Concerned About Archer Player Taking Point Blank Master


Advice

1 to 50 of 145 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

I'm fairly new to Pathfinder (something like six months) and even newer to GMing (about four months). I'm running a campaign where I only allowed the Core Rule Book, Advanced Player's Guide, and Advanced Class Guide (with the caveat that I'd consider other stuff but it would have to be approved individually).

Party is currently level 6 and is composed of a dual-wielding Rogue, a Witch, a Bard, a Paladin, a Monk, and a bow using Fighter.

In my (limited) experience, archery seemed to be balanced along the following lines...

Pros:
- Can full attack over 100 feet away
- Can hit the back lines
- Can hit flying targets

Cons:
- Provokes AoOs when firing
- Has less full attack damage than a 2H and less AC than a 1H + Shield
- Does not threaten for flanking or AoOs

Basically, it can consistently hit anything at the cost of raw damage and is at a disadvantage if a melee opponent manages to close the gap due to AoOs.

The feat Point Blank Master (which I learned about last night) eliminates AoOs in melee. And, running some numbers, he seems to actually do more damage than a Power Attacking 2H fighter at this point (two "extra" attacks with Manyshot and Rapid Shot contribute a lot). And he's planning on taking PBM which eliminates the whole "I eat extra attacks if I try to fire in melee."

The problem isn't that I can't think of ways to "threaten" him. The problem is that most of those ways seem far harsher than him taking an extra hit or two.

Wind Wall? Has to reposition.

Trip? Enemy needs high int or a racial ability (like wolves), and prevents the archer from full attacking (has to spend a move action to get up (which provokes) or can't fire at all).

Disarm? Enemy needs high int, he has to retrieve the weapon, also provokes.

Sunder? Bye-bye bow, don't want to be doing that constantly.

Overrun? Weaker version of trip, no weapon feats or bonuses.

Prior to PBM, taking an AoO from an enemy was probably worth it. If surrounded by four melee enemies, maybe withdraw or total defense and reposition (get your party to help). Unless they're weak enough, then just avoid most of the AoOs anyway. It made things a choice on his end where he can had to decide whether the AoOs were worth it (and if the enemy had Combat Reflexes). It was a "soft" counter if you will -- he was at a disadvantage, but could still function. And he has one of the highest HP pools and the second highest AC, so it's not like he's a fragile little flower or something.

The other things mentioned seem far more of a "hard" counter where it just completely screws up his day. Which I don't really like doing.

Am I right to wonder about this? Feels like this feat is going to trigger an escalating arms race of sorts -- especially since I generally have been going with a "fair is fair" policy. If he wants that feat, then the party should expect enemy Fighters, Rangers, and anyone else who qualifies for the feat to have it. Which is then a "nerf" to the Rogue, Monk, and Paladin.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Archery is the strongest damage dealing combat style in Pathfinder, has been for some time, and will likely continue to be so for the foreseeable future. The only real downside is that as a combat style, it is feat intensive.

The thing about Point Blank Master, is that it's often not necessary as there are many cases when you can simply take a 5' step out of threatened range and make a full attack.

The extent to which you should attempt to thwart archers in your games is proportional to how much they tend to dominate combat. It's okay if they're good, or even the best (something has to be), but if the archer kills everything and nobody else gets to do much you should step in.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

It's a feat, I wouldn't touch it. If he qualifies for it let him have it. It's limited to fighters and rangers that don't want Improved precise shot at lv6, so it's not very commonly had.

Also, are you doing penalties right? -4 if in combat without precise shot and another -4 if there's anything in the way granting cover.

But yes, archery is considered the best combat option, your damage isn't behind a THW because you're getting tons of shots and bonus damage on each shot. And full attacking basically every round. It's just feat intensive.

The way you stop a fighter is usually a saving throw, My guess is his will save is around a 4, even a lv2 spell from int 14 caster is DC 14, good chance of him failing.


PossibleCabbage wrote:
The thing about Point Blank Master, is that it's often not necessary as there are many cases when you can simply take a 5' step out of threatened range and make a full attack.

Step Up.

Chess Pwn wrote:
It's limited to fighters and rangers that don't want Improved precise shot at lv6, so it's not very commonly had.

What other "common" archers are there?

Chess Pwn wrote:
Also, are you doing penalties right? -4 if in combat without precise shot and another -4 if there's anything in the way granting cover.

Precise shot penalty, yes. Obstacle cover, yes (such as walls or clouds that conceal vision). Creature cover, no (the "blocking" rules don't really make any sense in many situations and there's already a penalty for firing into melee).

Chess Pwn wrote:
The way you stop a fighter is usually a saving throw, My guess is his will save is around a 4, even a lv2 spell from int 14 caster is DC 14, good chance of him failing.

Lemme check something...yep, that applies just as much to a 1H+Shield or 2H fighter. Nothing to do with archery specifically.


DPS is fairly easy to balance around. Adding hp, dr, deflect arrows, cover, etc can help your monsters live longer. If your worried about him being stronger than all the other party members the best solution is usually to just ask him to use a less optimal build. Another option is to manipulate item drops. Drop utility archer items like grappling hook or dimensional anchor arrows while giving the rest of the party raw stat boosts. You can help the other party members optimize more with their builds to help keep things more balanced. Also note that his DPS is useless in most not combat challenges if you want to give other characters a chance to shine


Zen archer is also a common archer, it also gets psudo point blank master for free.

