I'm also doubly as confused because a great deal (almost all) of monsters listed by you have multiple natural attacks and most definitely do suffer from losing their full attack.... so.... huh?
If a winged opponent is using natural attacks, you have no need to pick up a bow or drink a Fly potion - it should be close enough to the ground that you can just hit it with your sword.
A flying wizard zapping you with ranged spells, or a dragon blasting you with acid from a distance, is the type of thing we're talking about.
(If you can fly up and charge the enemy, and it moves away each round to blast you, that's probably an AoO. So even if you can't full-attack you're able to melee attack twice per round.)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm also doubly as confused because a great deal (almost all) of monsters listed by you have multiple natural attacks and most definitely do suffer from losing their full attack.... so.... huh?If a winged opponent is using natural attacks, you have no need to pick up a bow or drink a Fly potion - it should be close enough to the ground that you can just hit it with your sword.
A flying wizard zapping you with ranged spells, or a dragon blasting you with acid from a distance, is the type of thing we're talking about.
(If you can fly up and charge the enemy, and it moves away each round to blast you, that's probably an AoO. So even if you can't full-attack you're able to melee attack twice per round.)
We're only talking about flying opponents with ranged attacks so I don't know what you're getting at here. A flying opponent with a ranged attack can still, and often ideally should, use natural attacks when you engage it in the sky (or to hover out of your reach and make full attacks on your squishies). If you are forcing the critter to back away, eating as you say a charge AND AOO every round, you're no worse off than against a critter on the ground with a ranged attack -- and at level 8 probably doing more total damage than a full attack to boot (both AOO and charge are at full BAB instead of +6/+1 on a full attack).
The point being, once you are in the sky, almost all of the monsters on the list are better off standing next to you and going for a full attack with their natural attack routine, or else back away and cast spells which they could have done on the ground anyway. This lets you contribute fully to the fight just as if it was grounded. The original poster's argument - that flying letting you stand next to an enemy is not a useful option because ranged flying attackers can kite - is not really supported by the evidence they presented.
As the OP my premise which I stated several times has always been that a method of flight will remain a better option than using a Bow. Now after running the numbers I see that at very low levels (1-3) a sling/bow is not so bad.
I would say my premise of Flight>Ranged weapon for Melee has definitely been held up, also it seems you are agreeing with me.
As the OP my premise which I stated several times has always been that a method of flight will remain a better option than using a Bow. Now after running the numbers I see that at very low levels (1-3) a sling/bow is not so bad.
I would say my premise of Flight>Ranged weapon for Melee has definitely been held up, also it seems you are agreeing with me.
This is pretty agreeable.
Flight is kind of hard to get your hands on at mid level if your casters aren't doing it for you though.
Also, I'd like to point out that, at level 1, where the price of composite bows are an issue, thrown weapons beat it out in terms of effeciency for two-handers. Yeah, you've less range, but Chakram still get 30ft RI, and they're only 1 gp a piece. I wouldn't spend money on a composite bow until I hit my first iterative, to be honest.
When it comes to backup bows I often see folks pick them up from treasure, which kind of makes them half price. Since many parties don't reduce a PC's share of treasure for taking relatively minor magic items this can also be a way for the martials to pull a little more than their fair share of treasure.
From a caster's perspective, if you let the Fighter take a magic bow maybe he'll stop bugging the Witch or Wizard to cast Fly instead of casting Win Encounter. You can even conserve a few spells by letting the martials deal with any truly trivial flying encounters while you cuddle your familiar, create a demiplane, order pizza, etc.
Fighter: I find that I can't participate in certain encounters.
Wizard: I find that some encounters aren't worth participating in.
Witch: Hex! Hex! Hex!
|
It really depends on what you're fighting, too.
If it's a flying wizard casting spells at you, then readying an attack to interrupt spellcasting with a composite longbow can force a concentration check, even if you're not doing massive damage, and the wizard is less likely to have DR.
Many of the creatures on Alakallanar's list aren't going to just use ranged attacks and never come close for melee. They'll do both, either with fly by attacks, or whatever. If the fighter chugs a Fly potion and goes after them, they may go toe to toe with them, knowing it's just the one melee guy instead of landing to fight several at once.
But Alakallanar might be right that the Fly potions can be saved for level 7 or 8. I said 5 or 6 without thinking it through in detail.
Well... Duh!
Using a combat style other than your specialization will lower your DPR... But the alternative is stand there doing nothing because your sword can't reach the enemy.
