Complete this sentence, My character doesn't carry a ranged weapon because...


Gamer Life General Discussion

151 to 200 of 369 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | next > last >>

3 people marked this as a favorite.

... because I believe in Kants categorical imperative and I don't want my ennemies to have ranged weapons.

Silver Crusade

TarkXT wrote:
shallowsoul wrote:
TarkXT wrote:


Don't get me wrong carrying a ranged weapon "just in case" is great. But it's going to feel a whole lot like crap when the encounter is strictly designed with an enemy in a superior position.

Welcome to a "real" game of Pathfinder.
Didn't know there was such a thing. IS a lot like full contact checkers?

There is a tendency for people on these boards to post scenarios that usually don't happen and I was just saying that in most games that actually happen outside of these boards you will run into situations where you are very much less than optimal.

I wasn't talking about the "real" way to play but what "really" goes on in games outside of these boards.


Because I can.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Because I choose to.


Been playing too much 4e:

For the same reason I don't carry a melee weapon-- when I want to hit something in melee, I hit it with my barbarian. When I want to hit at range, I hit it with my ranger. (Warlord.)

Because if I can't reach it, I'll throw my fists at it. (Barbarian.)

Back to Pathfinder:

I'm an Archaeologist. I took care of the traps, you take care of the dragon.

I'm a Witch. If it's flying out of reach, I'll just make it go to sleep.

The Exchange

TheRonin wrote:
This keeps coming up in my groups for some reason! Complete the sentence!

I has teh BOMBS!

And teh tanglefoot bags, and teh thunderstones, and teh alchemist's fire...


Because being a barbarian doing 2d6+18 with a great sword versus 1d8 bow, I can turn to our mystic theurge in group and yell "FLY SPELL PLEASE!!".


because i am Karasu, i will even give you a head start because i am that merciful

one... two... three... four... five... six... seven... eight... nine... and it is now ten... sway... to and fro... sway... *Badass transformation sequence finishes*


Because he doesn't have to?

That, and because he can?

Utility is important. When you can get your primary melee weapon to function as both melee and ranged attacks, the question becomes pointless.


Darksol the Painbringer wrote:

Because he doesn't have to?

That, and because he can?

Utility is important. When you can get your primary melee weapon to function as both melee and ranged attacks, the question becomes pointless.

like the guy in this video


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Maps, Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

More like the guy in this video.


"...because at-range suppression is somebody ELSE'S problem."

:)


I'm a Soulknife and my Mind Blade doesn't come in a ranged variety without taking levels in another class...


Because I'm a combat medic Jim, not an archer!!!!

>.>


Harrison wrote:
I'm a Soulknife and my Mind Blade doesn't come in a ranged variety without taking levels in another class...

One blade skill lets you throw your mind blade helluva far. Mind Daggers have a 30' range increment.

And on a Soulknife with good Wisdom, a 1 level dip in Soul Archer is practically morally imperative.


TarkXT wrote:
TheRonin wrote:

And you know, not just when the enemy is flying, but what if the enemy is on top of a roof? A high cliff? A Chasm separates you? A magic barrier? a fire? difficult terrain? on top of a wall, or behind some sort of fortification?

Then they can probably outshoot me anyway.

You don't see soldiers standing valiantly in the kill zone getting shot even when they do have ranged weapons. They find cover and try to get in a better firing position.

Don't get me wrong carrying a ranged weapon "just in case" is great. But it's going to feel a whole lot like crap when the encounter is strictly designed with an enemy in a superior position.

In this case it could be useful for your heavily armored barbarian/tank/cleric/fighter to provide some cover for the glass cannons in your group. Give the enemy something else to shoot at, so that they don't take out your heavy hitters, range-wise.

Canny opponents will ignore the tank that's standing out in the open, howling, "Try to take me down, cowards!" It's more difficult to ignore someone who's firing bolts/arrows/bullets at you.

Impossible? No. But more difficult. And buffs like Haste and Prayer will boost (and give extra) ranged attack rolls as much as melee.


joeyfixit wrote:
TarkXT wrote:
TheRonin wrote:

And you know, not just when the enemy is flying, but what if the enemy is on top of a roof? A high cliff? A Chasm separates you? A magic barrier? a fire? difficult terrain? on top of a wall, or behind some sort of fortification?

