| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Wasn't there a youtube video with a guy shooting off a lot of arrows really quick?
Which brings us to today's second lesson: Don't tell your players "Your character can't do that because it's physically impossible even if the game allows it!" only to later be forced to eat crow by Youtube. Save yourself the face, and stop worrying about it so much.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Second, here is a video of a girl quick shooting. It gives you an idea of how it might be done.
[Hearts in eyes]
That's pretty stimulating. Must learn Russian.
Manyshot, rapid shot, sanp shot and combat reflexes. 5 regular attacks, and with dex 22) 6 attacks of oportunityThe level 20 fighter is badass. No explanation necessary.well, a 6 level figther can shot 10-11 arrows in less than a 6 seconds, and level 6 is far from unreacheable or extraordinayCome again?
Level 6 fighter - 2 attacks a round
Many Shot - 3 attacks a round
Rapid Shot - 4 attacks a round
Haste - 5 attacks a roundI don't see 10-11. Not sure how archers get AoO but I'm no expert there - but assuming it IS possible maybe he's pulling a legolas and stabbing them with the arrows.
Thats under magical influence. By level 6 we are looking heroic fantasy - ie Legolas or Crow from Hawk the Slayer.
Your build doesn't work because you need BAB +6 as a prerequisite for both Manyshot and Snap Shot.
Also, I don't know what game you're playing, but a Dex of 22 is not feasible for 6th level. No player would ever take it because it would require that you dump too many ability scores for it to work. An archer is also going to want a decent Strength for a Composite Bow and maybe a good Intellect if they feel like going for Focused Shots. Not to mention that, as an Archer, Snapshot only lets you provoke AoO within 5 feet of yourself, and since you're ranged, most enemies are not going to provoke all 6 of your AoOs in a single round anyway.
So yeah, you have a very high maximum potential, but it's a maximum potential that is almost never going to be realized.
Finally, all good games are designed with fluff supporting the cold-hard mechanics, as other people have said. This isn't something that you should be using your time nitpicking, in my personal opinion, because you're always going to find something in the game that isn't realistic.
I am profoundly amazed by the fact that someone has a problem with 13 or even 20 arrows in 6s and no problem whatsoever with Time Stop - Gate - Gate - Prismatic Sphere because that "is magic" while the former is "mundane".
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I am profoundly amazed by the fact that someone has a problem with 13 or even 20 arrows in 6s and no problem whatsoever with Time Stop - Gate - Gate - Prismatic Sphere because that "is magic" while the former is "mundane".
Congratz, you just discovered the heart of "Fighters Can't Have Nice Things" idea. :)
I am profoundly amazed by the fact that someone has a problem with 13 or even 20 arrows in 6s and no problem whatsoever with Time Stop - Gate - Gate - Prismatic Sphere because that "is magic" while the former is "mundane".
Ever heard of "Fighters / Melee classes can't have nice things" ? This is just a perfect example of the mindset.
Edit: Didn't see your post there until I had made mine, Gorbacz. Nice timing :D
I guess I'm going to go in a different direction with all of this.
I don't see level progression as "reality" to "superhero" so much as from "wide-eyed farmkid" to "experienced super veteran with so much stuff on his plate (family, allegiences, followers and swag) that most people retire gracefully and become institutions unto themselves" because awesome as they are it's easier than to forge on with all the aching bones and greying hair. Life takes it's toll heaviest on the most successful folks. I mean Aroden became a god and what's the very next thing he did? Retire and set up Absolom. I like this arc of experience so much I even came up with a nifty rubric for how many xp per day will get an average adventurer from young novice to venerable veteran. I really dig it. A lot of people don't. They like the idea of "heroes" as substantially different from "regular folk" and that people whoosh through levels and hit epic level in months. I mean that's how the XP system runs for the APs. I dunno. Different strokes.
