|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
ok ravingdork, i understand you dont want to continue our conversation. im just going to correct one mistake you have about archers.
"A line of sight is the same as a Line of Effect but with the additional restriction that that it is blocked by fog, darkness, and other factors that limit normal sight (such as Concealment)."
line of sight requires that you be able to SEE your target. a blind melee character with scent, blind sight, blind sense, tremor sense dragon sense ect... can still be effective in combat. albit difficult, they still can deal damage or provide assistance in flanking.
now an archer with any extra sensory detection abilities, will not be able to shoot at anything without the aid of improved precise shot or seeking. that effectivly means that they are WORTHLESS in a situation where sight is hindered, while using a bow.
Good that you can identify some problems with new feats and the SR negation of alc bombs.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
To touch on the original question (Is the weapon ability too powerful?)
No, I don't think it is. In fact, as far as power is concerned, I think the magic ability is totally fair.
What I do think it does, however, is make the Composite rules absolutely unnecessary, which is a direction we've ALWAYS been told that Paizo will never (willingly) go. (ie: If monks can't have an item that's better suited for them than the Amulet of Mighty Fists, then why are archers suddenly getting a magic item ability that 100% outclasses Core Rulebook options? It's a total double-standard.)
To touch on the original question (Is the weapon ability too powerful?)
No, I don't think it is. In fact, as far as power is concerned, I think the magic ability is totally fair.What I do think it does, however, is make the Composite rules absolutely unnecessary, which is a direction we've ALWAYS been told that Paizo will never (willingly) go. (ie: If monks can't have an item that's better suited for them than the Amulet of Mighty Fists, then why are archers suddenly getting a magic item ability that 100% outclasses Core Rulebook options? It's a total double-standard.)
Well your logic is flawed for one.
An item that was better then an Amulet of Might Fist would replace the need of buying an Amulet of Might Fist.
This enchant doesn't do that with a Composite Long Bow. You still have to buy the bow. You are modifying an existing item... not replacing or making it unnecessary.
Adding Keen to a Short Sword doesn't make it unnecessary. Adding a martial weapon that had the same stats as a Short Sword but with a better crit range would. The same can be said for this enchant.
Neo2151: The problem is using the rules, weapons cannot have non-magical physical properties upgraded. Have a favorite +3 sword and want to make it adamantine? Tough, buy a new sword and sell the old one.
My group has houseruled (by vote) an upgrade to the spell Masterwork Transformation in order to solve this problem (Spend the money, cast the spell, upgrade the weapon).
While this bow property is not the same as my group's houserule it does solve part of that problem for bows. I see this as a useful element rather than a power element.
- Gauss
|
|
but the difference between what you are talking about dragonamedrake and neo2151, is that if i buy a composite bow at first level, under normal circumstances i would have to buy a new bow (enchantments included) every time i increased my strength. this removes that from the game.
basically hes saying that is a massive negative for archers, but a balancing one. now they get rid of that necessity for archers, but they wont change AOMF or make AOMF better for monks? they said they wouldnt change things in the CRB because of compatability(in refrence to the AOMF not the composite issue).
so in conclusion they make archers "better" by changing a core feature of bows,the need to buy new ones every time you increase str if you want to keep it the best possible, but they refused to do that for monks after YEARS of QQ threads.
i think thats what he was saying
but the difference between what you are talking about dragonamedrake and neo2151, is that if i buy a composite bow at first level, under normal circumstances i would have to buy a new bow (enchantments included) every time i increased my strength. this removes that from the game.
basically hes saying that is a massive negative for archers, but a balancing one. now they get rid of that necessity for archers, but they wont change AOMF or make AOMF better for monks? they said they wouldnt change things in the CRB because of compatability(in refrence to the AOMF not the composite issue).
so in conclusion they make archers "better" by changing a core feature of bows,the need to buy new ones every time you increase str if you want to keep it the best possible, but they refused to do that for monks after YEARS of QQ threads.
i think thats what he was saying
And while I am in the same camp on Monks (they need help), I can understand the design decision to not release items that make earlier core items useless. An enchant or item that ENHANCED the AOMF would be fine. You would still need to purchase the core item.
The problem with Composite Long bows is another matter. If you got hit with a Str loss you lost proficiency in your weapon and took negatives to use. If you gained a Str bonus (magic item, bulls strength, inherent bonus) it did nothing for you. The fact dedicated archers had to carry several bows to defeat this (Barbarians are a great example) was an unintended consequence.