Also as mentioned before if they are firing through another creatures square that creature has +4 to it's AC (unless they have improved precise shot). Which is a separate penalty from the -4 due to firing into combat

But relay by and large Archers are DPR kings due to several advantages:


  • Range
  • A better version of two weapon fighting (Rapid shot)
  • Manyshot (who doesn't love 2x damage on your first attack
  • A way to mitigate DR (clustered shots)
  • naturaly high ac due to mandatory dex investment
  • And probably the most important, the ability to almost always full attack

The last point is why the Barbarian is considered so good, as they are one of the few classes that can full attack and charge.

But none of that is an issue assuming it's not harming the other player's fun. Do not try and start an arms race, but talk to the player if you feel like his character is making the game less fun for others.

To actual things that can be used to mitigate his effectiveness:

Terrain and things and that break line of sight are helpful. Like corners, fog spells or fickle winds. High winds and bad weather can also impose penalties on ranged attack (take care though cause these can also impact melee characters)


Balkoth wrote:
Chess Pwn wrote:
Also, are you doing penalties right? -4 if in combat without precise shot and another -4 if there's anything in the way granting cover.

Precise shot penalty, yes. Obstacle cover, yes (such as walls or clouds that conceal vision). Creature cover, no (the "blocking" rules don't really make any sense in many situations and there's already a penalty for firing into melee).

Chess Pwn wrote:
The way you stop a fighter is usually a saving throw, My guess is his will save is around a 4, even a lv2 spell from int 14 caster is DC 14, good chance of him failing.
Lemme check something...yep, that applies just as much to a 1H+Shield or 2H fighter. Nothing to do with archery specifically.

The dealing with soft cover provided by other creatures DOES have to do with archery (and other ranged combat specifically). Taking that out is making the combat style a lot easier when you're already feeling the archer character has an easy time doing damage.

And determining cover is easy. Take a corner of the archer's square, "if any line from this corner to any corner of the target's square passes through a square or border that blocks line of effect or provides cover, or through a square occupied by a creature, the target has cover (+4 to AC)." (PRD: Combat) That last part with the "or" means that another creature doesn't have to block the shot, but if its square is in the path of the line used to determine cover, then there's cover.

If in doubt = Cover.


Balkoth wrote:


What other "common" archers are there?

Inquisitors, Paladins, Hunters and Zen Archers to name a few.

Balkoth wrote:


Lemme check something...yep, that applies just as much to a 1H+Shield or 2H fighter. Nothing to do with archery specifically.

So you won't be unfairly targeting him because he is an archer, you'll just be targeting a weakness? In what way is this a problem?


There are all kinds of things that can screw up a ranged attack character. Just the ones I can think of off the top of my head:

- Blur
- Displacement
- Invisibility
- Obscuring Mist/Smoke/Wall of Fire/ etc...
- Darkness (if no darkvision)
- Deeper Darkness (if he has darkvision)
- Deflect Arrows
- Mirror Image or any other illusionary spell

But as someone pointed out above, if it's just a fighter with a bow and a bunch of bow-specific feats, the best counter is:

- Any spell that requires a Will save

Of which there are literally dozens of spells that will completely neutralize said OP archer. Take him over with Dominate Person and you might even wipe out the entire party.


Balkoth wrote:
PossibleCabbage wrote:
The thing about Point Blank Master, is that it's often not necessary as there are many cases when you can simply take a 5' step out of threatened range and make a full attack.

Step Up.

Chess Pwn wrote:
It's limited to fighters and rangers that don't want Improved precise shot at lv6, so it's not very commonly had.

What other "common" archers are there?

Chess Pwn wrote:
Also, are you doing penalties right? -4 if in combat without precise shot and another -4 if there's anything in the way granting cover.

Precise shot penalty, yes. Obstacle cover, yes (such as walls or clouds that conceal vision). Creature cover, no (the "blocking" rules don't really make any sense in many situations and there's already a penalty for firing into melee).

Chess Pwn wrote:
The way you stop a fighter is usually a saving throw, My guess is his will save is around a 4, even a lv2 spell from int 14 caster is DC 14, good chance of him failing.
Lemme check something...yep, that applies just as much to a 1H+Shield or 2H fighter. Nothing to do with archery specifically.

Well there you go for part of your problem, if you're going to ignore the -4 for a creature providing cover you just gave all your archers a level 11 feat for free at lv1. If you applied this then the enemy fighter stand in front of the target, or your allies are in the way and now there's a -4 OR he moves to get a clear shot and thus stopping a full attack.

And of course it's not archery specific. How do you stop a sword and shield or a 2H fighter or an archery? The answer is stop the fighter. Like, besides wind wall, snatch arrows, and the like, damage output is damage output.

Common archer could be rogues, fighters, rangers, clerics, bards, cavaliers, INQUISITORS, oracle, Hunter, Slayer, warpriest. All of them get good use from archery and aren't paladins. This is excluding all the monsters, like harpy, that do bows. If all they are fighting are fighters, then there should be more issues at hand then just not provoking using a bow.

Step up? how many enemies are running step up? If basically ALL your enemies are then I can see why he'd want that feat. If it's a normal campaign where most if not all enemies DON'T have that feat, then it's not a counter to the 5ft step. (seriously, how many enemies want to use one of their 3 feats for that? Like it's a decent feat, but shouldn't be on everyone)


11 people marked this as a favorite.

This is the typical, "Guys, I buffed one of the strongest options and now I feel that that option is too strong." threads.


Dastis wrote:
If your worried about him being stronger than all the other party members the best solution is usually to just ask him to use a less optimal build.

I'm not worried about him being stronger. I'm worried about a feat removing one of the only weaknesses of his combat style. 2H, DW, and 1H+Shield characters all have different strengths and weaknesses. Archery just seems to mostly have strengths (only remaining weaknesses are lack of flanking or AoOs...which I'm guessing other books might provide (I know Snap Shot exists)).

If he's 30% stronger than any other character but still has to worry about not getting caught in melee, I'm fine with that.