That said, most martial classes have tricks that make them decent archers, even if only for a moment (hopefully you aren't fighting powerful flying opponents with ranged weapons every encounter).
- Barbarian's can use an Adaptive bow to benefit from Rage. And Urban Barbarian's can increase their Dex. Things like Reckless Abandon can boost accuracy even further.
- Bloodrager's are similar to Barbarians. And they also have spells.
- Cavaliers can... Well... Yeah... They are screwed.
- Fighters aren't much better... But they have feats to be a decent switch-hitter and can take Bows as their second Weapon Training. With Gloves of Dueling, that's a huge boost.
- Gunslingers are already focused on ranged combat.
- Monks... Have the Scorching Ray Ki Power, I suppose...
- Paladins have Smite Evil, Divine Bond and spells such as Divine Power.
- Rangers also make great Switch hitters. And Instant Enemy lets them just buzzsaw right through their enemy. They also have spells like Aspect of the Falcon, Gravity Bow and Bow Spirit.
- Slayer get Studied Target and Ranger Combat Styles, so they too can make great switch-hitters.
- Swashbucklers have high Dex... So... Uh... There's that, I guess...In any case, a simple Bracers of Falcon's Aim costs only 4k and gives a solid boost to all ranged attacks (as well as to Perception checks).
tl;dr: A martial character focused on melee might never be nearly as good with a ranged weapon, but they can very well be good enough to pose a real threat to the flying enemy.
Good points that it will vary by class. A fighter benefits by making their second weapon training group ranged, also.
I think the calculations are mostly well-intended, but they're hard to measure against varied class options.
I'm also doubly as confused because a great deal (almost all) of monsters listed by you have multiple natural attacks and most definitely do suffer from losing their full attack.... so.... huh?If a winged opponent is using natural attacks, you have no need to pick up a bow or drink a Fly potion - it should be close enough to the ground that you can just hit it with your sword.
A flying wizard zapping you with ranged spells, or a dragon blasting you with acid from a distance, is the type of thing we're talking about.
(If you can fly up and charge the enemy, and it moves away each round to blast you, that's probably an AoO. So even if you can't full-attack you're able to melee attack twice per round.)
We're only talking about flying opponents with ranged attacks so I don't know what you're getting at here. A flying opponent with a ranged attack can still, and often ideally should, use natural attacks when you engage it in the sky (or to hover out of your reach and make full attacks on your squishies). If you are forcing the critter to back away, eating as you say a charge AND AOO every round, you're no worse off than against a critter on the ground with a ranged attack -- and at level 8 probably doing more total damage than a full attack to boot (both AOO and charge are at full BAB instead of +6/+1 on a full attack).
The point being, once you are in the sky, almost all of the monsters on the list are better off standing next to you and going for a full attack with their natural attack routine, or else back away and cast spells which they could have done on the ground anyway. This lets you contribute fully to the fight just as if it was grounded. The original poster's argument - that flying letting you stand next to an enemy is not a useful option because ranged flying attackers can kite - is not really supported by the evidence they presented.
Isn't the main problem with enemies that can kite you because they're a lot faster than you and have reasonable long range attacks? Like, say the level 10 fighter is fighting an Adult Black Dragon (CR 11) as an example. It has a 200 foot fly speed, it should never be in charge range of someone chasing it with a fly spell. It can just strafe you with its breath weapon from 80 feet above you whenever it recharges if it plans to fight a ranged battle. If it doesn't plan to fight a ranged battle, then it doesn't matter if you fly or not.
I mean, dragons are kind of a special case, but you have similar problems against any ranged attacker who is significantly faster than the speed granted by a flight spell or who can teleport/dimension door to buy multiple rounds worth of range.
By that point, the revolving door of death was spinning pretty well (my own fault, for not catching the limit on negative level removal)
I seem to have missed that limit too. What is it?
|
|
By that point, the revolving door of death was spinning pretty well (my own fault, for not catching the limit on negative level removal)I seem to have missed that limit too. What is it?
You get two negative levels when you're raised from the dead. Restoration can only be used to cure one negative level per week of game time. So you have to suffer with a negative level for at least a week every time.
You get two negative levels when you're raised from the dead. Restoration can only be used to cure one negative level per week of game time. So you have to suffer with a negative level for at least a week every time.By that point, the revolving door of death was spinning pretty well (my own fault, for not catching the limit on negative level removal)I seem to have missed that limit too. What is it?
Wow. I've never noticed that.