This is a simple fix that doesn't take away the usefulness of a core item. You simply don't have to carry around more then one or replace it every time you get a new Str.
mr. greatsword (and it is hilarious that it's always a greatsword)
I, personally, prefer Greataxes, but that's beside the point.
The best counter to an archer is another archer.
The archers at the GM's control will be just as powerful as the ones under player control (sometimes even more powerful) and will just as easily wreck the day of a player archer as much as a player archer wrecks the day of the GM's enemies.
In one of my campaigns, we have a player who plays a sniper gunslinger that has a fun habit of completely destroying enemies he faces. So what did the GM do? Monk enemies with high touch AC and enemy gunslingers.
Is that a cheap tactic? Not at all. It's the GM's job to challenge the players, and if they're not being challenges, the GM isn't doing his job (or just doing it poorly).
My bottom-line point is that, with this enchant in the game, no player will ever spend money on a Composite bow again. They'll just get a regular bow and enchant it with this enchantment. (Or if the base bow has to be composite, you'll never make it higher than a +1 composite, because any strength rating higher than that is just wasting gold.)
Harrison makes a good point. The most hassle the party of now 14th I Gm to, which has two awesome archers, is alwys when the baddies start firing back
for a start masses of archers is a great way to knock down the might that is mirror-image
And while I am in the same camp on Monks (they need help), I can understand the design decision to not release items that make earlier core items useless. An enchant or item that ENHANCED the AOMF would be fine. You would still need to purchase the core item.
But the AoMF is NOT useless. My current Viv. Alchemist with feral mutagen loves his! As have countless druids.
It only is useless for the monk. Giving the monk a fairer option won't make the AOMF useless.
Neo2151: And?
Lets reason this out:
What is reasonably the highest strength a dedicated archer can aspire to? Starting strength of 15 +6enhancement +5insight = 26 (+8)
So lets price that out:
A +1enhancement +1strength adaptive property composite longbow costs 3700gp.
A +1enhancement +8strength composite longbow costs 3200gp.
So, we are paying 500gp for the ability to occassionally use LESS than our own strength without an attack penalty and for us to benefit from strength without having to sell our bow in order to upgrade (something most people agree sucks and should not have to happen).
I think that is a reasonable cost. BTW, the 500gp is the 'best case' price. Earlier in life it would have a bigger cost difference.
Note: I have yet to get the book (argh!) so have not seen this property for myself. Any errors in this line of reasoning are due to that. For all I know it requires a composite longbow with a +0strength bonus (which would drop the difference by 400 at the higher end).
- Gauss
Price has never been the issue. Making Core rules obsolete is the issue. (Edit - At least for my argument anyway.)
Price has never been the issue. Making Core rules obsolete is the issue. (Edit - At least for my argument anyway.)
Monk is in the core rules.
Price has never been the issue. Making Core rules obsolete is the issue. (Edit - At least for my argument anyway.)
It doesn't make anything obsolete! Good Lord. You still have to buy the bow. Having to buy fewer bows doesn't make it obsolete.
I don't understand how this is an issue. Archer's are now having to pay for an enhancement (taking away from other enhancements (+5, +2 holy, +1 seeking, +1 merciful, +1 distance)), just to have their higher STR come through.... not a big deal. The 2-hander is still going to have his 1.5 Str bonus (or even 2x with the other feat that works with PA.
-----------------
Now I really can't wait for UE to see what else archers get. besides hushing arrow, special materials, 2nd chance enh., and others.
Grizzly: The enhancement is a flat GP enhancement rather than a +1 enhancement. As a result it does not factor into the rest.
Note: my information is based on second hand knowledge. I do not yet have Ultimate Equipment.
- Gauss
Did not know that, again the PDF and books are delayed so I'm only making that statement based on what others have mentioned.
Just checked, it's 1000 gp bonus. Awesome.
Grizzly: I am frustrated I don't have my PDF either. ARGH!!! :)
- Gauss
2 bows now I guess for me to carry, my normal one, and then the 2nd chance, adaptive, holy, merciful, seeking, distance, +1 enh. = +10 total. Bow....then have magic weapon greater casted to get the enh. Bonus higher. Using any arrow I need, it will be THE bow for monks to use, since they are more likely to miss than a fighter or ranger archer.
