| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I see lots of complaints (well, not as many as I see on other subjects, but still a good number) about how impossibly quick Pathfinder archers are. Up until about ten minutes ago, I was in agreement that it was probably completely unrealistic. However, a few minutes ago I found this video on wins.failblog.org and it rather changed my mind.
Assuming that the real world doesn't get past level 5 and this girl seems relatively young, she can't be much more than 3rd level or so. Yet, on her first salvo, she fires off four arrows in six seconds. She maintains this speed through the whole video, even doing so while moving side to side. At first, I thought she was just firing blindly at a wall, then the camera angle moves behind her and, sure enough, she is putting them in a relatively small area (less than 5 feet wide, or one square on a battle mat) with consistency.
And, as this is the first instance of speed archery I've ever seen, I'm sure there are other, much better speed archers out there.
Just food for though.
That's not a composite longbow, however. It doesn't have a heavy enough draw. She's also not firing at moving targets or multiple targets from 100 feet. It doesn't prove Pathfinder archery realistic.
Don't get me wrong. I don't have a problem with Pathfinder archery. This is fantasy, after all. I just don't bear the impression that I could do any of that stuff in real life, just like how I don't actually believe I can throw lightning bolts at people who make me mad.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Lets see, you have monks outrunning eagles, halfling fighters that can wrestle 20 ton dragons to the ground, Blacksmiths that are so good they can make a shield that flies without ever learning magic, people swimming up waterfalls wearing full plate, fighters that can jump out of planes hit the ground, get up and jog back to the dragon emporium that dropped them off...
I'm amazed people can even NOTICE the archer in all that. Must be epic level spot checks... or people not liking a useful martial technique.
My only real beef is that Pathfinder/D&D swordsman are incredibly slow compared to Archers in the same game.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Whatever it may or may not imply about PFRPG archery, the video is awesome. It amused me that the way her hair hangs over her ear at the beginning makes it look as though she has pointed ears.
There is a youtube video out there of a guy shooting a bow from horseback mongol soldier style. He was hitting a man sized target while riding at speed with about a one arrow per second rate of fire.
No, it wasn't a compound bow, but neither are most Pathfinder bows.
That's not a composite longbow, however. It doesn't have a heavy enough draw. She's also not firing at moving targets or multiple targets from 100 feet. It doesn't prove Pathfinder archery realistic.
Don't get me wrong. I don't have a problem with Pathfinder archery. This is fantasy, after all. I just don't bear the impression that I could do any of that stuff in real life, just like how I don't actually believe I can throw lightning bolts at people who make me mad.
Well, she's also like a seventeen year old girl, so I shouldn't expect her to be pulling 100 pound draws. I do offer this video which I found while looking through the related videos. Apparently 3 arrows as a standard action is also possible. *shrug*
I know that it doesn't need to be realistic to be included with the unrealism. I just like that it's more realistic than I thought previously. It's cool and I thought I'd share.
Nice video. Yea, thats a realy low draw bow, maybe as low as 10-15lbs. Thats still going to require alot of muscle memory to do with any degree accuracy, and that means practice/practice/practice. I wish that I had the time to get THAT good at something. Don't take that the wrong way, my recurve is only 35# and I'm alot bigger then her, I can't shoot anywhere close to that fast and smooth.
I've seen a world champion revolver shooter fire so fast it sounds like an automatic weapon (and still have all the rounds hit a man sized target), so I know that its possible for people to do things that seem impossible to most.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Shooting a bow four times in six seconds with accuracy is no stretch for actual human beings. For fantasy martial experts who have to compete with fireball tossing spellcasters, it's downright tame.
Historically the limit on an archers rate of fire was ammo conservation. The unrealistic thing in Pathfinder is the rate of fire of fire arms and Xbows.
This however is necessary to have some game balance. The main advantage these weapons had over (well equipped) archers was that it took years to train a good archer and weeks a Xbowman/handgunner.
Also unless using a longbow or a composite bow armour penetration was less good then a Xbow. But few roleplaying characters are going to use a non composite shortbow.
As a “game” pathfinder has to err on the side on balance/fun/playability rather than blindly follow historical accuracy.
Shooting a bow four times in six seconds with accuracy is no stretch for actual human beings.
Sure, that part is realistic. But can you hit a moving target or moving targets under combat conditions with these tactics? That's where things start to fall apart, especially with a composite bow, which pretty much every Pathfinder archer gets eventually, as those things have a massive draw.
Again, I don't have a problem with being able to do so in game. I don't particularly want realistic combat in Pathfinder. It wouldn't be any fun. I just don't think Pathfinder style archery would work IRL.
