thrown in for good measure. When all *THAT* hits in the same round... ow.
Thankfully, with 3.5's stance on bow and arrow enhancement bonuses, this problem becomes much more manageable. That plus the fact that I never allow PCs to simply 'purchase' ideal magical equipment for their characters helps me be okay with allowing this PrC to be used in my future campaigns.
Agreed. 3.5 fixed a LOT of these issues. That and it was a huge learning experience for me. It was difficult, but I was glad I went through it. I still feel that increasing the crit multiplier is a difficult thing to truly measure with balance, with all the things that can be used to modify attacks that also get multiplied with the critical hit. As I said earlier, I think a better balance would be to increase the die of damage from the bow -- that demonstrates better bow accuracy and damage overall with every hit without the criticals becoming explosive.
And I don't allow the PCs to "purchase" ideal magic items either. I didn't think it would be a big deal to hand out a +1 flaming burst longbow as a reward at one point. I didn't anticipate the cleric's Greater Magic Weapon being cast on that and the arrows. In short, it wouldn't have made much difference -- wasn't it like at 16th level, the cleric could get +5 on any weapon? Wasn't the duration 1 hour/level? (It's been so long since I played 3.0.) The archer could have had a non-magical bow and arrows and he still could have gotten the keen property from his class, improved critical from the feat, +2d6 sneak attack from his other class, improved critical multiplier from his class, and +10 enhancement bonus from the cleric for 16 hours. Haste was a spell cast by another character, and the other additional attacks came from feats.
As I said, 3.5 fixed a lot of problems with 3.0 and overall, it was a good learning experience for me.
(That wasn't short, was it?)
|
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32
|
One additional balancing factor might allow the critical multiplier increase but it was only useable once on any given foe who was unaware of the attacker (like a REAL sniper). I would even go so far as to say that any attack made under these circumstances is AUTOMATICALLY critical. Its just that the sniper is only going to get to use that ability ONCE per fight.
A sniper should be able to effectively kill (or at least severely injure) a target who is unaware of the sniper and not expecting the attack. Once the target is on the run and looking out for the next shot, the sniper has lost his edge and can no longer deliver shots with the same punishing power behind them (I would probably still allow the increased range because I don't find that unbalancing and it would be a very unique and handy ability to have).
|
|
One additional balancing factor might allow the critical multiplier increase but it was only useable once on any given foe who was unaware of the attacker (like a REAL sniper). I would even go so far as to say that any attack made under these circumstances is AUTOMATICALLY critical. Its just that the sniper is only going to get to use that ability ONCE per fight.
A sniper should be able to effectively kill (or at least severely injure) a target who is unaware of the sniper and not expecting the attack. Once the target is on the run and looking out for the next shot, the sniper has lost his edge and can no longer deliver shots with the same punishing power behind them (I would probably still allow the increased range because I don't find that unbalancing and it would be a very unique and handy ability to have).
Yes, I can definitely agree with that.
First off, I'm going to apologize. My earlier statement of the threat range was incorrect. (sorry, but I didn't have my Masters of the Wild book with me while posting, and I don't even have a 3.0 PHB)
Second, I've been seeing a pattern in the discussion.
Why does everyone seem to asssume that 3.0 is being used here? I've never even played 3.0...
When I first read MotW and saw the Deepwood Sniper/started playing, it was 3,5.
And despite each post so far, I'm still not seeing why the Deepwood Sniper isn't in 3.5.
Ok, so a math major crunches the numbers, and says it's unbalanced. K. So what? Most, if not all of these calculations are assuming that you're trying everything possible to max out the archer.
I don't play the Deepwood Sniper like that... I haven't devoted time to figuring out how much damage I could do on average in a round while firing as many arrows as I can, with spells in use that my char can't cast, using a strength bonus that my char has never had, and using a magically enhanced bow with magical arrows that I'd personally rather not waste gold on... That would be power-gaming, which I find both boring and a waste of time.
I play the Deepwood Sniper because I've always been a fan of archery. And as I said earlier, the point of archery, IMO, is range, thus the sniper prestiege class.
And when I play, my char usually doesn't fire any more than one or two arrows per round, if that. Most rounds being spent adjusting positions and aiming to get the most out of the fewest number of shots.
And not to start another debate, but I'm not seeing the comparison of the archer to a berzerker as valid here... Mainly due to the much wider weapon selection for the berzerker.
-Kurocyn
One additional balancing factor might allow the critical multiplier increase but it was only useable once on any given foe who was unaware of the attacker (like a REAL sniper). I would even go so far as to say that any attack made under these circumstances is AUTOMATICALLY critical. Its just that the sniper is only going to get to use that ability ONCE per fight.