Firewarrior44 wrote:
(take care though cause these can also impact melee characters)

Precisely. I can already make things more difficult for the melee if I want without hurting the archer. Now I'm looking for something I can use to favor the melee in other cases.

Protoman wrote:
Taking that out is making the combat style a lot easier when you're already feeling the archer character has an easy time doing damage.

Again, my issue is not that the archer character has an easy time doing damage. It's that the archer, if he takes PBM, suddenly doesn't get penalized for letting enemy melee stick to him like glue. I'm not trying to nerf his overall strength.

And let's talk about cover from creatures. Well, first let's talk about cover from a wall or something.

Archer -> Wall -> Creature

The archer sees the creature around the corner of the wall and fires! But the creature has cover, so the archer has a -4 penalty. And due to that penalty, the archer hits the wall providing cover. Better luck next time.

Archer -> Creature -> Creature

The archer sees the second creature behind the first creature and fires! But the second creature has cover, so the archer has a -4 penalty. And due to that penalty, the archer hits the first creature...wait no he doesn't. Somehow. Even if both creatures have the same AC. Even if the first creature is a gelatinous cube with 4 AC.

I don't mind the idea of creature #1 getting in the way of an arrow meant for creature #2. But then creature #1 should risk getting hit. Which, by the rules, it does not. It's completely safe. Why can't the archer just fire at creature #2 and who cares if creature #1 is in the way, it'll take the arrow instead if it wants?

Oh, and of course Improved Precise Shot removes this issue entirely on top of that nonsense.

I mean, I'm using the precise shot penalty and the physical objects or spell effects cover penalty. And with PBM the archer literally walk up to his target and shoot him point blank (no cover penalty) without provoking if he wants.

Chromantic Durgon <3 wrote:
So you won't be unfairly targeting him because he is an archer, you'll just be targeting a weakness?

Why do you think I'm targeting him "unfairly?" Is it unfair to have spellcasters which bypass the extra AC of a shield? Is it unfair to have high AB enemies which a 2H character can't stand against for long due to lack of shield AC?

I run large combats which can easily involve 8+ enemies of varied types. Some characters are better against some enemies than others. Some characters are vulnerable to certain types of enemies. Shield users don't like foes that can ignore their shield AC. 2H users don't like foes that take advantage of their low AC. What are bow users vulnerable to that 1H+Shield and 2H are fine against?

John Lance wrote:

There are all kinds of things that can screw up a ranged attack character. Just the ones I can think of off the top of my head:

- Blur
- Displacement
- Invisibility
- Obscuring Mist/Smoke/Wall of Fire/ etc...
- Darkness (if no darkvision)
- Deeper Darkness (if he has darkvision)
- Deflect Arrows
- Mirror Image or any other illusionary spell

So...all of those kind of look like they screw up melee attackers too (except Deflect Arrows).

John Lance wrote:
But as someone pointed out above, if it's just a fighter with a bow and a bunch of bow-specific feats, the best counter is:

I want something that counters bows specifically, regardless of class. Just like shield users, 2H users, and dual-wielders have specific weaknesses.

Chess Pwn wrote:
Well there you go for part of your problem, if you're going to ignore the -4 for a creature providing cover you just gave all your archers a level 11 feat for free at lv1.

Hardly. They still have to deal with cover from terrain. They still have to deal with cover from a spell effect. They still have to deal with concealment from something like Blur or being 5' away in an Obscuring Mist.

So it's more like getting a quarter of a feat. Maybe a third.

Chess Pwn wrote:
If you applied this then the enemy fighter stand in front of the target, or your allies are in the way and now there's a -4 OR he moves to get a clear shot and thus stopping a full attack.

See section above discussing my issues with that. Plus with PBM (as I said above) he can just move right up to melee and full attack from there next round if he wants, no AoOs.

Chess Pwn wrote:
Like, besides wind wall, snatch arrows, and the like, damage output is damage output.

Elaborate on "and the like," please. That's the whole point of the thread.

Chess Pwn wrote:
Common archer could be rogues, fighters, rangers, clerics, bards, cavaliers, INQUISITORS, oracle, Hunter, Slayer, warpriest.

I humbly apologize, I'm new and have been making "class" enemies only from CRB classes. Didn't realize it was such a crime.

Chess Pwn wrote:
If all they are fighting are fighters, then there should be more issues at hand then just not provoking using a bow.

Let's see...

Rogues: enemy rogues have been melee focused, generating sneak attacks from range past an initial ambush is problematic (or, at least, is problematic from what little I know).

Fighters: can get PBM.

Rangers: can get PBM.

Clerics: have been melee back-up when not casting so far.

Bards: haven't had a situation where they faced a bunch of bards...don't really have legions of bards. Though that sounds like a hilarious idea for a campaign.

And the rest aren't CRB, I foolishly assumed I could have decent enemy variety despite sticking to the CRB for now!

Chess Pwn wrote:
how many enemies are running step up? If basically ALL your enemies are then I can see why he'd want that feat.

Maybe like 1/3 of the melee enemies, so like 1/9 overall? Only humanoid melee focused enemies with class levels. The thing that prompted his desire for the feat didn't have anything to do with Step Up, actually, it had to do with some enemies with reach (and who didn't have Step Up). For some reason the party decided to basically clump up and the Archer got stuck on the outside. Then they got surrounded (was only like 4 enemies of Large size) and the archer couldn't 5 foot step away because he'd be in reach (and without cover) no matter where he went.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

You have cover rules wrong. A miss is just a miss, not a "you hit the cover". Cover from creatures forces the character to eat -4 or move more often.