If I get rid of 2nd chance, I can out that towards the enh. For a +5, with everything else. AWESOME!
|
So the real request here is "Show me a Sword-and-Board or Two-Weapon Fighter who does as well as an archer build in combat?" They don't. Two-Weapon Fighting is sadly under-powered, especially if you're focusing only on the CRB since the Two-Weapon Warrior archetype from the APG comes closest to correcting these issues. A Sword and Board is either defense focused and not competing as a damage dealer, or bumps into the same issues as the TWF(i.e. limited attack/movement options). So many people compare the THF and archery builds, because those are the builds that are expected to do damage. Archery does it by pumping out twice as many attacks, THF does it by cranking out twice as much damage per hit. Mounted Combat builds are equally capable of dishing out huge damage (hello lance while attacking from a charging mount), but people don't reference them as often because a) everyone immediately counters with the "but you can't bring your horse everywhere" argument, even though most situations that preclude a mount also mean the archer is taking at least soft cover negatives to hit, and b) the answer to having a mount you can take everywhere is to play a halfling mounted warrior, and no one wants to be the first guy to make that suggestion.I am frankly amazed that you could miss the point of Cheapys post so utterly and entirely. He makes a huge and legitimate rant about the topic how archers were amazing out of the core rulebook and people bring up special builds from a variety of sourcebooks to counter that argument, and you come up with something about two-weapon fighting and sword&board? Unreal.
I think perhaps you're the one lacking in reading comprehension. Cheapy's challenge was for someone to create a character, using only the Core Rulebook, who was balanced in power to an archer, and wasn't a THF. My rejoinder was that, of all the fighting styles available, the reason THF always gets compared to archery is because those are the builds that have comparative ease of creation/damage potential vectors. Using the Core Rulebook alone, Sword and Board, Two-Weapon Fighting, and Mounted Combat are pretty much the only other non-spell caster options. Two Weapon Fighting, as I mentioned, is underpowered using only the tools available in the Core Rulebook, Sword and Board is a defensive build, and Mounted Combat is either the strongest or weakest build depending on who's posting at the time. That's why I rejoined to Cheapy as I did, because his challenge essentially boiled down to those options. Which anyone with a 4th grade reading level probably understood.
..soooo, what's this I hear about an endless ammunition enh. or item or something? I assume it uses abundant ammunition as its base spell, but is it the same, or is there room to use both, like seeking and improved precise shot overlap for concealment.
..soooo, what's this I hear about an endless ammunition enh. or item or something? I assume it uses abundant ammunition as its base spell, but is it the same, or is there room to use both, like seeking and improved precise shot overlap for concealment.
The endless ammunition enchantment (+2 mod) allows your bow or crossbow to shoot an unlimited supply of mundane arrows from nothing. Arrows/bolts generated in this fashion vanish if removed from the device and are always destroyed when fired, even on a miss.
You can still nock and use magical arrows as well.
Archers are getting better.
Take the Endless Ammunition weapon enchantment for example. Put that on a bow along with ammo/weapon enhancements such as flaming, frost, holy, and your bow will be generating flaming, frost, holy shots forever (sans ammo).
You'll practically never need to buy magic ammo again since the bow creates AND enchants the ammo for you.
2 bows now I guess for me to carry, my normal one, and then the 2nd chance, adaptive, holy, merciful, seeking, distance, +1 enh. = +10 total. Bow....then have magic weapon greater casted to get the enh. Bonus higher. Using any arrow I need, it will be THE bow for monks to use, since they are more likely to miss than a fighter or ranger archer.
If I get rid of 2nd chance, I can out that towards the enh. For a +5, with everything else. AWESOME!
Keep in mind that Paizo has updated the rules and +10 total Enhancement bonuses is all you can have on a weapon, including other enhancements via devices or spells.
In other words, you're going to stick that oil/spell of Greater Mighty Weapon on your +10 bow, and nothing is going to happen.
==Aelryinth
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Archers are getting better.
Take the Endless Ammunition weapon enchantment for example. Put that on a bow along with ammo/weapon enhancements such as flaming, frost, holy, and your bow will be generating flaming, frost, holy shots forever (sans ammo).
You'll practically never need to buy magic ammo again since the bow creates AND enchants the ammo for you.