Shooting a bow four times in six seconds with accuracy is no stretch for actual human beings.Sure, that part is realistic. But can you hit a moving target or moving targets under combat conditions with these tactics? That's where things start to fall apart, especially with a composite bow, which pretty much every Pathfinder archer gets eventually, as those things have a massive draw.
Again, I don't have a problem with being able to do so in game. I don't particularly want realistic combat in Pathfinder. It wouldn't be any fun. I just don't think Pathfinder style archery would work IRL.
Kelsey, did you read the part where I described the guy using mongol mounted archery techniques to hit a man-sized target from the back of a moving horse?
Yes, YES a thousand times YES archers can do this in combat, and hitting a moving target is all about learning to lead a target.
Yes. They can. And did.
This is one reason that the English longbow ended the reign of knights.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Shooting a bow four times in six seconds with accuracy is no stretch for actual human beings.Sure, that part is realistic. But can you hit a moving target or moving targets under combat conditions with these tactics? That's where things start to fall apart, especially with a composite bow, which pretty much every Pathfinder archer gets eventually, as those things have a massive draw.
Again, I don't have a problem with being able to do so in game. I don't particularly want realistic combat in Pathfinder. It wouldn't be any fun. I just don't think Pathfinder style archery would work IRL.
Kelsey, did you read the part where I described the guy using mongol mounted archery techniques to hit a man-sized target from the back of a moving horse?
Yes, YES a thousand times YES archers can do this in combat, and hitting a moving target is all about learning to lead a target.
Yes. They can. And did.
This is one reason that the English longbow ended the reign of knights.
Did you read the part where I said "under combat conditions"? Doing something on the range and doing it on the battlefield are two very different things.
As for the English longbow, it was not responsible for the end of the reign of knights, combination pike/crossbow and pike/firearm formations and changing socio-economic conditions were. The only people who used the longbow en masse were the English and Scandinavians. That wasn't widespread enough use to end the knights. Plus, longbowmen did not generally aim at specific people, they aimed at entire formations.
My only real beef is that Pathfinder/D&D swordsman are incredibly slow compared to Archers in the same game.
Hmmm...
Rapid Slash, a combat feat that is exactly Rapid Shot but for 1-handed weapon users? With offhand free?
My only real beef is that Pathfinder/D&D swordsman are incredibly slow compared to Archers in the same game.
This, the best swordsmen are more fast than strong.
My only real beef is that Pathfinder/D&D swordsman are incredibly slow compared to Archers in the same game.Hmmm...
Rapid Slash, a combat feat that is exactly Rapid Shot but for 1-handed weapon users? With offhand free?
That's a good idea.
I'm going to put out there that realism went out the window when the we could become an elf and that happens on page 22 of the core rulebook. I would say dwarf, but dwarves are real, just not in the same style as in the book.
Actually Don't ability scores come first which have some completly inhuman starting scores no matter what race. Or is 20 still within real-world human reach?
Yes, ability scores did come first, but there are things out there (lots of things in fact) that have stats better than a human on a non-subjective level. Which is why those are okay. Like a fighter jet, way stronger, tougher, and faster than any human could ever hope to be in real life.
My only real beef is that Pathfinder/D&D swordsman are incredibly slow compared to Archers in the same game.
Why do you care how many times they swing their swords mechanically?
My only real beef is that Pathfinder/D&D swordsman are incredibly slow compared to Archers in the same game.Why do you care how many times they swing their swords mechanically?
Ion's talking about reaction time and movement speed. Swordsmen get almost as many if not more attacks than archers get, but they tend to react slower, and they tend to wear heavier armor, which slows their movement rate down a bit.
Ion's talking about reaction time and movement speed. Swordsmen get almost as many if not more attacks than archers get, but they tend to react slower, and they tend to wear heavier armor, which slows their movement rate down a bit.My only real beef is that Pathfinder/D&D swordsman are incredibly slow compared to Archers in the same game.Why do you care how many times they swing their swords mechanically?
Who cares though how many attacks they get mechanically?
Who cares though how many attacks they get mechanically?Ion's talking about reaction time and movement speed. Swordsmen get almost as many if not more attacks than archers get, but they tend to react slower, and they tend to wear heavier armor, which slows their movement rate down a bit.My only real beef is that Pathfinder/D&D swordsman are incredibly slow compared to Archers in the same game.Why do you care how many times they swing their swords mechanically?
... That's not what makes the swordsmen slow, stop talking about attacks/round.