Spellcaster ignore ALL their AC, armor, natural armor and shield, so it's not like touch attacks are only a shield user problem.

and what type of enemies or players do you have that a THW user doesn't kill the enemy quickly? Why would they need to stand long against any enemy? Shield AC is likely between 1 and 4. 4 AC lower doesn't make for bad AC. Paladin with full plate should be at 22 or 23 AC before smite. Yeah 26 is higher, but it's not like 3 ac is making THAT much of a difference. If an enemy has high attack bonus, it'll likely hit the shield user if it's likely to hit the non-shield user.

So 1 and shield, 2 and archery all don't like being hit. There's not actually anything you've said that is a "counter" to any of the three styles. Heck, archery has the most direct counters. Snatch arrow negates an attack, can't do that to non archery.


Balkoth wrote:
Protoman wrote:
Taking that out is making the combat style a lot easier when you're already feeling the archer character has an easy time doing damage.

Again, my issue is not that the archer character has an easy time doing damage. It's that the archer, if he takes PBM, suddenly doesn't get penalized for letting enemy melee stick to him like glue. I'm not trying to nerf his overall strength.

And let's talk about cover from creatures. Well, first let's talk about cover from a wall or something.

Archer -> Wall -> Creature

The archer sees the creature around the corner of the wall and fires! But the creature has cover, so the archer has a -4 penalty. And due to that penalty, the archer hits the wall providing cover. Better luck next time.

Archer -> Creature -> Creature

The archer sees the second creature behind the first creature and fires! But the second creature has cover, so the archer has a -4 penalty. And due to that penalty, the archer hits the first creature...wait no he doesn't. Somehow. Even if both creatures have the same AC. Even if the first creature is a gelatinous cube with 4 AC.

I don't mind the idea of creature #1 getting in the way of an arrow meant for creature #2. But then creature #1 should risk getting hit. Which, by the rules, it does not. It's completely safe. Why can't the archer just fire at creature #2 and who cares if creature #1 is in the way, it'll take the arrow instead if it wants?

Oh, and of course Improved Precise Shot removes this issue entirely on top of that nonsense.

I mean, I'm using the precise shot penalty and the physical objects or spell effects cover penalty. And with PBM the archer literally walk up to his target and shoot him point blank (no cover penalty) without provoking if he wants.

The cover isn't providing a -4 penalty, its a +4 bonus to the target's AC. Doesn't matter if the archer doesn't care about hitting creature providing cover or not and hoping to avoid a penalty (that's what feat investments are for), the creature is there and target can use it to its advantage for cover and benefit the bonus to AC, just like hiding behind an object with no Dexterity and crummy AC.

It doesn't auto-hit the cover because the archer wasn't aiming for the covering creature/square and its square. Why give the target a consolation prize if the cover was also a foe or punish the archer if it was an ally and already investing feats (Precise Shot and the +4 cover bonus or even negating that with Improved Precise Shot)?

With Point Blank Master, the archer full attacking without having to worry about AoOs is the absolute intent of the feat.
It's better than two-handed Power Attacking fighters/martials sure, but exactly how much feat investment did such a melee character really make? Power Attack? Maybe Furious Focus? Vital Strike (gah I hope not unless it's a very specific build)?
Whereas the archer went PBS, Rapid Shot, Precise Shot, Manyshot, Weapon Focus, Weapon Specialization, and Point Blank Master minimum from what I gathered from your description of the matter.


Balkoth wrote:
I humbly apologize, I'm new and have been making "class" enemies only from CRB classes. Didn't realize it was such a crime.

Wow, I didn't know that rogues, clerics and bards aren't in the CRB, care to share their source?

I foolishly assumed I could have decent enemy variety despite sticking to the CRB for now

If all enemies of class X are doing Y how is there variety?
Yes you have variety in CRB. Have an archery rogue, archery cleric, THW rogue, THW bards, THW rangers.

Ranger's generally want to get improved precise shot since cover from allies or other enemies is VERY common. That's the reason I want Improved precise shot, I'm not to worried about ignoring non-creature cover. So sure, Or the ranger could have manyshot and be getting 2 hits from his first attack. Those things are far more useful than not provoking because in the world step up is a relatively rare feat. If it's prevalent in your world and you give a large part of IPS for free then sure, might as well not provoke in melee range.


Okay, so enemies with reach is the reason. Again, how often are they fighting enemies with reach and how often are they getting RIGHT next to the archer so the archer can't 5ft and shoot for free?
Practically, it should be pretty rare. So this feat really is something that won't see much use and is far less problematic than him picking up manyshot.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

There isn't some sort of rock paper scissors in weapon combat you can pull. It's more class based. Weak will save and not wisdom based loses to will saves. Weak fort save loses to fort saves. Weak ref and not dex focused loses to ref saves. AC loses to touch attacks. Melee loses to flying enemies.

dual-wielding Rogue, a Witch, a Bard, a Paladin, a Monk, and a bow using Fighter

at lv6 the paladin and the fighter should have similar AC, I'm guessing this paladin is running the shield, so AC is 2-3 points higher when not smiting. (The paladin doesn't have a heavy shield right? He can't use lay on hands if he has a heavy shield and a weapon out.) The monk and the rogue also probably have similar AC which is much lower than the heavy armor users. The bard is the same, or maybe has a shield for 2 or 3 AC (again, not using heavy right? since that would prevent casting if a weapon is out.) So the bulk of the party has low AC and is frail. So anything with decent attacks should ignore the heavy armor and attack the frail light to no armor people and drop them. Your heavy armor fighter should probably be one of the last people attacked.