Generally if I run into weird results from the rules, which overall I find to be pretty slick and elegant--I just change them so they feel better. No big deal. If somebody superbuilt their 20th level character to be a super arrow machine gunner, we'd probably have a talk. It wouldn't be about mechanically what you can or can't do with what feats, or about what stacks or even what's game balanced. It'd be about this guy and how as he went through his thirty-odd year career adventuring, what feats he'd actually pick up, and how unlikely it would be that he'd even be thinking with the kind of premeditation that a build like this one requires. I just like things to make sense.
I'd say this: Story trumps everything. If what you get from the mechanics doesn't satisfy you, or makes your story feel somehow you don't want--change the heck out of it with a big freakin' hammer. In the end its about you and your friends having a story you can all sit back and enjoy retelling over the years. Do what you need to do to get there.
PS. As regards fighters not getting nice things, I dunno. I think people get what's reasonable for what they are. People who call upon gods get divine intervention. People who study magic get magic. People who jump off cliffs onto the backs of dragons and stab them with swords get heroic glory. Personally I think we tell more glory stories about cool stuff fighter guys do than about the guy who tossed that really cool spell that one time. That said, your milage may vary.
I am profoundly amazed by the fact that someone has a problem with 13 or even 20 arrows in 6s and no problem whatsoever with Time Stop - Gate - Gate - Prismatic Sphere because that "is magic" while the former is "mundane".Congratz, you just discovered the heart of "Fighters Can't Have Nice Things" idea. :)
Or as I now call it ROMVORD
Rules As My View Of Reality Dictate
If somebody superbuilt their 20th level character to be a super arrow machine gunner, we'd probably have a talk. It wouldn't be about mechanically what you can or can't do with what feats, or about what stacks or what's game balanced--it'd be about as this guy went through his thirty-odd year career what feats do you think he'd actually pick up, and would he even be thinking with the kind of premeditation that a build like that requires.
Is that your place as DM to decide?
Or is it instead your player's place to decide how his character grows?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Is that your place as DM to decide?
Or is it instead your player's place to decide how his character grows?
I think anytime a question about anything comes up, it's time to talk about it. Not me decide and him submit. Just really talk it through. But in my case I tend to prefer to talk it through as history rather than from the game balance, mechanical end. The end goal isn't for me to be right and him be wrong. The hope is to flesh things out in a cool way that gives us both a clearer and cooler idea about who this guy is and what he's been through. And honestly if that ends up with him being able to fire off bunches of arrows but with a freaking fantastic new backstory, I'll be a lot happier than with him mechanically weaker but bland.
But I guess to answer your questions...no and no. It's a fun opportunity to talk things over and work things out together--jam session style. Nobody just decides.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Is that your place as DM to decide?
Or is it instead your player's place to decide how his character grows?
I think anytime a question about anything comes up, it's time to talk about it. Not me decide and him submit. Just really talk it through. But in my case I tend to prefer to talk it through as history rather than from the game balance, mechanical end. The end goal isn't for me to be right and him be wrong. The hope is to flesh things out in a cool way that gives us both a clearer and cooler idea about who this guy is and what he's been through. And honestly if that ends up with him being able to fire off bunches of arrows but with a freaking fantastic new backstory, I'll be a lot happier than with him mechanically weaker but bland.
But I guess to answer your questions...no and no. It's a fun opportunity to talk things over and work things out together--jam session style. Nobody just decides.
Then that is very different from the way I handle my players' characters. My control of the game extends right up to the person of the PCs, but no further. As DM, I get to control the world, the NPCs, the progression of the story, and everything else external to their character.
In return, I respect that their character is their character, and that they have far more right to insist that their character would do something a particular way than I have to insist the same.