Seriously? This is a big problem for game balance? The same archer can just use free actions to nock normal arrows and gain the same benefit, and has been able to do that since the game began. The vast majority of GMs have long ago stopped tracking ammo use anyway, so "endless ammunition" is probably not even needed in most games. Abundant ammunition is really just an enchantment that allows GMs to ignore ammunition without being accused of being too easy on the players. That's about all it does.
I don't think endless ammunition is broken at all.
Never said it was. It simply eliminates the need to buy +1 flaming frost shock arrows over and over again.
Mechanically it is a minor benefit, but conceptually, it's pretty damn cool. People have been wanting a bow that generates magical arrows for years. Now they have it.
Quiver of Andariel in 3.5 has been around for years. Variants of it can make magic and off-metal arrows, too. I don't remember what the version Drizzt uses makes off the top of my head.
Oh, yeah, and the Force Bow made it's own arrows, too. Clearly based off Hank's bow from the cartoon.
Actually, going way back to 1E, there was an awesome Bazaar of the Bizarre Dragon Magazine article on bows in FR, and one of the bows made it's own phantom arrows, which was kicking cool at the time. I think some of them were reprinted in the first Pages of the Magister...
==Aelryinth
Never said it was. It simply eliminates the need to buy +1 flaming frost shock arrows over and over again.
Mechanically it is a minor benefit, but conceptually, it's pretty damn cool. People have been wanting a bow that generates magical arrows for years. Now they have it.
Actually you still need to buy those extra arrows. Say your bow only does fire damage but you need cold....well guess your sol...unless you thought ahead and bought some icy burst arrows as well.
|
|
There is a zen archer monk in the campaign I'm co-GMing right now (Skull and Shackles), and he is very VERY powerful, but I'm not going to call him OVERpowered. The only ability that he has that I'll probably disallow after this campaign is the Clustered Shot feat. I'm just not comfortable with almost completely nullifying damage reduction for an archer every time they get a full attack action on a single target.
<br /><br />
Between Clustered Shot allowing archers to largely ignore DR and an alchemist's bombs being supernatural instead of spell like (thus avoiding SR), golems have become the laughing stock of the Pathfinder Bestiary in our campaigns.
I'm surprised that your Zen Archer made you feel like Clustered Shots was OP, since of all the archery classes he's the one who least needs it since his arrows can use his UAS for damage. Zen Archer is a tricky one to reference when talking about archers in general, since he gets capabilities that most archers have to dedicate their feats to as class abilities.
Not that they're necessarily better or worse, but they're very different from almost any other archer.
..soooo, what's this I hear about an endless ammunition enh. or item or something? I assume it uses abundant ammunition as its base spell, but is it the same, or is there room to use both, like seeking and improved precise shot overlap for concealment.The endless ammunition enchantment (+2 mod) allows your bow or crossbow to shoot an unlimited supply of mundane arrows from nothing. Arrows/bolts generated in this fashion vanish if removed from the device and are always destroyed when fired, even on a miss.
You can still nock and use magical arrows as well.
In that case is rather have abundant ammunition out on my efficient quiver, since I can now have the specif arrow I shot the round orbits, instead of a mundane arrow. in my mind, the spell is better than the enh.
Couldn't you just make a custom magical quiver, based on the spell abundant ammunition?
If my calculations are correct, it would cost 8000 gp to get a magical container that would copy any non-magical ammunition (including masterwork and paper cartridges).
That should prove a whole lot cheaper than a +2 enchantment.
Edit: the +2 enhancement cost, at minimum, 17000 gp (18000 for the minimum +3 enchantment -1000 for the +1 enchantment that both can use)
Only if your GM agrees to it. Of course, when he compares it to the weapon property, he may not price it to your satisfaction... :)
Only if your GM agrees to it. Of course, when he compares it to the weapon property, he may not price it to your satisfaction... :)
Well, obviously, with it being some 9000 gp cheaper than the enhancement's minimum cost, not taking up precious enhancement bonus and not taking up a slot space.
:P
Couldn't you just make a custom magical quiver, based on the spell abundant ammunition?
If my calculations are correct, it would cost 8000 gp to get a magical container that would copy any non-magical ammunition (including masterwork and paper cartridges).That should prove a whole lot cheaper than a +2 enchantment.
Edit: the +2 enhancement cost, at minimum, 17000 gp (18000 for the minimum +3 enchantment -1000 for the +1 enchantment that both can use)
That was one of the first items I had made for my ranger. Abundant ammunition on a quiver is pretty handy.