... That's not what makes the swordsmen slow, stop talking about attacks/round.Who cares though how many attacks they get mechanically?Ion's talking about reaction time and movement speed. Swordsmen get almost as many if not more attacks than archers get, but they tend to react slower, and they tend to wear heavier armor, which slows their movement rate down a bit.My only real beef is that Pathfinder/D&D swordsman are incredibly slow compared to Archers in the same game.Why do you care how many times they swing their swords mechanically?
Actually in game that is what makes swordsman slow. A fighter can be just as fast movement and reaction wise as an archer. I'm not saying they will always beat them mechanically however they can match them.
Actually in game that is what makes swordsman slow. A fighter can be just as fast movement and reaction wise as an archer. I'm not saying they will always beat them mechanically however they can match them.
Two-weapon fighting, bam! Same number of attacks as an archer. Improved Two-weapon fighting, bam! More attacks than an archer. Etc.
No, they really can't, because of the way the game works, a player is not likely to have an even dex and strength, and only the fighter is going to be running around very quickly in heavy armor, every other weapon-use (aside from archer naturally) is going to be slower, if they take the best armor for them. Unless they use multiple work-arounds, which most of that can't be used until higher levels, due to the way finances work for adventurers.
If we're going to talk about weak builds then fine. I can make a dervish dancing fighter. BAM At lvl 7 I can ignore movement speed reduction from heavy armor. BAM Sohei monk archer has more attacks. BAM
If we're going to talk about weak builds then fine. I can make a dervish dancing fighter. BAM At lvl 7 I can ignore movement speed reduction from heavy armor. BAM Sohei monk archer has more attacks. BAM
Weak builds? What part of Paladin is a weak build? Yet they still ALWAYS take armor penalties to movement. Unless you've managed to make a suit of mithral celestial fullplate or you simply wear a weaker suit of armor. The latter is far more likely to get a pass than the former.
Escrima (?) knife fighters I have seen at tourneys move blindingly fast. One had a two bladed 'kata' that left about 30 cuts in a old jacket in about a second. To be fair, he pointed out that slashes like he was doing would barely penetrate any real protective army.
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
Clearly the girl in that video has some kind of PrC that lets her shoot with Cha.
If we're going to talk about weak builds then fine. I can make a dervish dancing fighter. BAM At lvl 7 I can ignore movement speed reduction from heavy armor. BAM Sohei monk archer has more attacks. BAMWeak builds? What part of Paladin is a weak build? Yet they still ALWAYS take armor penalties to movement. Unless you've managed to make a suit of mithral celestial fullplate or you simply wear a weaker suit of armor. The latter is far more likely to get a pass than the former.
Yes TWF is weak. A fighter can ignore the armor movement penalty completely at level 7. Who cares if the paladin can't maintain high amounts of movement. the barbarian can, the fighter can, the magus can, the monk can, and the inquisitor can, the bard can, the EK can, etc. What's your point?
My only real beef is that Pathfinder/D&D swordsman are incredibly slow compared to Archers in the same game.
I tend to interpret that as the amount of openings you get in the course of a single combat round, the fact is you are making a lot of feints and parrys but your attacks are the only times you actually have a clear shot.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Realistically, if you put a two handed sword into someone you're only getting the one attack in 6 seconds unless you behead them or something, otherwise you're going to be prying that sucker out of their spine or getting it unstuck from their ribs.
Yes TWF is weak. A fighter can ignore the armor movement penalty completely at level 7. Who cares if the paladin can't maintain high amounts of movement. the barbarian can, the fighter can, the magus can, the monk can, and the inquisitor can, the bard can, the EK can, etc. What's your point?If we're going to talk about weak builds then fine. I can make a dervish dancing fighter. BAM At lvl 7 I can ignore movement speed reduction from heavy armor. BAM Sohei monk archer has more attacks. BAMWeak builds? What part of Paladin is a weak build? Yet they still ALWAYS take armor penalties to movement. Unless you've managed to make a suit of mithral celestial fullplate or you simply wear a weaker suit of armor. The latter is far more likely to get a pass than the former.
Two-weapon fighting is weak for most, but a paladin can totally TWF like a champion. When using two-weapon feint, it's the easiest way for a rogue (or ninja for that matter) to consistently get sneak attack without having to rely on their allies, and it gives them a better chance to hit most targets, meaning that TWF is not a waste for them. The Barbarian gets normal movement, the Magus, EK, and Bard need to cast a spell to get that kind of movement, so they can't do it all the time, the Monk can't even wear armor, and the Inquisitor needs to take a specific domain (which may not fit into the player's vision of the character) to do it.