All in all, you're going to get posters telling you not to change the feat and that it's fine. If you don't want to agree you're fine not to and change your game up. But you're probably not going to find anything that helpful to you. Especially if you're dealing with what's available by lv6.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

So you're worried that the archer isn't getting punished for being in melee, because he took a feat that literally stops him from getting punished in melee... This is the entire reason why feats exist in the first place, to accentuate your strengths and cover up or eliminate your weaknesses.

Pathfinder isn't a video game, not everything needs to have a drawback or a counterbalance at all times.


Chess Pwn wrote:
You have cover rules wrong. A miss is just a miss, not a "you hit the cover".

I'm aware it's just a miss, that's my whole problem with it.

Chess Pwn wrote:
Spellcaster ignore ALL their AC, armor, natural armor and shield, so it's not like touch attacks are only a shield user problem.

Shield users gave up extra damage to get extra AC that is now useless, so that affects shield users more than 2H users.

Chess Pwn wrote:
4 AC lower doesn't make for bad AC.

Let's say the enemy hits the non-shield user on a 13 or better (40% chance). A shield user with 4 more AC only gets hit on a 17 or better (20% chance). The shield user literally takes half the damage.

Chess Pwn wrote:
Heck, archery has the most direct counters. Snatch arrow negates an attack, can't do that to non archery.

And, like I said in the original post, I'm looking for NON-direct counters. I'm looking for soft counters, not hard counters. Something that makes his life more difficult if he isn't careful, not stuff that cripples him.

Protoman wrote:
but exactly how much feat investment did such a melee character really make?

So are you arguing that melee needs more feats to help them or that ranged needs some of those feats removed?

Chess Pwn wrote:
Okay, so enemies with reach is the reason. Again, how often are they fighting enemies with reach and how often are they getting RIGHT next to the archer so the archer can't 5ft and shoot for free?

Third time in six levels they've fought anything with reach.

Chess Pwn wrote:
The paladin doesn't have a heavy shield right? He can't use lay on hands if he has a heavy shield and a weapon out

Do you really want to open that can of worms? For example, explain Seelah. And explain how a Mithral Heavy Shield is too heavy to use Lay on Hands while a Light Steel Shield *WHICH WEIGHS MORE* than the Mithral Heavy Shield is just fine.

Frogsplosion wrote:
So you're worried that the archer isn't getting punished for being in melee, because he took a feat that literally stops him from getting punished in melee... This is the entire reason why feats exist in the first place, to accentuate your strengths and cover up or eliminate your weaknesses.

If the feat was "You gain +2 Dodge AC vs AoOs when firing a ranged weapon" I'd be fine with that. But there's a reason Mobility isn't "You no longer trigger AoOs while moving" and Iron Will isn't "You are immune to Mind Affecting effects."

I'd also point out that one feat effectively negates the entire Step Up/Following Step/Step Up and Strike feat chain.


Balkoth wrote:
Protoman wrote:
but exactly how much feat investment did such a melee character really make?

So are you arguing that melee needs more feats to help them or that ranged needs some of those feats removed?

Welcome to the issues of Feats.


I say let it go, because there are much much worse combos that exist in the game. If you let yourself be worked up over a run of the mill idea, I would hate to see your reaction at some of the more optimized options.

For instance, I have a pouncing character at level 12 that does with haste and bardic 284 DPR. I can literally kill anything on the board within 140' once per round.


nicholas storm wrote:
If you let yourself be worked up over a run of the mill idea, I would hate to see your reaction at some of the more optimized options.

For me, "run of the mill" means Core Rulebook :P That's how I was introduced to Pathfinder -- and PBM is APG.

nicholas storm wrote:
For instance, I have a pouncing character at level 12 that does with haste and bardic 284 DPR. I can literally kill anything on the board within 140' once per round.

Is that CRB/APG/ACG only or other stuff?

Also, between the fact it's a party of six and the style of the campaign, I'm tweaking monster stats. Going by the "formula" I've been using, CR 12 monsters would seem to have roughly 320ish HP. FWIW.


CR12 monsters do not have 320HP. Table 1-1 bestiary 1. Average HP by CR at 12 is 160.

That character is APG, UM, UC, UEG, Familiar Folio.

The point is that PBM is not overpowered. Maybe the character is overpowered, but that has nothing to do with the feat.


nicholas storm wrote:
CR12 monsters do not have 320HP. Table 1-1 bestiary 1. Average HP by CR at 12 is 160.

What part of "tweaking monster stats" and "going by the 'formula' I've been using" was confusing?

nicholas storm wrote:
That character is APG, UM, UC, UEG, Familiar Folio.

So it's not something I have to worry about anyway.

nicholas storm wrote:
The point is that PBM is not overpowered. Maybe the character is overpowered, but that has nothing to do with the feat.

I don't mind characters that are very strong in one area as long as they have weaknesses to be careful about. I'd just prefer less drastic ways to "challenge" the archer than deflect arrows/wind wall/etc. Those are very binary.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

At the point you double average HP, you aren't playing pathfinder anymore. You are playing Balkothfinder.


Balkoth wrote:


If the feat was "You gain +2 Dodge AC vs AoOs when firing a ranged weapon" I'd be fine with that. But there's a reason Mobility isn't "You no longer trigger AoOs while moving" and Iron Will isn't "You are immune to Mind Affecting effects."

I'd also point out that one feat effectively negates the entire Step Up/Following Step/Step Up and Strike feat chain.

so does every combat maneuver specialist that takes an Improved Combat Maneuver feat. There are also plenty of other feat chains that revolve entirely around forcing free AoOs.

http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/combat-feats/close-quarters-thrower-combat

http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/combat-feats/sword-and-pistol-combat

this negates one of the rogue's weaknesses, no one really cares.
http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/combat-feats/shadow-strike-combat

Quote:


I don't mind characters that are very strong in one area as long as they have weaknesses to be careful about. I'd just prefer less drastic ways to "challenge" the archer than deflect arrows/wind wall/etc. Those are very binary.