I really like that.
You get two negative levels when you're raised from the dead. Restoration can only be used to cure one negative level per week of game time. So you have to suffer with a negative level for at least a week every time.By that point, the revolving door of death was spinning pretty well (my own fault, for not catching the limit on negative level removal)I seem to have missed that limit too. What is it?
Oh. Yeah, I knew that one. Resurrection and/or Greater Restoration fix that anyway.
I thought he was talking about some permanent limit, like, you can only be raised 10 times in your life, or have 10 negative levels removed in your life.
I think the current system is much better than having to make a system shock percentage roll and having a hard limit based on your Consitution score.
Game designers have made it abundantly clear that a weapon's hardness and hit points are based on the WEAKEST part of the weapon. If you have an axe with an adamantine head, it still has a base hardness 5 and 5 hit points--because someone trying to sunder it would naturally be targeting the handle, not the axehead.
You absolutely CAN sunder a bow by targeting the bow string (and it would not have the statistics of wood).
Though I personally would rule that the bow itself is unharmed in such a case (that is, the archer doesn't need to spend hundreds of gold on a new bow) and is instead merely unusable as a bow until a new string can be attached.
So assuming you can target a string on a projectile weapon, what happens with the following?
1. Can the string on a projectile weapon be made of Special Materials?
2. How much would it cost?
3. What types of materials can be used?
Darkleaf Cloth? Dragonhide?
Or perhaps since its based off rope can i use different ropes to get a better string?
Bloodvine Rope
Spider Silk Rope
4. How much is it to fix a Broken projectile weapon after its string is broken?
5. How much are bowstrings?
So assuming you can target a string on a projectile weapon, what happens with the following?
1. Can the string on a projectile weapon be made of Special Materials?
Sure, why not. Not sure what it would do for you though.
Depends on the material. As it stands, Hemp makes poor bowstrings which is why they were traditionally horsehair. Most of those special materials would cost a hell of a lot more and only give a few extra HP at most.
2. How much would it cost?3. What types of materials can be used?
Darkleaf Cloth? Dragonhide?
Or perhaps since its based off rope can i use different ropes to get a better string?
Replace the string as a full round action4. How much is it to fix a Broken projectile weapon after its string is broken?
5. How much are bowstrings?
1 cp. Its just a 3-6 ft piece of decent quality string.
Game designers have made it abundantly clear that a weapon's hardness and hit points are based on the WEAKEST part of the weapon. If you have an axe with an adamantine head, it still has a base hardness 5 and 5 hit points--because someone trying to sunder it would naturally be targeting the handle, not the axehead.
You absolutely CAN sunder a bow by targeting the bow string (and it would not have the statistics of wood).
They give you the hardness of a bow. It is 5. That is presumed to be the hardness of the weakest part, since you always sunder the weakest part. So if we accept the claim that hardness is based on the weakest part (and not the largest part), either the bowstring has a hardness of 5 (and a whipwood bow wouldn't be harder than a regular bow), or the bowstring isn't the weakest part.
Sure, why not. Not sure what it would do for you though.
I was just wondering since i can't find anything in the rules to help with pricing a bowstring.
Depends on the material. As it stands, Hemp makes poor bowstrings which is why they were traditionally horsehair. Most of those special materials would cost a hell of a lot more and only give a few extra HP at most.
So if i wanted to use this as a player where would i find the relevant rules for it?
Replace the string as a full round action
Could you link where to find that? I can't seem to find that rule.
All i could find was;
"If the item does not fit into any of these categories, the broken condition has no effect on its use. Items with the broken condition, regardless of type, are worth 75% of their normal value. If the item is magical, it can only be repaired with a mending or make whole spell cast by a character with a caster level equal to or higher than the item's. Items lose the broken condition if the spell restores the object to half its original hit points or higher. Non-magical items can be repaired in a similar fashion, or through the Craft skill used to create it. Generally speaking, this requires a DC 20 Craft check and 1 hour of work per point of damage to be repaired. Most craftsmen charge one-tenth the item's total cost to repair such damage (more if the item is badly damaged or ruined)."
Wouldn't someone just use the normal Sunder/Broken rules?
1 cp. Its just a 3-6 ft piece of decent quality string
I also couldn't find this in the rules. I searched the PRD and Archives of Nethys and couldn't find anything about bowstrings.
