There is no real reason to switch hit. At least with any sort of monetary or feat investment. Just carry a 2-handed melee weapon around just in case. At higher levels (10+, technically could be 6+ but you should be getting Imp. Precise Shot at 6) you'll have Point Blank Master feat and have no reason to bother with a melee weapon at all.
(Before PBM feat, 5 ft stepping back isn't a cure-all; the Step Up feat is ridiculously easily available and unlike spellcasters -- the group the feat was clearly intended to mess with -- archers do not get some sort of check to "shoot defensively")
Wind Wall has always been kind of bs (completely and utterly shuts down a few specific ranged attacks only), and a DM actually using Fickle Winds is on my list of "things that will cause me to leave a game, even if said thing does not affect my own character, just out of sheer disgust." In any case, by RAW, you could just whip out a sling or some javelins and shoot through either of those spells w/ a 70% success rate, so even then there's no reason to go melee.
God I hate the fickle winds spell....
|
Switch Hitter is about being less specialized and more well rounded. A lot of these issues go away at higher levels, but the fact remains that Archery is very feat intensive.
The Ranger is a perfect example of what bad medicine Archery is in Pathfinder. Mechanically they are positioned to be one of the best archers in the game - and they are as long as you're Human.
For Society play I'd wager that being a Switch Hitter is a better option. Best of both worlds so to speak...
See, that's the problem. Archery IS feat-heavy. So...you solve the problem by investing still *more* feats in melee? It makes no sense.
So by all means, carry a melee weapon. But do not actually invest feats into melee.
From experience, I've played with switch hitters and archers. The archer simply does more damage than the switch hitter because he specializes. Yeah, the switch hitter can do both...and...?
An archer can wear a buckler for free, get point blank master, and then just be better than a switch hitter. Not to mention you don't split your gold as much, too. You spend money on bows and arrows rather than bows, arrows, AND melee weapons.
God I hate the fickle winds spell....
That spell is pretty ridiculous. Wind wall is the reason my archer is a bard...he can dispel those archer-nullifying spells himself.
|
|
See, that's the problem. Archery IS feat-heavy. So...you solve the problem by investing still *more* feats in melee? It makes no sense.
So by all means, carry a melee weapon. But do not actually invest feats into melee.
Switch hitting is about being a melee focused character with Archery as a secondary method of attacking your foes.
It's not about solving the problems of Archery, it's about supplementing a melee build by cherry picking some prime feats without the prereqs.
For high level play of course archery is more optimal. But if you're playing to mid levels and don't know what party composition is going to be I stand by my assertion that the switch hitter would be have better survivability.
The money gets to be annoying but I love switch hitting with my Ranger. He can throw up alot of arrows on a full attack. With power attack he does pretty huge numbers.
Though I am sure pure melee or pure archery would be better. I just have a realism issue with using a bow in melee.
|
Switch hitting is about being a melee focused character with Archery as a secondary method of attacking your foes.
This is a switch-hitter in Pathfinder. It's all about Strength over Dex. Precise Shot isn't necessary since you'll be using melee once the enemy gets close. A switch hitter excels when working with a disciplined party. Instead of charging in, they let them enemy approach while hitting them with ranged weapons. If played this way, the switch hitter is pumping full round attacks all the time. For PFS this is why I don't play switch hitters because many people just charge the enemy.
Switch hitting is about being a melee focused character with Archery as a secondary method of attacking your foes.This is a switch-hitter in Pathfinder. It's all about Strength over Dex. Precise Shot isn't necessary since you'll be using melee once the enemy gets close. A switch hitter excels when working with a disciplined party. Instead of charging in, they let them enemy approach while hitting them with ranged weapons. If played this way, the switch hitter is pumping full round attacks all the time. For PFS this is why I don't play switch hitters because many people just charge the enemy.
You could go pure DEX and get a (dervish) scimitar or another Agile weapon.
|
This is only true if you are ignoring the rules for cover, and/or if your GM isn't playing the enemies with the most basic intelligence. Until you have Improved Precise Shot, your opponents should be able to get a cover bonus against your archer(s) at LEAST half the time. If they aren't ducking around corners, then they should be engaging your allies in melee and keeping your friends between you and them as much as possible.
It's funny how often people are willing to overlook this issue when discussing archers. If a monster's move action could consistently give a melee character a -4 to hit, we'd all be complaining about how useless melee is.
lets not forget, obscuring mist, darkness, any any other effect that blocks line of effect OR line of sight.
most archers ive seen played need to be reminded of the "if your ally is in the line your target gets a +4 ac" rules of archery, getting ray of enfeeblement, and about 100 other low level things that can make your archer suck.
to preface i would not play a switch hitter that is not a fighter, but a fighter makes a damn powerful switch hitter.
and yes there are many times when ranged attacks just cant cut it, oozes anyone? how about underwater combat, enclosed hallways, areas of no visibility, things with immunity to, or high DR against piercing attacks, remember that you dont start off with clustered shots.
Stream has the right of it in my experience. If you're going to switch hit, you should focus on melee and use archery as a way to make you more tactically versatile. If you focus more on the archery side of it, then you'll eventually never have any reason at all to enter melee and then all those melee feats you took are suddenly wasted.
Agreed. My Paladins and Barbarians (Urban Barbarians) always take Deadly Aim at some point early on to compliment their Smites/Rage if they have to face a foe at range, but everything else goes into two-handed melee. A ranged option is a good thing to have as a frontliner, but only as a compliment to others. A pure switch ultimately becomes a jack-of-all-trades, master of none.
The reason why a switch-hitter works for Ranger, is because the Ranger can skip all the unnecessary feat taxes, making archery a lot less feat-heavy. Every other archer has to start with Point Blank Shot and then Precise Shot, but the switch-hitter doesn't need those, and the Ranger can skip them. That saves you two feats right there that a Fighter switch-hitter would have to waste on useless archery prereqs.
And those feats are useless to a switch-hitter because when your target is at point blank range, you'll be hitting it with your sword. And when he's in melee, he's in melee with you. Spend your regular feats on melee, and possibly Deadly Aim, and the rest of your archery comes from your combat style. Archery is definitely secondary to melee with regards to the focus of your build, but you'll still be good at it, because you can skip all those prereqs and get the good stuff much earlier than anyone else.
About half the archery feats are just about shooting into melee, and as a switch-hitter, you're just not going to do that. You're using the bow only how it's really intended: shooting people at a distance. You're Aragorn, nor Legolas.