Clearly your 9 level caster isn't doing their job if they're not the center of attention in your game. A core only wizard could deal with pretty much any encounter you throw at them without ever really being threatened at all as long as they're in a party.


I would suggest that him taking point blank master is a trap. He will be less inclined to leave melee combat that way and should get eaten up by the 2-handed fighters (by fighter I mean generic melee guy not the class- Barbarian is usually best). A two-handed fighter, should have no problem out damaging an archer in a standard game. The 2HF only has to have strength to attack with, while the archer needs high strength and dexterity. Assuming he put points into both of those he no longer has points for constitution.

Quote:
I'm looking for NON-direct counters. I'm looking for soft counters, not hard counters. Something that makes his life more difficult if he isn't careful, not stuff that cripples him.

I need more details of the character to fully help you out, but if he doesn't have a way to get around damage reduction it is something that cripples archers until they do. This will also hurt the 2 weapon fighter, but it will allow the 2 handed fighter to shine. You can also specify what the damage reduction is to, for example if the rogue has slashing weapons throwing zombies at them will allow you to negate the archer while still letting the rogue shine (although they are immune to sneak attack...).

Hitting will saves has been stated before, but worth mentioning again. Everyone else in the party has ways to defend against will saves fairly well. I wouldn't try to mind control him (not at 6 anyway) but there are a lot of effects that you can land that will lower his effectiveness.

Lower their strength. An archer that is using a composite bow takes a penalty to attack when he is not strong enough to use it. This will also lower their damage by a larger percentage than it will the 2hf as it will lower each attack by a set amount. Some ways to lower strength are to apply fatigue and exhaustion.

Whatever you do, don't go overboard. If every encounter has one or more of these effects it really hurts the archer and makes their character useless. Remember that they still need to be the hero of the day sometimes.


nicholas storm wrote:
At the point you double average HP, you aren't playing pathfinder anymore. You are playing Balkothfinder.

No, clearly I started playing Balkothfinder when I had PCs do max HP on level up. Then I was playing Balkothfinder even more when I gave everyone Weapon Finesse/Agile Maneuvers for free. Then I was REALLY playing Balkothfinder when I maximized healing spells out of combat. This is just the icing on the icing on the icing of the cake.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Then you should move your posts to homebrew, because these forums are for people that play with pathfinder rules.


8 people marked this as a favorite.
nicholas storm wrote:
Then you should move your posts to homebrew, because these forums are for people that play with pathfinder rules.

No they are for people who play utilizing some form of pathfinder rules. don't be an elitist.


Frogsplosion wrote:
so does every combat maneuver specialist that takes an Improved Combat Maneuver feat.

Taking the Improve Feat doesn't automatically get them past their opponent's CMD.

Frogsplosion wrote:
this negates one of the rogue's weaknesses, no one really cares.

Me either!

Frogsplosion wrote:
Clearly your 9 level caster isn't doing their job if they're not the center of attention in your game. A core only wizard could deal with pretty much any encounter you throw at them without ever really being threatened at all as long as they're in a party.

We "only" have a witch. Not sure if that matters.

I also have two campaigns going on in this "style" of combat and so far everyone seems very happy with it. Not sure what to say.

Rylar wrote:
A two-handed fighter, should have no problem out damaging an archer in a standard game.

A level 6 Greatsword wielding fighter is doing less damage than this level 6 Longbow wielding fighter. I statted out both "versions" of the character fully (with more str/con for the greatsword guy). Manyshot, Rapid Shot, and Point Blank Shot are really powerful.

Rylar wrote:
I need more details of the character to fully help you out, but if he doesn't have a way to get around damage reduction it is something that cripples archers until they do.

He's doing 3 (Str) + 1 (PBS) + 1 (Weapon Training) + 1 (Weapon) + 2 (Weapon Specialization) + 4 (Deadly Aim) + 4.5 (average of a d8) = 16.5 damage per shot. Takes DR 10 to significantly slow him down...which would also screw over the monk.

Rylar wrote:
Lower their strength. An archer that is using a composite bow takes a penalty to attack when he is not strong enough to use it.

It's an Adaptive Bow. Yes, it's not CRB/APG/ACG. I didn't want him to have to go through the hassle of getting a new bow every time he got a new strength item.

Rylar wrote:
Whatever you do, don't go overboard. If every encounter has one or more of these effects it really hurts the archer and makes their character useless. Remember that they still need to be the hero...

Indeed, which is why I mentioned wanting "soft" counters. Stuff that makes him wary, not stuff that makes him useless.


Balkoth wrote:
Frogsplosion wrote:
so does every combat maneuver specialist that takes an Improved Combat Maneuver feat.
Taking the Improve Feat doesn't automatically get them past their opponent's CMD.

...And Point Blank Master doesn't automatically let him hit their AC. It doesn't even give him the +2 to-hit that the Improved Maneuver Feats do.

Why, exactly, does every fighting style need a "downside" that can't be negated?


I mean, honestly, the real "downside" to archery is DR. The archer just can't manage damage/hit to match the Barbarian with a 2H weapon. You could always take clustered shots, but I guess we're not okay with taking feats to reduce or eliminate weaknesses?

But for the OP, try letting the party fight some golems or something else with meaningful DR, that will give the archer more trouble than other people.

The Exchange

Point Blank Master has never mattered on my level 16 PFS archer. You are highly overvaluing the ability.

Archers do so much damage it is rare enemies can approach them before dying. If they do it is even more rare they have combat reflexes to take advantage of all the AoO created by firing the bow so you just keep shooting and kill them anyway.