Similarly, if I were playing an archer character and decided to pick up feats that allowed me to shoot a lot of arrows, I would be very off-put if the DM took me aside and asked "Is that really something your character would do?" It's my character. I'm the only person fit to decide what my character would do. A DM trying to question that sends up a red flag that the DM isn't happy having absolute control over the entire game world, and also needs to have a level of control over how the players interact with the game in order to feel satisfied - in my experience, an unpleasant trait.
|
actually i'm a little disappointed that no one tried to beat 13 arrows in a round
note, this build isn't meant to be viable
human
1 Fighter1 Point Blank Shot, Rapid Shot, Precise Shot
2 Vivisectionist1
3 Vivisectionist2 Discovery: Vestigial Arm, Extra Discovery: Vestigial Arm
4 Fighter2 Two Weapon Fighting
5 Fighter3 Weapon Focus (long bow)
6 Fighter4 Weapon Specialization (long bow)
7 Fighter5 Many Shot
8 Fighter6 Snap Shot
9 Fighter7 Improved TWFing
10Fighter8 Combat Reflexes
11Fighter9 Greater Weapon Focus
12Fighter10 Greater TWFing
13Fighter11 Improved Snap Shot
14Fighter12 Greater Weapon Specialization(long bow)
15Fighter13 Greater blah blah we got it all
16Fighter14
17Fighter15
18Fighter16
19Fighter17
20Fighter18
so at 20th we have
haste, many shot, rapid shot, 4 attacks from bab and 3 from TWF, 10 attacks with a full round, assuming the same stats for the first post that's 6 AoOs, 8 if the dex mutagen is up,
so 18 arrows in a round, although the to hit will be screwed with a total of -5 on all attacks(-2 rapid shot, -4 TWFing without a light weapon in the offhand, +1 haste)
Similarly, if I were playing an archer character and decided to pick up feats that allowed me to shoot a lot of arrows, I would be very off-put if the DM took me aside and asked "Is that really something your character would do?" It's my character. I'm the only person fit to decide what my character would do. A DM trying to question that sends up a red flag that the DM isn't happy having absolute control over the entire game world, and also needs to have a level of control over how the players interact with the game in order to feel...
Y'know, truth be told, if you were in my group and we did talk it over and you started feeling like it was a touchy subject, I'd drop it and play around it. Again, the big thing for me is trying to have a good experience as a group. The hope would be to work through things and fit things into a good story. My track record with my group is good enough that generally the characters we tinker with tend to feel pretty cool once they've come out of a tune-up. Really the only consequence of not wanting that (other than maybe some of the other players eye-rolling you when you do something really gonzo) is that your guy maybe ends up feeling out of synch with the rest of the setting, the lone Drizzt in a world full of grizzled normal folks.
Y'know, truth be told, if you were in my group and we did talk it over and you started feeling like it was a touchy subject, I'd drop it and play around it. Again, the big thing for me is trying to have a good experience as a group. The hope would be to work through things and fit things into a good story. My track record with my group is good enough that generally the characters we tinker with tend to feel pretty cool once they've come out of a tune-up. Really the only consequence of not wanting that (other than maybe some of the other players eye-rolling you when you do something really gonzo) is that your guy maybe ends up feeling out of synch with the rest of the setting, the lone Drizzt in a world full of grizzled normal folks.
I'm on Scott's side with this, to be honest. You haven't said it straight, but I'm getting the kind of vibe here that you don't trust your players enough to let them have the freedom that I think the players are entitled to. Consider this. I would let the players be free to handle their concepts and such, punishing stupid behaviour and rewarding for good roleplaying respectively. What I will assume now is that you don't want to ever get to that punishment part, so you go around it by taking some of that freedom away altogether. I understand the intention, but that does NOT mean I agree with such a decision.
Extraordinary Abilities: These abilities cannot be disrupted in combat, as spells can, and they generally do not provoke attacks of opportunity. Effects or areas that negate or disrupt magic have no effect on extraordinary abilities. They are not subject to dispelling, and they function normally in an antimagic field. Indeed, extraordinary abilities do not qualify as magical, though they may break the laws of physics.
;)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Again, the big thing for me is trying to have a good experience as a group.You haven't said it straight, but I'm getting the kind of vibe here that you don't trust your players enough to let them have the freedom that I think the players are entitled to.