The point is that the archer is still faster, because he can take all of those advantages, and he's still faster than all of them. He's still probably going first and he's still outrunning all of them if he took the same options, because he's not being slowed down by armor.
The point is that archers are simply faster in almost every way. What you aren't getting is that I'm not talking about the archetypes, I'm talking about taking the classes available, and building them around using a bow. Unless all of their stat numbers are the same (important stats anyway) the archer is faster than non-archers 100% of the time.
Realistically, if you put a two handed sword into someone you're only getting the one attack in 6 seconds unless you behead them or something, otherwise you're going to be prying that sucker out of their spine or getting it unstuck from their ribs.
Unless you don't hit them that well. Hit points represent more than just actually stabbing someone, which is part of the reason I like Hero System more, where Body=damage you can take before dying.
* Archers shoot an amazing amount of times in a round
* Well... realistically it's possible
* Not if you consider aiming and movement
* Well it is a game of fantasy
* Swordsman are slow compared to archers in the same game
* Well... realistically a sword can be swung more than 4 times in 6 seconds
* Well... realistically it also includes parrying and connecting
**(Totally ignores the fact of that's what AC represents)
**(If sword fighting takes in account multiple actions, are archers taking additional shots, waiting to get clear shots, etc?)
**(Such an abstraction not take into account unarmed, unarmored, unaware opponents)
* Well... Damage is an abstraction...
**(An arrow does a d6 or d8 per arrow, a dagger does a d4 for getting past a dodge, a parry, and connecting all in the same turn)
* Swordsman need to wear heavy armor, which apparently slows them down (which is kind of silly for the frontline warriors) unless they have special abilities. Although realistically armor doesn't slow one down like that (Many sources point to it being a myth).
But maybe I'm just imagining this subtle bias against swordsman.
It would only be a bias if the swordsman couldn't hit harder than an archer every swing, which is downright mysterious, because they normally can't.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
That's not a composite longbow, however. It doesn't have a heavy enough draw.
Your right. It is a 14 year old girl with a str of about 7 or 8 using a low pound-pull bow. The exact kind of girl NO ONE WOULD PLAY AS A RPG CHARACTER ARCHER/ADVENTURER.
She has the same SKILLS the character archer uses but she lacks the HEROIC Str and dexterity that average PC's bring to bear. Oh and PC's get magic weapons which can defy the laws of real world physics by hitting hard but being easier to pull at the same exact time, for example.
So, no, the real world little girl cannot pull back that compound bow. But my 16 Strength Hobgoblin sure as hell can and he has the same skills that girl does. PLUS he has learned to pull two arrows at once and fire them, like in the other videos. AND his bow is magic. AND he has gloves that boost his already superhuman hand eye coordination and speed EVEN HIGHER.
There is 0 reason why archers cannot fire as fast as they do in Pathfinder besides individuals not being able to let go of preconceptions as to what degree of the fantastic the 'mudane weapons users' are allowed to get to.
The point is that archers are simply faster in almost every way. What you aren't getting is that I'm not talking about the archetypes, I'm talking about taking the classes available, and building them around using a bow. Unless all of their stat numbers are the same (important stats anyway) the archer is faster than non-archers 100% of the time..I think I'm missing something here you seem to be saying that unless you have the same character a dedicated archer is going to be faster than a non-dedicated one which seems rather obvious. If they have different stats they'll have different abilities and if I build my Magi around spells + sword I'd expect a trained archer to be faster with a bow.
He's not just faster with a bow, he's faster in basically every way. Higher dex+lighter armor=faster in basically every way.
I think everyone is forgetting that attacks/round are defined as those attacks within the period of 6 seconds which are 'telling', and do not include the semi-feints, probes and position switching which goes on in melee.
As far as ranged is concerned, waiting for the perfect angle etc. is less important than hitting in many cases so the comparative speed issue is not significantly valid....
My only real beef is that Pathfinder/D&D swordsman are incredibly slow compared to Archers in the same game.
Quite right. I really like the video above, I've sent it around too, I more counted three in a dnd round, not four. Some come off quicker though.
She shoots about an arrow every two seconds, give or take a little. How many cuts or stabs can a swordsman or spear-user make in such a time? I've seen fencers pull off parries and multiple attacks in a few seconds. Leap attack and in fight in that time. With spear or staff you can stab and bash in a really short time.
A friend took me archery shooting, an old dm, and yes, he did indeed say, give this a go, and it might provoke some thought for your gaming. It sure has. In mount and blade, a good game for simulating medieval combat with no magic, archers do rock, but up close, you can cut 2-3 times in the time it takes to loose an arrow. Draw, cut, knock, cut, shoot.