If DR is still slowing him down be thankful he isn't taking Clustered Shots or better arrows and is instead taking this situational feat.


Point Blank Mastery is fine. If your PC pays for the required feats, they should be allowed to use said feats unmolested. I have an Ilsurian archer with mythic tiers and Point Blank Mastery in one of my games. Its perfectly fine.


Just have a frost giant ambush the archer and sunder his bow, problem solved.

In a more serious response you should step back and realize the pros and cons you thought knew about archery after 6 months of playing are wrong and that's okay.

At level 6 the party should be facing windwall as an effective and valid tactic to delay and limit the archers effectiveness. All the fog spells also force opponents to engage by melee. Wall of stone can also effectively remove the archer from combat.

Weather such as rain, snow, high winds will also hurt archery until higher levels. Archery underwater is essentially useless without very specific magical effects.

Also archery is useless when you are grappled, swallowed whole, engulfed etc. If you like NPCs opponents check out the rules for nets.


Pathfinder Maps Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

At the end of the day, a mid or high-level archer is simply more powerful than an in-your-face melee combatant in Pathfinder. PBM or no.

All you can do is:
- deploy the usual penalties for cover & firing into melee (which feats can overcome)
- deploy the usual anti-archery spells and vision-restricting tools
- deploy anti-martial magic preferentially against that danged archer
and... drum roll...

- use NPC archers with the same suite of feats and abilities as the players, right back at them.

Me, I'd be far less worried about a good archer PC than I would be about a clever spellcaster PC. Does your archer *really* outshine the witch character?


So you've heavily modified things in the archer's favor and now are worried that they're too powerful? No @#$%. You also presented a limited list of allowed stuff that also isn't accurate because you've let the archer take stuff from other books to make themselves more powerful. That's... well, not helping.

Point Blank Master literally only does one thing, let them fire in melee without provoking. It doesn't give them any bonus to hit, it doesn't up damage, it literally only prevents AoOs. If they were too powerful before it changes absolutely nothing.

Since I now have some numbers, let's see what we've got.

The archer is attacking at +6+Dex+1(WT)+1(W)+1(WF)+1(PBS)-2(DA)-2(RS)... for +6+Dex (x2+1 doubled) and +1+Dex. Damage of 16.5.
For a THF we'd be looking at +6+Str+1(WT)+1(W)+1(WF)-2(PA)+2(FF)... for +9+Str and +2+Str. Damage 2d6+Str*1.5+1(WT)+1(W)+2(WS)+6(PA) or 17+1.5*Str.

Doing the quick DPR numbers (Assuming 20 stat) the archer comes out ahead. If the archer lost either Manyshot or Rapid Shot, they would be behind. If the THF had a slightly higher Str (22) then they'd still be behind, but it would be only a couple points apart (and in battle not noticeable). Same if the archer had lower Dex. If the archer actually had to use the soft cover rules, their positions (and about how far apart they are) switch.

So only if the archer has Manyshot, gets to skip the soft cover rules, and the THF doesn't have a higher mainstat... then the archer does noticeably more DPR. In any other case they're equal or the THF is better. Why is Point Blank Master the problem again?

Now for the limitations on archery. You mention fog but leave out that unless the opponent is next to the archer, their choices are to move and shoot at point blank range (which a THF does better) or to fire blindly at squares in the fog and hope to hit something (this way can hit other targets and allies). An opponent walks behind a wall or turns a corner. The archer now has to move to see behind the obstacle. So does the THF, but they had to anyway. Anything that makes the archer reposition causes them to lose both Rapid Shot and Manyshot. The THF loses... well, just their iterative. Why is making them reposition not a good way to stop the archer?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

After reading through this thread and the OP responses, I'd advise all of your players to find a new GM that isn't recreating the game in their likeness. The game has already been designed for you. Try not to alter it too much or you will continue to run into problems.


I will just point out that fighting an opponent with spring attack, a high movement speed and deflect arrows on a battlefield that is full of things large enough to hide behind is hilarious against an archer. Its the break-line-of-sight tactic, but supported by feats such that it actually works well instead of kind of ok. Not functional in all terrain though.

More to the point, Point Blank Master is fine. There are a lot of things that can challenge an archer, as have been mentioned. I wouldn't worry so much about harder counters; getting disarmed or tripped is bad, usually worse than getting hit (which is a hint that maybe some enemies should try to do that if appropriate) but not completely incapacitating most of the time. Breaking line of sight is also an underrated tactic that can be employed in some situations to decent effect.


Things archers generally hate:

  • Fickle Winds/Wind Wall
  • The Wall of Stone time-out box
  • Sunder
  • Being knocked prone
  • Grapple
  • Earth elementals
  • Summoners (role, not necessarily class) and their summons
  • Small rooms and narrow, curving/turning hallways
  • Obscuring Mist/Fog Cloud
  • Deeper Darkness
  • Disarm
  • Glitterdust/Blindness
  • Deflect Arrows
  • Blur/Displacement
  • Swarms
  • Humorously placed Silent Image walls
  • etc.

Look at all those CRB options that don't involve AoOs for being in melee. Do you know how many high-level encounters in PFS include a scroll of Fickle Winds (Ultimate Magic) for the big bad? Enough that there are people clamoring to have a dispeller handy in the party.

While there is typically a counter to any of these, the big question becomes "how many counters does the archer invest in and how much does it diminish his/her other capabilities?" Personally, I've got 2 archers in PFS, neither has any interest or need in PBM, and it's so low on the wish list that I can't really bother to care that it exists. I just don't have feats to take something that situational when I could be focusing on more important aspects of combat and the character. I typically get around the "I'm in melee" problem by not being in melee and having a reasonable escape method from melee when I need it.