I think it is a little weird that Grimcleaver is being condemned for having mature conversations about game balance with PCs in his group. Mike Mearls actually has a lot to say on the subject in the new State of D&D: Future article, where he maintains that we've entered what he calls the "second era of RPG decadence," where all the power has shifted from the GM to the player. When a GM loses control of the environment for the sake of allowing players to do whatever the heck they want, consequences to the enjoyment of others be damned, then there is something wrong. I can't think of a more healthy, mature remedy than addressing such problems directly with PCs at the table.
I've suffered my share of archer abuse. In a 2-year Greyhawk campaign back in the 3.5 days, I had a knife-throwing halfling rogue that picked some 3PP feats that not only allowed him to use Combat Reflexes at range, but also another feat that allowed all AoOs to be sneak attacks. Next level, the party's arcane archer took the first feat, too, and suddenly the two of them are laying waste to everything, with about a dozen or more AoOs between them. They dominated everything, and the other PCs at the table began to resent it.
I addressed the situation with the story's primary antagonists calling in shadar-kai mercenaries. With their concealment miss chance, it effectively shut down the AoO scheme, and suddenly the ranged-weapon players were crying foul at the crippling of the abilities that were theirs, by right as players, to choose for their characters.
Now, I'm not sure who is right or who is wrong in this scenario from the viewpoint of this thread. Seems Scott might approve of my environmental reaction since that falls within GM control. But at the same time, I eventually took Grimcleaver's approach after a couple of sessions of this "arms race" between GM and PCs, and after a pre-game conversation, the PCs traded in those feats for the sake of the enjoyment of all.
And I'm pretty sure there's nothing wrong with that. =-)
If you start at level 1 and grow your character in game, that isn't "back story". That's just part of the game. An adventurer is expected to specialize in his field.
On the other hand, if you are starting out at higher levels, the character's back story should be something like: I'm fricking Beowulf. Or Aragorn. Or Conan.
If you want a game where characters are limited by mundane limits, stop leveling around 6.
@Brandon - if a feat or power is broken or poorly worded, it should be taken off the menu. But you shouldn't have options that are only available if you tell the GM an amusing anecdote.
Honestly, while I personally don't agree with Grimcleavers though process behind character creation, I do absolutely respect the fact that he sits down with his players and talks as adults to resolve issues that he sees, and is willing to back off if its a big deal to his players.
That speaks to me highly of a good DM.
As is commonly attributed to Voltaire: I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.
Every game is different, and he's a mature adult about it. Something rarely seen on these boards when arguements come up. Bravo. Seriously.
I try to skew my perceptions of what can and can't be done in-game from actual reality to movie reality. Most of what gets done in action movies is physically impossible, or at least highly improbable, but a good movie manages enough suspension of disbelief to pull off some amazing stuff. So, if I can see someone of exceptional skill accomplishing something in a movie in ultra-cool, heroic fashion, then it works in-game with the same effect.
As DM, I get to control the world, the NPCs, the progression of the story, and everything else external to their character.
I agree. I have even made similar quotes before. With that said nobody knows a character better than the creator of that character, and for me as a GM to say "Is that would your character would do?" is no different than one of my arch villains doing something(mechanically), and the player asking me the same question about the villain I created. I would not appreciate it, no matter what side of the board I was on.
I also agree with Weables about the fact that he(Grimcleaver) does not just pull the "I am the GM" card.