By the formulas under creations rules, you end up with (1)(1)(2,000)(1.5)= 3,000gp for the price of the item, meaning you can create it for 1,500gp. My GM decided that was a fair price to pay to quit tracking arrows.
|
I would not mind threads that are created for the sole purpose of theorycrafting. It's that more often than not it's worst case theorycrafting. All the things about archers that the OP expects me to worry about archers all have a cost. Yes archers are awesome. It's at the expense of feats, money being spent on magic items and depending on the class certain abilities. I could understand the worry if players who want to play archers would have to pay nothing. Instead it comes across as usual as certain posters not wanting certain classes or builds to have nice things.
Precise shot is basically mandatory for ranged characters. Without it you are bad.
|
Well:
A) you dont get snap shot until level 10, so for the first 9 levels, the main idea behind this build doesnt work and you are underpowered in comparison with other archers.B)The lack of percise shot is going to suck
C)With this you pritty much have to be on the front lines, You wont be able to hide behind the melees
D)When using combat patrol, you will only get one AOO per opponent, so you cant really focus anything down and it is useless against fights with a singular targit
The biggest problem with "building a higher level character" is that many of the feats lower level players almost feel are mandatory to survive the low levels are ignored
|
|
Precise shot is basically mandatory for ranged characters. Without it you are bad.
no its not. an archer can use rapid shot to kill targets at a ranged that are not enguaged in melee, then switch over to here ECB, or other 2 handed weapon. they would have to invest resources in other aspects of combat, but they should be doing that any way.
Precise shot is basically mandatory for ranged characters. Without it you are bad.no its not. an archer can use rapid shot to kill targets at a ranged that are not enguaged in melee, then switch over to here ECB, or other 2 handed weapon. they would have to invest resources in other aspects of combat, but they should be doing that any way.
That is a switch hitting character. Also if you have snap shot and not precise shot you take firing into melee penalties unless you houserule them away.
|
|
im not actually talking about a switch hitter build. lets assume you use your bow in melee, and the gm isnt a friendly guy, you will get tripped or worse sundered, you need to have a back up combat form. even if its just a great sword with a +1 enchant on it.
my point wasnt to say everyone should play a switch hitter, just that a character that has no back up "oh s@@& button" is doomed to fail with a gm who is impartial. and that if you build a character with said "oh s&%+ button", like having a great sword, you wont need to have precise shot as a mandatory feat.
I still take the greatsword even if I have precise shot. I think ranged character means you don't close from melee to attack at range most of the time.
Guided weapon property (+1 equivalent) uses WIS for both Attack and Damage. It is pretty close to what you are looking for.
I am VERY happy that we can now see some Barbarian Archers who don't have to change weapons each time they rage.
I am POSITIVELY ECSTATIC that, if I understand this new enchantment right, Archers will not be screwed as soon as they get hit with STR drain.
It's not all you think it's cracked up to be. Guided property lets you substitute Wisdom for Strength when it is used for attack and damage. Bows don't use strength to attack -or- damage. At best you can use it with a comp bow for extra damage.
^^ an even then, its first not PF available, since when it came out it was during 3.5, (200*, so it doesn't count for PFS, or most home games. Also, there is currently no errata or ruling on whether o not, the STR bonus for a composite bow would allow the user to have a high Wis, to use the bow, or HAVE to have high STR to match the Wis just to use the wis bonus.
In all, zen archers should stay away from it, b/c even if their arrows aren't going to be as high damage as say a fighters,or FE ranger, they still get more attacks, for more damage.
Couldn't you just make a custom magical quiver, based on the spell abundant ammunition?
If my calculations are correct, it would cost 8000 gp to get a magical container that would copy any non-magical ammunition (including masterwork and paper cartridges).That should prove a whole lot cheaper than a +2 enchantment.
Edit: the +2 enhancement cost, at minimum, 17000 gp (18000 for the minimum +3 enchantment -1000 for the +1 enchantment that both can use)
That was one of the first items I had made for my ranger. Abundant ammunition on a quiver is pretty handy.
By the formulas under creations rules, you end up with (1)(1)(2,000)(1.5)= 3,000gp for the price of the item, meaning you can create it for 1,500gp. My GM decided that was a fair price to pay to quit tracking arrows.
That is not the correct price (but neither were mine).
The formulae is (Spell level x caster level x 2,000 gp) time 3 for a spell effect meassured in minutes. So the cost is 6000.