Then they can probably outshoot me anyway.

You don't see soldiers standing valiantly in the kill zone getting shot even when they do have ranged weapons. They find cover and try to get in a better firing position.

Don't get me wrong carrying a ranged weapon "just in case" is great. But it's going to feel a whole lot like crap when the encounter is strictly designed with an enemy in a superior position.

In this case it could be useful for your heavily armored barbarian/tank/cleric/fighter to provide some cover for the glass cannons in your group. Give the enemy something else to shoot at, so that they don't take out your heavy hitters, range-wise.

Canny opponents will ignore the tank that's standing out in the open, howling, "Try to take me down, cowards!" It's more difficult to ignore someone who's firing bolts/arrows/bullets at you.

Impossible? No. But more difficult. And buffs like Haste and Prayer will boost (and give extra) ranged attack rolls as much as melee.

Two words sir. Tiny. Hut.


TarkXT wrote:


Two words sir. Tiny. Hut.

QFT. Most underrated battlefield control spell evar.


Ravingdork wrote:
More like the guy in this video.

way too silly. that's not gun Vs. sword, that is trained, hardened, minmaxed gunslinger against a drastically lower level incompetent sword wielding rogue.


TarkXT wrote:
joeyfixit wrote:
TarkXT wrote:
TheRonin wrote:

And you know, not just when the enemy is flying, but what if the enemy is on top of a roof? A high cliff? A Chasm separates you? A magic barrier? a fire? difficult terrain? on top of a wall, or behind some sort of fortification?

Then they can probably outshoot me anyway.

You don't see soldiers standing valiantly in the kill zone getting shot even when they do have ranged weapons. They find cover and try to get in a better firing position.

Don't get me wrong carrying a ranged weapon "just in case" is great. But it's going to feel a whole lot like crap when the encounter is strictly designed with an enemy in a superior position.

In this case it could be useful for your heavily armored barbarian/tank/cleric/fighter to provide some cover for the glass cannons in your group. Give the enemy something else to shoot at, so that they don't take out your heavy hitters, range-wise.

Canny opponents will ignore the tank that's standing out in the open, howling, "Try to take me down, cowards!" It's more difficult to ignore someone who's firing bolts/arrows/bullets at you.

Impossible? No. But more difficult. And buffs like Haste and Prayer will boost (and give extra) ranged attack rolls as much as melee.

Two words sir. Tiny. Hut.

Okay. But the party's only fourth level (or lower). You don't have that spell yet. Now what?

or

Okay. But the evil archers have the princess/magic gem/scroll of MacGuffinness/your wizard hostage. Are you suggesting abandoning the ranger to hide in your hut (and not providing cover) or just saying to hell with Princess MacGuffWizGem?

or

Okay. But you're in an anti-magic zone. Now what?

or

Okay. But you used it to hide from the harpies this morning. Now what?


joeyfixit wrote:
TarkXT wrote:
joeyfixit wrote:
TarkXT wrote:
TheRonin wrote:

And you know, not just when the enemy is flying, but what if the enemy is on top of a roof? A high cliff? A Chasm separates you? A magic barrier? a fire? difficult terrain? on top of a wall, or behind some sort of fortification?

Then they can probably outshoot me anyway.

You don't see soldiers standing valiantly in the kill zone getting shot even when they do have ranged weapons. They find cover and try to get in a better firing position.

Don't get me wrong carrying a ranged weapon "just in case" is great. But it's going to feel a whole lot like crap when the encounter is strictly designed with an enemy in a superior position.

In this case it could be useful for your heavily armored barbarian/tank/cleric/fighter to provide some cover for the glass cannons in your group. Give the enemy something else to shoot at, so that they don't take out your heavy hitters, range-wise.

Canny opponents will ignore the tank that's standing out in the open, howling, "Try to take me down, cowards!" It's more difficult to ignore someone who's firing bolts/arrows/bullets at you.

Impossible? No. But more difficult. And buffs like Haste and Prayer will boost (and give extra) ranged attack rolls as much as melee.

Two words sir. Tiny. Hut.