actually i'm a little disappointed that no one tried to beat 13 arrows in a round
note, this build isn't meant to be viable
human
1 Fighter1 Point Blank Shot, Rapid Shot, Precise Shot
2 Vivisectionist1
3 Vivisectionist2 Discovery: Vestigial Arm, Extra Discovery: Vestigial Arm
4 Fighter2 Two Weapon Fighting
5 Fighter3 Weapon Focus (long bow)
6 Fighter4 Weapon Specialization (long bow)
7 Fighter5 Many Shot
8 Fighter6 Snap Shot
9 Fighter7 Improved TWFing
10Fighter8 Combat Reflexes
11Fighter9 Greater Weapon Focus
12Fighter10 Greater TWFing
13Fighter11 Improved Snap Shot
14Fighter12 Greater Weapon Specialization(long bow)
15Fighter13 Greater blah blah we got it all
16Fighter14
17Fighter15
18Fighter16
19Fighter17
20Fighter18so at 20th we have
haste, many shot, rapid shot, 4 attacks from bab and 3 from TWF, 10 attacks with a full round, assuming the same stats for the first post that's 6 AoOs, 8 if the dex mutagen is up,so 18 arrows in a round, although the to hit will be screwed with a total of -5 on all attacks(-2 rapid shot, -4 TWFing without a light weapon in the offhand, +1 haste)
I can beat that just by playing a summoner with a lot of arms and hand crossbows.
I can beat that just by playing a summoner with a lot of arms and hand crossbows.
How are you going to reload the crossbow? It takes two hands to do so even for the light and hand crossbow.
I also agree with Weables about the fact that he(Grimcleaver) does not just pull the "I am the GM" card.
This ^^
And I am pretty sure Brandon misunderstood me.
How are you going to reload the crossbow? It takes two hands to do so even for the light and hand crossbow.
I can beat that just by playing a summoner with a lot of arms and hand crossbows.
The challenge wasn't about multiple rounds.
And I am pretty sure Brandon misunderstood me.
Yeah, probably, but that's OK! =-)
My views on GM interaction in character development still stand.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Screw shooting 13 arrows.
Screw shooting 13 arrows.
I saw this before. It was amazing.
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Another thread like this. Yay. *yawn*
It's a freaking fantasy game about avatars of our imagination doing heroic things at a level reality cannot hope to emulate. It's why we play, to recreate the legends of our past and our literary favorites.
Insisting on reality in a fantasy game is absolutely ludicrous. Seriously, there are other systems that try to emulate the mundane, D&D and its derivatives have never been those games.
Meh.
For me as a GM to say "Is that would your character would do?" is no different than one of my arch villains doing something(mechanically), and the player asking me the same question about the villain I created. I would not appreciate it, no matter what side of the board I was on.
Yeah, I'm totally on the other side here too. Really often in games I've had players call me on "Hey, waitaminute...why's he reacting this way. In our plan, we really figured he'd respond this other way, which seems to make more sense" or especially "Hey how's this guy even know we're doing what we're doing let alone be able to respond so quickly."
It's nice to have the players check on me so I remember to know what the NPCs know and do what they'd do, not do what I'd do as DM, knowing what I know. It's hard to keep perfect track of everything and the game always looks a lot different from my side of the screen. There's been a lot of times where that reaction has knocked me back a step, seeing how their plan is set to work, and has led to really some much more fun results where the PC's actually do get the drop on guys I figured would be much tougher nuts to crack and has led to quite a few really awesome glory stories. I try to get the player's side of what's going on and weave that into the story as often as I can.
Oh and thanks for the praise folks, I do my best.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Another thread like this. Yay. *yawn*
It's a freaking fantasy game about avatars of our imagination doing heroic things at a level reality cannot hope to emulate. It's why we play, to recreate the legends of our past and our literary favorites.
Insisting on reality in a fantasy game is absolutely ludicrous. Seriously, there are other systems that try to emulate the mundane, D&D and its derivatives have never been those games.
Meh.
When did this become the gold standard for everyone who plays D&D? Seriously, I happen to really like the game as I play it--with a fair amount of meaty realism to it. For me that makes the game more fun. Presumably the same for the OP. Please do not lame-bad-no-fun on my game style. There's lots of different ways to love our favorite hobby, man. Live and let live.