They give you the hardness of a bow. It is 5. That is presumed to be the hardness of the weakest part, since you always sunder the weakest part. So if we accept the claim that hardness is based on the weakest part (and not the largest part), either the bowstring has a hardness of 5 (and a whipwood bow wouldn't be harder than a regular bow), or the bowstring isn't the weakest part.Game designers have made it abundantly clear that a weapon's hardness and hit points are based on the WEAKEST part of the weapon. If you have an axe with an adamantine head, it still has a base hardness 5 and 5 hit points--because someone trying to sunder it would naturally be targeting the handle, not the axehead.
You absolutely CAN sunder a bow by targeting the bow string (and it would not have the statistics of wood).
There's a difference between sundering the bow, and cutting the string. The former destroys the bow, the latter merely disables it.
There's a difference between sundering the bow, and cutting the string. The former destroys the bow, the latter merely disables it.
What is the difference in the rules?
If i use sunder to attack a projectile weapon's string doesn't it either get destroyed or broken?
There's a difference between sundering the bow, and cutting the string. The former destroys the bow, the latter merely disables it.What is the difference in the rules?
If i use sunder to attack a projectile weapon's string doesn't it either get destroyed or broken?
If you're targeting the string, it likely has only 1 hit point and 0 hardness before modifications (such as magical enhancement bonuses or the impervious weapon enchantment, which could give said string up to 20 hardness and 100 hit points). You make a sunder attempt as normal. If you succeed and deal at least 1 damage to the string, the string is severed and the bow cannot be used (at least not as a bow) until the string is replaced. The bow itself neither gains the broken condition, nor is it destroyed.
There's a difference between sundering the bow, and cutting the string. The former destroys the bow, the latter merely disables it.What is the difference in the rules?
If i use sunder to attack a projectile weapon's string doesn't it either get destroyed or broken?
The string gains the broken condition and can't be used. The bow is just fine, but since it needs the string to function it can't be used.
The string gains the broken condition and can't be used. The bow is just fine, but since it needs the string to function it can't be used.There's a difference between sundering the bow, and cutting the string. The former destroys the bow, the latter merely disables it.What is the difference in the rules?
If i use sunder to attack a projectile weapon's string doesn't it either get destroyed or broken?
Why just the "string"?
You can attempt to sunder an item held or worn by your opponent as part of an attack action in place of a melee attack. If you do not have the Improved Sunder feat, or a similar ability, attempting to sunder an item provokes an attack of opportunity from the target of your maneuver.
If your attack is successful, you deal damage to the item normally. Damage that exceeds the object's Hardness is subtracted from its hit points. If an object has equal to or less than half its total hit points remaining, it gains the broken condition (see Conditions). If the damage you deal would reduce the object to less than 0 hit points, you can choose to destroy it. If you do not choose to destroy it, the object is left with only 1 hit point and the broken condition.
Wouldn't the projectile weapon either become destroyed or broken?
Because you are only sundering the string.
Because you are only sundering the string.
I disagree.
I would be sundering a projectile weapon and targeting it's weakest point, which as others have said is the string.
The whole item should be broken or destroyed. It says that in Sunder.
You're sundering the BOW, and when you sunder you go for the weakest part, AKA the STRING. The string is not separate from the bow, it's part of the bow. So when you go to sunder you're cutting the string. If you succeed the bow is broken or destroyed appropriately.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This is a roleplaying game, not a video game. Here we have GMs, not mindless video-game robots.
This is a roleplaying game, not a video game. Here we have GMs, not mindless video-game robots.
This is a roleplaying game, not a story. Here we have rules, not arbitrary decisions.
Look I can do it too! :D
This is a roleplaying game, not a video game. Here we have GMs, not mindless video-game robots.
True. But not all GMs use house rules either.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The core rulebook gives the hardness and hit points for a projectile weapon. If a weapon is made of a special material, there are provisions for altering those characteristics. If there is no special material, there is no rule that says you should go look at the characteristics of common materials and wildly extrapolate a hit points and hardness for a string. Further, the rules state that large objects may have separate hit points for different sections; smaller objects do not, and hence it is impossible to break only the string using a normal smash maneuver.
Hardness 5 is the proper hardness for the bow entire, including the string. There is no "weakest part" to consider because no ordinary material is being replaced with a special material.
Well I guess the game developers were wrong then.
As the OP my premise which I stated several times has always been that a method of flight will remain a better option than using a Bow. Now after running the numbers I see that at very low levels (1-3) a sling/bow is not so bad.
I would say my premise of Flight>Ranged weapon for Melee has definitely been held up, also it seems you are agreeing with me.