Okay. But the party's only fourth level (or lower). You don't have that spell yet. Now what?

or

Okay. But the evil archers have the princess/magic gem/scroll of MacGuffinness/your wizard hostage. Are you suggesting abandoning the ranger to hide in your hut (and not providing cover) or just saying to hell with Princess MacGuffWizGem?

or

Okay. But you're in an anti-magic zone. Now what?

or

Okay. But you used it to hide from the harpies this morning. Now what?

Welp, guess I won't have Prayer, Haste, Magic Weapons, or snowballs chance in hell what with my 1d8 plinking crossbow versus the kobold archers who took rapid shot and outnumber us two to one. Come on guys let's walk away for a bit and find a different angle of attack preferably with low ceilings and narrow spaces where I'm only eating one arrow a round versus thirty.

Also why is the ranger not hiding in my hut? That seems incredibly doofy of him not to walk behind the two way mirrror of total concealment against the bad guy. So hell yea I'm abandoning him.


TarkXT wrote:
joeyfixit wrote:
TarkXT wrote:
joeyfixit wrote:
TarkXT wrote:
TheRonin wrote:

And you know, not just when the enemy is flying, but what if the enemy is on top of a roof? A high cliff? A Chasm separates you? A magic barrier? a fire? difficult terrain? on top of a wall, or behind some sort of fortification?

Then they can probably outshoot me anyway.

You don't see soldiers standing valiantly in the kill zone getting shot even when they do have ranged weapons. They find cover and try to get in a better firing position.

Don't get me wrong carrying a ranged weapon "just in case" is great. But it's going to feel a whole lot like crap when the encounter is strictly designed with an enemy in a superior position.

In this case it could be useful for your heavily armored barbarian/tank/cleric/fighter to provide some cover for the glass cannons in your group. Give the enemy something else to shoot at, so that they don't take out your heavy hitters, range-wise.

Canny opponents will ignore the tank that's standing out in the open, howling, "Try to take me down, cowards!" It's more difficult to ignore someone who's firing bolts/arrows/bullets at you.

Impossible? No. But more difficult. And buffs like Haste and Prayer will boost (and give extra) ranged attack rolls as much as melee.

Two words sir. Tiny. Hut.

Okay. But the party's only fourth level (or lower). You don't have that spell yet. Now what?

or

Okay. But the evil archers have the princess/magic gem/scroll of MacGuffinness/your wizard hostage. Are you suggesting abandoning the ranger to hide in your hut (and not providing cover) or just saying to hell with Princess MacGuffWizGem?

or

Okay. But you're in an anti-magic zone. Now what?

or

Okay. But you used it to hide from the harpies this morning. Now what?

Welp, guess I won't have Prayer, Haste, Magic Weapons, or snowballs chance in hell what with my 1d8 plinking crossbow versus the kobold archers who took...

So yeah, I just reread the spell. Not a bad choice, if you've got it memorized. I will, however, reiterate the ranged weapon's usefulness in areas of an antimagic field.

Which happened to a party I was in with my very first magus. This was shortly after UM came out, and we were at about level 11 and slogging through the "Legacy of Fire" AP. My Magus was totally built for melee, but he had a decent Dex and I had thought to equip him with a bow and arrow "just in case." Didn't put any feats or magic into it, just a masterwork composite bow +4.

So when we found ourselves in an antimagic field, the wizard, cleric, and gnome sorcerer were pretty much useless. And we started to get creamed by the minions that showed up to ambush us. We hightailed it out of there and only the two-weapon ranger and I had a ranged weapon, so we spammed the minions down to nothing at a safe distance.

A case where technically the party had no (non-magic) ranged cannon, and the backup ranged weapons came in real handy.


Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

My character doesn't carry a Ranged Weapon because unless he or she is a Gunslinger, it's just plain better to throw your returning Weapon at them.

...What? You get a Strength Bonus to Damage! Uncapped!

Using anything else is a drag, unless you get the "Gun training" ability from Gunslinger; which fixes the disequilibrium of Damage between Melee and Ranged.

So Throwing my Katana at them is "made of win".


Pathfinder Maps, Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
BlueStorm wrote:

My character doesn't carry a Ranged Weapon because unless he or she is a Gunslinger, it's just plain better to throw your returning Weapon at them.

...What? You get a Strength Bonus to Damage! Uncapped!

1,000gp to get the Adaptive weapon property allows a composite bow to automatically adjust to match your strength modifier. Suddenly your unlimited damage cap isn't looking quite so sweet.


Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Ravingdork wrote:
BlueStorm wrote:

My character doesn't carry a Ranged Weapon because unless he or she is a Gunslinger, it's just plain better to throw your returning Weapon at them.

...What? You get a Strength Bonus to Damage! Uncapped!

1,000gp to get the Adaptive weapon property allows a composite bow to automatically adjust to match your strength modifier. Suddenly your unlimited damage cap isn't looking quite so sweet.

True, But that's just Bows... And those get pretty boring for me considering everyone and their mother will be using one.

I mean, there ARE other Ranged weapons; they just don't get that bonus.

Second, I don't think "Strength" should be a high priority for a character that "specializes" in ranged. But when you're a normal Melee character who can just throw their weapon, you're probably a bit better off for damage than a ranger that specializes in Dex. Even if you might not hit all the time.

I might not be doing the mental maths right, so I'll leave you with this instead:

It's more fun to describe your character as "throwing their sword" than as "using a Bow" like the 800 other Rangers you passed on the way there.

...Guns are also fun though, But you really need to be gunslinger for that.


BlueStorm wrote:
Using anything else is a drag, unless you get the "Gun training" ability from Gunslinger; which fixes the disequilibrium of Damage between Melee and Ranged.

Wait, you're aware that ranged builds often outdamage melee builds?

Grand Lodge

Because I'm one of the special people who believes the GM should make combats the way I want otherwise he's cheating or not being fair.


I'm amazed that people keep citing an enemy that out-missiles them when the original problem presented was a flying enemy they could not reach. That said, every character should carry a missile weapon, period. While a single longbow in the hands of a melee specialist is not much cop, a party-full of missiles can have a very significant effect - especially if everyone remembered to pick up a handful of magic arrows each. I always carry a couple of +1 bane arrows for most nasty critters we are likely to meet. Only one needs to hit to convince them that they might be safer in melee or not there at all...and they don't know that I only had a brace of them...:D


People are citing enemy archers because the flier problem has other solutions, one of which is being good enough at melee that you're worth throwing a fly spell at.


...because I'm not that good with them.

(So far, my Monk* has not even once used a Ranged Attack of any sort)

* = Ironskin Qinggong Monk with a two-level dip to Invulnerable Urban Barbarian (Fluff reasons and houserule by DM** permit this combination).

** = Said DM is me. The character is a DM PC I made as per a request from the players themselves since we only had three PCs after kicking out a distruptive player.


Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
stringburka wrote:
BlueStorm wrote:
Using anything else is a drag, unless you get the "Gun training" ability from Gunslinger; which fixes the disequilibrium of Damage between Melee and Ranged.
Wait, you're aware that ranged builds often outdamage melee builds?

Not aware, no... But As I mentioned to the other guy, if I have to use a Bow to get a Strength Modifier bonus to damage then it takes all the fun out of it.

I mean, what about the Crossbow? Or the Blowgun?

Or the...

...

Okay, the choice of ranged weapons that aren't thrown aren't very big anyways. And unless I'm looking for a gun, I'm probably not going to use any of them.

Really, I'm more of a "so long as its cool" player. And bows... are over-used. And unless I'm missing something, Crossbows don't get a Strength boost or anything. (And aren't much better.)

Also, Why can't Supernatural Ranged attacks (Like the Azata Ghaelle's light beams) get an ability score bonus to damage? That would actually get me to stop throwing stuff.


Because we could carry around ranged weapons, ensure they are upgraded and put some feats to them if we can spare it, or we could just flee, hide and lure the enemies back to us. Hide in buildings, deep in the earth or caves.

Just sneak up and kill the flyer when it eventually stops to rest, or just go around it. No ranged needed.

The griffon was guarding the mountains, yeah we sneaked past it when it was asleep.


He's a bard enchanter who uses his diminutive stature and lack of armament to engender a false sense of security in his targets.


BlueStorm wrote:
But As I mentioned to the other guy, if I have to use a Bow to get a Strength Modifier bonus to damage then it takes all the fun out of it.

You know, there's a ranged weapon in the Core Rulebook that outranges any thrown weapon in the game, and also gives you your uncapped Strength bonus to damage automatically, at no extra cost and with no special limits.