Some people object, but I've always gone Attack of opportunity for bowmen trying to shoot an up close attacker. If they have combat reflexes, it is a good day to fight archers.
Dnd does have good rules on movement and attacks though, that moving really prevents what you can get down. But, as the vid above shows, she moved back and forth nice and calm, and kept shooting just as fast. In a frightening situation of ranged and melee, there would be more mistakes. Some games do the closing in on bowmen better than others. In something like shogun 2, they don't do so well when you get in. They are caught loading, have to get their swords out, have already been charged, its a mess.
That's not a composite longbow, however. It doesn't have a heavy enough draw.Your right. It is a 14 year old girl with a str of about 7 or 8 using a low pound-pull bow. The exact kind of girl NO ONE WOULD PLAY AS A RPG CHARACTER ARCHER/ADVENTURER.
She has the same SKILLS the character archer uses but she lacks the HEROIC Str and dexterity that average PC's bring to bear. Oh and PC's get magic weapons which can defy the laws of real world physics by hitting hard but being easier to pull at the same exact time, for example.
So, no, the real world little girl cannot pull back that compound bow. But my 16 Strength Hobgoblin sure as hell can and he has the same skills that girl does. PLUS he has learned to pull two arrows at once and fire them, like in the other videos. AND his bow is magic. AND he has gloves that boost his already superhuman hand eye coordination and speed EVEN HIGHER.
There is 0 reason why archers cannot fire as fast as they do in Pathfinder besides individuals not being able to let go of preconceptions as to what degree of the fantastic the 'mudane weapons users' are allowed to get to.
Approve the hobgoblin build bro. Like their stealth bonus.
Realistically, if you put a two handed sword into someone you're only getting the one attack in 6 seconds unless you behead them or something, otherwise you're going to be prying that sucker out of their spine or getting it unstuck from their ribs.
"That's a nice head you have on your shoulders!" Warband quote
Well the Talhoffer material shows two handers being used at times like staves to deliver tricky little blows to compliment chops. Possible to get some off without getting stuck, it isn't as bad as the Polish pick going through and getting stuck almost all the time.
That video does show the girl shooting fast and accurately but put a dozen people in between her and the target all moving whirling weapons and and at different distances other than 15 to 20 feet with some of them shooting back or attacking her with swords and spears and the story changes.
Which is why she is a LITTLE GIRL and not an adventurer. Give her an 18 dex, 14 con, 16 str and combat training to live in a world with monsters and dragons and such and the story changes again.
That video shows what is possible in the real word. Those skills did not just *poof* into existance in the minutes before the video was shot. They have been passed down from the past to the present because they were USED.
That's not a composite longbow, however. It doesn't have a heavy enough draw.Your right. It is a 14 year old girl with a str of about 7 or 8 using a low pound-pull bow. The exact kind of girl NO ONE WOULD PLAY AS A RPG CHARACTER ARCHER/ADVENTURER.
I never said anyone would. I was pointing out that the specific archer in this specific video does not prove anything.
She has the same SKILLS the character archer uses but she lacks the HEROIC Str and dexterity that average PC's bring to bear. Oh and PC's get magic weapons which can defy the laws of real world physics by hitting hard but being easier to pull at the same exact time, for example.
Exactly. HEROIC stats and MAGIC items. Guess what IRL people do not have?
So, no, the real world little girl cannot pull back that compound bow. But my 16 Strength Hobgoblin sure as hell can and he has the same skills that girl does. PLUS he has learned to pull two arrows at once and fire them, like in the other videos. AND his bow is magic. AND he has gloves that boost his already superhuman hand eye coordination and speed EVEN HIGHER.
Exactly. MAGIC. ITEMS. The second you add those, things are no longer realistic.
There is 0 reason why archers cannot fire as fast as they do in Pathfinder besides individuals not being able to let go of preconceptions as to what degree of the fantastic the 'mudane weapons users' are allowed to get to.
I never said that they cannot fire as fast as Pathfinder archers, I said that the archer in the video was not doing Pathfinder style archery and therefore that the video did not prove anything about Pathfinder archery. Plus, there is the issue of what battlefield conditions do to accuracy. You may be able to fire six shots a second and hit what you aim at on the range, but in the field? I doubt it's going to happen. Battlefield conditions are not range conditions. I doubt you'd get off more than one or two well aimed shots in 6 seconds during an actual battle. You could fire off six with enough training, but I doubt you'd hit much. In Pathfinder? Sure. It's fantasy, and mundanes shouldn't be limited to IRL possibilities. I specifically said so.