That said, if the target you're shooting for in your gaming is "literary favorites", I think maybe we agree more than it seems. I don't know many books that celebrate tree-chopping on monsters with too many hitpoints or weird game mechanics that derail the action of the story for balance or abstraction reasons. If what you're after is novel style two fisted fantasy action, then that's what I love and go after.
|
|
Another thread like this. Yay. *yawn*
It's a freaking fantasy game about avatars of our imagination doing heroic things at a level reality cannot hope to emulate. It's why we play, to recreate the legends of our past and our literary favorites.
Insisting on reality in a fantasy game is absolutely ludicrous. Seriously, there are other systems that try to emulate the mundane, D&D and its derivatives have never been those games.
Meh.
When did this become the gold standard for everyone who plays D&D? Seriously, I happen to really like the game as I play it--with a fair amount of meaty realism to it. For me that makes the game more fun. Presumably the same for the OP. Please do not lame-bad-no-fun on my game style. There's lots of different ways to love our favorite hobby, man. Live and let live.
That said, if the target you're shooting for in your gaming is "literary favorites", I think maybe we agree more than it seems. I don't know many books that celebrate tree-chopping on monsters with too many hitpoints or weird game mechanics that derail the action of the story for balance or abstraction reasons. If what you're after is novel style two fisted fantasy action, then that's what I love and go after.
"Meaty realism"? So, one arrow can kill your high level characters (Richard the Lionheart, King Harold), there are no wizards, dragons, elves, etc? What "realism" are you talking about? You're not talking about "realism", you're describing "fighters have to suck because in real life 'x' can't happen, but, you know, wizards aren't restrained by that".
This is what I got from the OP, and based on his body of posts here. It isn't a "badwrongfun" thing, it's more of a "are you sure this game's mechanics do what you want, and, if not, why are you a) playing it, or b) not houseruling it to be what you want and not whining about it here?".
Just sayin'.
|
|
That is less than a second to take the arrow, to put it in the bow, to pintpoint the target and to shot. and a level 20 figther can do it.
So, how fast his hands have to move?
And let suppose his targets are spread out, let say 6 targets in 360 arc degree, how fast he have to rotate to do that?
and let he provoke atacks of opportunity, and all hit, how is that the attacks do not interrupt the shooting?
And let suppose his attackers also provoke, and the archer have, snap shot, impproved snap shot and combat reflexes, so he can strike back at all of they, that will be 7 arrows from regular attacks, and 6 arrows form attacks of opportunity, and all in 6 seconds!!
how can it be?
Simple. Heroic fiction is not bound by real world physics or realism.
That is less than a second to take the arrow, to put it in the bow, to pintpoint the target and to shot. and a level 20 figther can do it.
So, how fast his hands have to move?
And let suppose his targets are spread out, let say 6 targets in 360 arc degree, how fast he have to rotate to do that?
and let he provoke atacks of opportunity, and all hit, how is that the attacks do not interrupt the shooting?
And let suppose his attackers also provoke, and the archer have, snap shot, impproved snap shot and combat reflexes, so he can strike back at all of they, that will be 7 arrows from regular attacks, and 6 arrows form attacks of opportunity, and all in 6 seconds!!
how can it be?
Your archer has 36 dex.
36 is beyond anything any animal has. Look in the bestiary - what has 36 dex?You are crying foul that a superhuman can do superhuman things.
36 dex is like ... spiderman on 20 redbulls.
I am all for limiting fights to realism, as long as you do the same with wizards and everyone else.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I am all for limiting fights to realism, as long as you do the same with wizards and everyone else.So, they can only pull rabbits out of their hats and stuff? Right on!
No, but they can amaze you by showing you your card. :)
Your archer has 36 dex.
36 is beyond anything any animal has. Look in the bestiary - what has 36 dex?
You are crying foul that a superhuman can do superhuman things.
36 dex is like ... spiderman on 20 redbulls.
The metaphorical crack squirrel on speed then given a gallon of redbull.
Or as we call it: Monday night.
I am all for limiting fights to realism, as long as you do the same with wizards and everyone else.So, they can only pull rabbits out of their hats and stuff? Right on!
Yep. You should not hold classes to a realistic mindset, but a mythic one.