A sniper should be able to effectively kill (or at least severely injure) a target who is unaware of the sniper and not expecting the attack. Once the target is on the run and looking out for the next shot, the sniper has lost his edge and can no longer deliver shots with the same punishing power behind them...
Well said. But I wouldn't limit the "auto-crit/enhanced crit" to just once per fight. Just give it strict, but appropriate limitations. i.e. - target is helpless, or fails spot check to notice the sniper taking aim. (Said check should be optional for the target each round, provided they take time to look or have the ability to do so.)
Once engaged in combat, a target isn't going to be able to keep an eye on the sniper the entire time. He may know the sniper is out there, but if the target is distracted (melee, trap, etc...), can't see him, or otherwise react as well as he could normally, then the sniper should get at least some of his edge back.
...I would probably still allow the increased range because I don't find that unbalancing and it would be a very unique and handy ability to have.
I couldn't agree more.
-Kurocyn
|
|
And despite each post so far, I'm still not seeing why the Deepwood Sniper isn't in 3.5.
Putting it as simply as I can -- most likely because of the critical hit multiplier. I don't believe that there is another 3.5 class or 3.5 feat out there that increases the multiplier of any weapon. It is simply too difficult to maintain a balance with this kind of an enhancement.
Ok, so a math major crunches the numbers, and says it's unbalanced. K. So what? Most, if not all of these calculations are assuming that you're trying everything possible to max out the archer.
You asked for people's opinions and experiences with the prestige class. I have given that -- along with the inherent potential problems with the associated class (and the math to back it up :-)). If you disagree with me -- fine. Play the class. You asked, I answered. Regardless, you should still ask yourself why there isn't any way in 3.5 to increase the critical hit multiplier.
But what happened to the Deepwood Sniper?
Our grueling game of cat and mouse lasted over 56 hours in the dark depths of the jungle, but finally, I ended him with an arrow through his right eye. Best sniper I ever faced, but just a hearbeat slower than me. The memory gives me the chills.
Anyway...that's it...that's what happened to the Deepwood Sniper.
Huzzah, well played sir!!!
Regardless, you should still ask yourself why there isn't any way in 3.5 to increase the critical hit multiplier.
A ranger's favored enemy bonus applies to crits. Though not a multiplier, it still increases the damage dealt for the crit. Unbalanced?
And just because there's no other way to do it, shouldn't mean that it's unfair or unbalanced in any way. If a char could get the same benifits from items or spells, then why have the prestige classes in the first place?
"Yay! I got a bow/scroll of sniping! Now I have the abilities of the Deepwood Sniper without even having to multiclass!"
That, would be unbalanced.
-Kurocyn
|
|
A ranger's favored enemy bonus applies to crits. Though not a multiplier, it still increases the damage dealt for the crit. Unbalanced?
And just because there's no other way to do it, shouldn't mean that it's unfair or unbalanced in any way. If a char could get the same benifits from items or spells, then why have the prestige classes in the first place?
"Yay! I got a bow/scroll of sniping! Now I have the abilities of the Deepwood Sniper without even having to multiclass!"
That, would be unbalanced.
-Kurocyn
You are not listening.
Actually, the Ranger's favored enemy bonus compounds the problem -- it doesn't justify it. There are things that increase a critical hit by a fixed number of dice. There are things out there that add a fixed number to damage (ranger's ability). There are things out there that improve the crit range of a weapon. But there is NOTHING that improves the critical multiplier in 3.5. Not feats, not spells, not magic items, not even ANY prestige classes. There are far too many variables to consider when thinking about increasing the MULTIPLIER. Die damage, sneak attack damage, strength damage, enhancement bonus damage, element damage, alignment damage, ranger damage, point blank shot damage, other spells like prayer and/or divine favor, change in size, etc. Many of these types of damage are also multiplied with a critical hit. It is very difficult to maintain a balance when dealing with a multiplier when you have to also account for all the possible ways a person can damage a foe (mathematically, but you don't really care to see the math involved).
Your argument is a little amusing. You are saying that basically, because the ability comes from a prestige class (from 3.0) and not from a spell it is automatically balanced. You are not giving a reason why it is balanced. You are not giving me any other classes as comparison for why it is balanced. All you are saying is that it is balanced BECAUSE it doesn't exist anywhere else.
Ultimately, you are not looking for advice on this prestige class. You are not even looking for ways that it is balanced or unbalanced. It is almost as if you are looking for permission to play the class. I have already said -- play the class. Maybe the critical hit multiplier won't be an issue for you and your group. If you don't listen to anything else, listen to this -- play the game and have fun. Very little else truly matters.