Sorry convent, yes, I meant 'original poster' as in, the original poster of that particular quote tree, rather than you.
I am in total agreement with you on the general matter at hand.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Because you are only sundering the string.I disagree.
I would be sundering a projectile weapon and targeting it's weakest point, which as others have said is the string.
The whole item should be broken or destroyed. It says that in Sunder.
Pulling the string away from the attacker is represented by the CMD of the person with the bow. Which, try as he might to pull it away from you, might get the wooden part of the bow in the way. Unless there is some guaranteed method of attack to directly hit the string, it's going to use hardness and hit points of a projectile weapon.
This is wandering into "called shot" territory.
There are. They could also take Extra Item Slot for any number of other flying items.and if i remember correctly there are a set of horseshoes that can give a mount flight- Cavaliers can... Well... Yeah... They are screwed.they could work with their dm to get a flying mount
Rather late response, but where might someone find these horseshoes of flight?
Shameless self-indulging bump
The Horseshoes of Zyphyr don't actually grant flight - they're basically a horse equivalent of Marty McFly's hoverboard in the Back to the Future movies.
I don't know of any actual flying horseshoes in Pathfinder. Maybe some splat book has them (but I also can't find them on the SRD).
Perhaps you could make some. Craft Wondrous item. Fly is a 3rd level spell, so the base price would be 3 x 5 x 2,000gp = 30,000gp, multiplied by x2 because it's a continuous item with a normal duration of 1 minute per level, so the final Base Price is 60,000gp.
You could make your own for half that price, but it takes 2 months to build them, half that if you raise the DC by +5 but that's still only a DC 15, automatic success when you Take-10 even if you're only 3rd level (assuming you maxed your ranks in Spellcraft and either have it as a class skill or have a minimum of a 14 INT.
If you're willing to spend 60,000gp, you don't need a custom item - just stick the horse on a magic carpet.
I still can't locate a set of horseshoes that grant flight. Although it wouldn't be too much to ask for to re-skin Winged Boots into a set or horseshoes, would it?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Or...just ride on a magic carpet yourself.
No! If you want to get double damage with your lance you have to sit on the horse and have the horse control the magic carpet. It doesn't work without the horse.
Or...just ride on a magic carpet yourself.
You're not thinking like an adventurer.
Well I guess the game developers were wrong then.Or the game developers knew what they were doing and didn't want sunder to be that powerful against bows.
This isn't some complicated mechanic or related to the magic/mundane double standard. Should every yahoo with a dagger completely f@$$ over any archer in just one attack? No. If bows were 0 hardness archers would be unplayable because anyone who got next to an archer even briefly would destroy their ability to fight. If sunder was going to be in the game at all every single weapon needed enough hardness to stop normal enemies from achieving guaranteed one hit sunders until magic items started appearing.
Bows having the hardness from the table is the price of letting you have any sunder rules at all.
Maybe, but that logic applies up to about level 3, give or take. By then, many enemies can easily dish out 10 HP of damage on a sunder attempt and break it anyway. Certainly by level 5 or 6, EVERYTHING can do that much damage.
Or, maybe the game system protects archers by giving them 5' steps and other tricks to maintain distance, and by including DEX in their CMD so they can avoid some of those Sunder attempts. And especially by not having every rabid dog chewing on their bowstrings (as in, only the intelligent enemies would even try this, and only once they realize the archer is the biggest threat AND so hard to kill that breaking his bow is a better tactic than injuring the archer himself).
Given that few enemies will try this, fewer will get close enough, many of them will miss their sunder, leaving only a small number that will succeed on this attempt - yeah, I don't have a problem with that. Maybe that reflects the reason that EVERY ARMY IN HISTORY kept their archers behind many lines of infantry, so those effective ranged-attacking archers could do their job without themselves or their weapons being destroyed while they do it. Pathfinder archers might want to invest in a meat shield or two, and this stops being a problem. Or just invest in being able to attack adjacent enemies, so they will provoke when they try to sunder the bow - even if he can't kill them, the damage he does on his AoO is subtracted from their CMB roll.
And if a few enemies still pull it off, well, that's OK because archers have it too good anyway, being able to match or exceed the damage output of melee martials AND being able to do it at range. I'm sure the number of severed bowstrings in my games has been far fewer than the number of times a flying enemy, or an enemy up in the trees, or up on a cliff, or up on a wall, or on the other side of a chasm, or otherwise out of reach has neutralized a melee character quite easily.