It's also free, gives zero encumbrance, can use ammo scrounged right off the ground (at a minor penalty, sure), and every class except wizard is proficient with it, so there's literally no reason not to mark it down on your character sheet anyway, just in case you wind up in some circumstance that makes it useful.


Atarlost wrote:
People are citing enemy archers because the flier problem has other solutions, one of which is being good enough at melee that you're worth throwing a fly spell at.

And rushing enemy archers with fly or haste is not another solution to being shot at as well because...?


see wrote:
BlueStorm wrote:
But As I mentioned to the other guy, if I have to use a Bow to get a Strength Modifier bonus to damage then it takes all the fun out of it.

You know, there's a ranged weapon in the Core Rulebook that outranges any thrown weapon in the game, and also gives you your uncapped Strength bonus to damage automatically, at no extra cost and with no special limits.

It's also free, gives zero encumbrance, can use ammo scrounged right off the ground (at a minor penalty, sure), and every class except wizard is proficient with it, so there's literally no reason not to mark it down on your character sheet anyway, just in case you wind up in some circumstance that makes it useful.

So incredibly true. In fact, carry 10+ slings. Want to tie up that flying archer who keeps harassing the other posters in this thread but used up all your rope? Use a bunch of slings. They're free. They let you add your STR bonus. You don't need to worry about ammo - or even track it. You're proficient. In fact, I may just make a fillable PDF character sheet that already includes 10 slings in your equipment.

Really, though, you don't need 10+ but you should be carrying one. Even archers should carry slings.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Because "Drive/Sail/Fly me closer! I want to hit them with my sword!"

Paizo Employee Organized Play Developer

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Because I'm a monk who's not a Sohei or Zen Archer and couldn't hit them with anything useful if I did. But they'll never actually catch me anyways!! *does roadrunner impression and Fast Movement/Abundant Steps someplace safer*


see wrote:
BlueStorm wrote:
But As I mentioned to the other guy, if I have to use a Bow to get a Strength Modifier bonus to damage then it takes all the fun out of it.

You know, there's a ranged weapon in the Core Rulebook that outranges any thrown weapon in the game, and also gives you your uncapped Strength bonus to damage automatically, at no extra cost and with no special limits.

It's also free, gives zero encumbrance, can use ammo scrounged right off the ground (at a minor penalty, sure), and every class except wizard is proficient with it, so there's literally no reason not to mark it down on your character sheet anyway, just in case you wind up in some circumstance that makes it useful.

And you can easily conceal it as a belt or by tying it around a bag.

(Although I do prefer the innocent walking stick with a "pretty ribbon" on it...)

Silver Crusade

Dabbler wrote:
I'm amazed that people keep citing an enemy that out-missiles them when the original problem presented was a flying enemy they could not reach. That said, every character should carry a missile weapon, period. While a single longbow in the hands of a melee specialist is not much cop, a party-full of missiles can have a very significant effect - especially if everyone remembered to pick up a handful of magic arrows each. I always carry a couple of +1 bane arrows for most nasty critters we are likely to meet. Only one needs to hit to convince them that they might be safer in melee or not there at all...and they don't know that I only had a brace of them...:D

Agreed!

Doing something is better than doing nothing.

It's a no brainer.

Sovereign Court

Because I'll summon one of my goons next to them and have them attack instead. At them my minion I'm right behind you!

Seriously though the only character I've had without some form of ranged weapon was my 7 dex lore oracle with the blind curse (Done mostly for amusement to have a stumbling and bumbling melee combatant who always seemed to get lucky thanks to sidestep secret)


because he is a melee fighter? and I could only afford one sweet weapon. I would rather climb a tree and jump on the flying guy then dane to fire a "bow" |


because I'm a pacifist enchantment sorcerer who doesn't carry any weapons at all.


Dabbler wrote:
Atarlost wrote:
People are citing enemy archers because the flier problem has other solutions, one of which is being good enough at melee that you're worth throwing a fly spell at.
And rushing enemy archers with fly or haste is not another solution to being shot at as well because...?

Because enemy archers can be as low as CR 1/4. I don't know what CR the first dangerous flyer is, but they don't seem to be frequently used before APL 5-6.