You are not listening.
Actually, the Ranger's favored enemy bonus compounds the problem -- it doesn't justify it. There are things that increase a critical hit by a fixed number of dice. There are things out there that add a fixed number to damage (ranger's ability). There are things out there that improve the crit range of a weapon. But there is NOTHING that improves the critical multiplier in 3.5. Not feats, not spells, not magic items, not even ANY prestige classes. There are far too many variables to consider when thinking about increasing the MULTIPLIER. Die damage, sneak attack damage, strength damage, enhancement bonus damage, element damage, alignment damage, ranger damage, point blank shot damage, other spells like prayer and/or divine favor, change in size, etc. Many of these types of damage are also multiplied with a critical hit. It is very difficult to maintain a balance when dealing with a multiplier when you have to also account for all the possible ways a person can damage a foe (mathematically, but you don't really care to see the math involved).
You're right, I don't really care about the math. Because I don't feel calculations are a valid argument here. But you're too worried about figuring out the five million different ways to increase the damage and having to deal with a player who might actually try and use them. Have you even thought about how much effort it would take to do so? Not to mention how obvious it would be what they're trying to do?
Like I said, powergaming. I don't do it, and I won't allow it in my games. But it seems that you would allow it just because there's a formula to back it up that works within the rules.
Your argument is a little amusing. You are saying that basically, because the ability comes from a prestige class (from 3.0) and not from a spell it is automatically balanced. You are not giving a reason why it is balanced. You are not giving me any other classes as comparison for why it is balanced. All you are saying is that it is balanced BECAUSE it doesn't exist anywhere else.
Where did I say that? I don't see in my post where I said that anything was "automatically balanced." What I DID say, however, was that other ways of getting said class abilities(or any class abilities for that matter) would be unbalanced. Not that a being a unique prestige class makes it balanced...
Ultimately, you are not looking for advice on this prestige class. You are not even looking for ways that it is balanced or unbalanced. It is almost as if you are looking for permission to play the class. I have already said -- play the class. Maybe the critical hit multiplier won't be an issue for you and your group. If you don't listen to anything else, listen to this -- play the game and have fun. Very little else truly matters.
You say that I'm not listening, but did you even read my first post? I wasn't asking for advice on the class. I simply wanted to know why the class isn't in 3.5. But, from the constant stream of over-analyzed and unnecessary mathmatics, it would seem the crit multiplier is why. I for one, don't agree; but, thank you just the same.
As for asking permission to play the class... That's just ignorant. Seriously. Do you really think I care if you don't like the class or think it's unbalanced?
Yes, I am going to play it. It's my favorite class, both fun for me to play and a good addition to a party, despite the math. Maybe one day the class with be "updated," so that even you'd tolerate the equations behind it...
-Kurocyn
Kurocyn, I don't understand why you are being defensive towards Moff Rimmer. In my post on Oct 28th I stated the reason there is not a 3.5 deepwood sniper is the critical multiplier. It was not that you were not listening as was put forward, you were not willing to believe that is the case because you do not agree. Since you argued in favor of the increased multiplier others argued against the fact.
You say that you don't like the math put forward but sometimes to recognize if a feat or PC is unbalanced it must be evaluated. Since math is involved in every fight(AC, attack, etc) it does play a part in evaluating classes. Ask yourself why thieves do not receive a damage multiplier on backstabs? Because the team that created 3.0 as well as the multitude of playtesters realized it would not be balanced. The same situation applies to the changes from 3.0 to 3.5 with the deepwood sniper.
Game balance has 0% to do with how you run your campaign. It is put forward by the game designers to ensure each character has an equal chance to shine and thus each player enjoys the game. Also they need the CR system to be as effective as possible (it is difficult enough already)
Moff Rimmer did nothing more than try to convince you of the logic behind the omission of the deepwood sniper.
My being defensive is due to the excess of redundant math posted here. Yes, I know that the game revolves around math, but I don't think that all math should be calculated as if a player was trying to max out. Yes, I know that Moff Rimmer was trying to convince me, but when one keeps pressing a subject to which I do not agree, using the same examples, one just comes across as irritating.
As I said multiple times, I don't feel the multiplier is unbalanced with the 3.5 rules. Why press the matter? If that is the only reason, then leave it at that.
I am clearly arguing for the underdog here, due to the Deepwood Sniper not being in 3.5. That's obvious. But am I really the only one who thinks that a highly skilled archer should have such a benifit?
As for back stabs and the like, sure, I'll agree with that. But, I'd like to point out that sneak attacks get progressivly more powerful, whereas an archer's attack usually doesn't. Yes, there are ways, but there are also many limitations.
-Kurocyn