Dabbler wrote:
I'm amazed that people keep citing an enemy that out-missiles them when the original problem presented was a flying enemy they could not reach. That said, every character should carry a missile weapon, period. While a single longbow in the hands of a melee specialist is not much cop, a party-full of missiles can have a very significant effect - especially if everyone remembered to pick up a handful of magic arrows each. I always carry a couple of +1 bane arrows for most nasty critters we are likely to meet. Only one needs to hit to convince them that they might be safer in melee or not there at all...and they don't know that I only had a brace of them...:D

Actually, the original problem had nothing to do with flying creatures. Although that is of course one common scenario.

The original problem that prompted the post was a group of enemy combatants against a party of 4 level 3 PCs. The enemy combatants were unreachable due to an obstacle, it was a linear dungeon with no other way forward.

One spellcaster had all but depleted her spells at this point, that character and the rogue stood around while two others fired, because neither had a ranged weapon.

two people at this game were also in a previous game where a similar (though different) situation occurred. The party stood around while my Bard (with no feats) got on her stomach and using her 1d8 'plinking' light crossbow gunned down two similarly leveled bow using enemy NPCs that stood across a nearly 80 foot wide river of poisonous snakes (don't ask).

But these are of course just TWO scenarios, and the frustration prompted me to create the thread. There are dozens of other ones where such a situation could occur, especially in low level parties who have limited spells, no ability to fly and can't drop a 'returning' enchantment on their melee weapon like its chump change.

though a lot of responses are clever, It is fun to see how many people have different clever ways to get around this. Though a lot of other responses seem to be "I don't have one, and heres an increasingly hypothetical scenario where my choice does the least harm". These are also amusing.

Silver Crusade

TheRonin wrote:
Dabbler wrote:

I'm amazed that people keep citing an enemy that out-missiles them when the original problem presented was a flying enemy they could not reach. That said, every character should carry a missile weapon, period. While a single longbow in the hands of a melee specialist is not much cop, a party-full of missiles can have a very significant effect - especially if everyone remembered to pick up a handful of magic arrows each. I always carry a couple of +1 bane arrows for most nasty critters we are likely to meet. Only one needs to hit to convince them that they might be safer in melee or not there at all...and they don't know that I only had a brace of them...:D [\quote]

Actually, the original problem had nothing to do with flying creatures. Although that is of course one common scenario.

The original problem that prompted the post was a group of enemy combatants against a party of 4 level 3 PCs. The enemy combatants were unreachable due to an obstacle, it was a linear dungeon with no other way forward.

One spellcaster had all but depleted her spells at this point, that character and the rogue stood around while two others fired, because neither had a ranged weapon.

two people at this game were also in a previous game where a similar (though different) situation occurred. The party stood around while my Bard (with no feats) got on her stomach and using her 1d8 'plinking' light crossbow gunned down two similarly leveled bow using enemy NPCs that stood across a nearly 80 foot wide river of poisonous snakes (don't ask).

But these are of course just TWO scenarios, and the frustration prompted me to create the thread. There are dozens of other ones where such a situation could occur, especially in low level parties who have limited spells, no ability to fly and can't drop a 'returning' enchantment on their melee weapon like its chump change.

though a lot of responses are clever, It is fun to see how many people have different clever ways to get around this. Though a lot...

Flying, across a chasm, it's all the same because you can't reach them. You always need a ranged weapon and it will never ever hurt you to pick up a bow. You will always do some amount of damage, unless they have DR, but some of the responses seem to suggest that it's not worth taking unless they are optimized with it, which is crap by the way.


TheRonin wrote:
a nearly 80 foot wide river of poisonous snakes (don't ask).

Spoil sport. Because that sounds like the explanation should be either epic or hilarious.


...because every fight should be played hand to hand. The honorable way!


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Atarlost wrote:
TheRonin wrote:
a nearly 80 foot wide river of poisonous snakes (don't ask).
Spoil sport. Because that sounds like the explanation should be either epic or hilarious.

None is needed, the explanation is obvious: They were trying to protect their sacred relics from Indiana Jones!


... because I have our fighter carry my crossbow for emergencies, just for the situation that neither my wand of scorching ray, my wand of magic missiles nor my bajillion of electric rays will do the trick.

Hey, these things are heavy!

151 to 200 of 369 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Gamer Life / General Discussion / Complete this sentence, My character doesn't carry a ranged weapon because... All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.