Serisan wrote:
Do you know how many high-level encounters in PFS include a scroll of Fickle Winds (Ultimate Magic) for the big bad?

Yeah, and that kind of spell is precisely what I want to avoid, since it's a big middle finger to the archer. Auto blocks 100% of his shots. If that spell was "+4 AC vs arrows" or something I'd be fine with it.

Serisan wrote:
I typically get around the "I'm in melee" problem by not being in melee and having a reasonable escape method from melee when I need it.

The concern is the "I'm in melee problem" is NOT a problem with PBM. He already matches or exceeds the AC of a 2H fighter and has nearly as much HP.

GM 7thGate wrote:
I wouldn't worry so much about harder counters; getting disarmed or tripped is bad, usually worse than getting hit (which is a hint that maybe some enemies should try to do that if appropriate) but not completely incapacitating most of the time.

Unfortunately both of those feats require 13+ Int, unless you're meaning "Just do it baseline since the archer can't AoO." Which I suppose could work. He still has 25 CMD, though, second only to the monk.

Bob Bob Bob wrote:
You also presented a limited list of allowed stuff that also isn't accurate because you've let the archer take stuff from other books to make themselves more powerful.

By "stuff" you mean "Pay 1000g for an Adapative property?" Because that's literally it.

Bob Bob Bob wrote:
If they were too powerful before it changes absolutely nothing.

It means that if some enemies rush him, he doesn't get pummeled by continuing to full attack in melee range of several enemies. By full attacking in melee range he'd take 50-100% extra damage due to the provoked AoOs.

Since I now have some numbers, let's see what we've got.

Bob Bob Bob wrote:
If the archer actually had to use the soft cover rules, their positions (and about how far apart they are) switch.

Funny story, if you can freely full attack with a bow in the bad guy's face, he doesn't get soft cover.

Bob Bob Bob wrote:
Why is making them reposition not a good way to stop the archer?

It is. And I'll try to use that more. Though PBM reduces the need to reposition :P

Wheldrake wrote:
Me, I'd be far less worried about a good archer PC than I would be about a clever spellcaster PC. Does your archer *really* outshine the witch character?

Honestly don't know.

Trimalchio wrote:
At level 6 the party should be facing windwall as an effective and valid tactic to delay and limit the archers effectiveness. All the fog spells also force opponents to engage by melee. Wall of stone can also effectively remove the archer from combat.

So...spellcasters. Joy.

Ragoz wrote:
If they do it is even more rare they have combat reflexes to take advantage of all the AoO created by firing the bow so you just keep shooting and kill them anyway.

Even getting one AoO would double the damage output of a level 5 enemy.

Ragoz wrote:
If DR is still slowing him down be thankful he isn't taking Clustered Shots or better arrows and is instead taking this situational feat.

Clustered Shots isn't allowed.

PossibleCabbage wrote:
But for the OP, try letting the party fight some golems or something else with meaningful DR, that will give the archer more trouble than other people.

Would completely screw over the monk doing 1d8+3 damage per hit. And the paladin also doing 1d8+3 damage per hit. Though the paladin could at least buff himself to 1d8+4!

Sundakan wrote:
...And Point Blank Master doesn't automatically let him hit their AC.

What? It automatically avoids the AoO. If Mobility just gives +4 AC to AoOs incurred while moving, why does PBM automatically AoOS incurred while firing a ranged weapon? If Mobility was "You no longer provoke AoOs while moving" and PBM was "You get a +4 AC bonus when you provoke an AoO in melee" what would you think?

Sovereign Court

14 people marked this as a favorite.

@Belkoth: last week you were asking if the Roc wasn't too powerful. Everyone agreed that rocs were powerful, but not that they were too powerful because they had some limits. But you kept trying to convince us that the roc was too powerful. And then it turned out that some of your house rules removed those limits.

This week you're concerned about the power of archers, and everyone agrees archers are powerful, but have their limits. But you're convinced they're too powerful. And it turns out that your house rules remove some of those limits and that you're not happy to enforce the others.

See a pattern here?


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Balkoth wrote:
Would completely screw over the monk doing 1d8+3 damage per hit. And the paladin also doing 1d8+3 damage per hit. Though the paladin could at least buff himself to 1d8+4!

These are level 6 characters? I think a level 6 martial dealing only 1d8+3/hit while the archer stars is a pretty good indication of an optimization gap- the archer is fairly well optimized while the Paladin and Monk are not. (An aside, if monsters have 320 HP, and your in-your-face martials are doing an average of 7.5/hit, how long does combat take? Yeesh)

One thing that is pretty clear about Archers is that while you need a lot of feats to make them work, the path to making a good archer is fairly well indicated. An archer is easy to optimize: you take PBS, Precise, Rapid, and Manyshot and then you pick archery feats that work for you (or spend feats on something other than a specific fighting style). Meanwhile the barbarian with a greatsword takes power attack and they're ready to go, but "spending their future feats in a constructive fashion" is less obvious for the Barbarian than it is for the archer.

But I mean, a level 10 monk with some fairly basic gear can have an attack progression of 2 weapon attacks at +17 for 1d10+20 and 3 unarmed attacks at +16/+16/+11 for 1d10+15 each. 1d8+3 at 6th level can be improved on.


5 people marked this as a favorite.

The OP really should stop coming here if he wants validation.

There's nothing that "soft counters" archery. Anything that might be considered a "soft counter" against archery works against non-archery. The only other things are the hard counters like fickle winds and wind wall or deflect arrows. If you don't want to use those at all because you feel they are "cheap or cheezy" then you've just buffed the archer a lot. If you don't use creature cover because "it's not realistic" then you buffed archery. If you don't use DR you've just buffed many combat styles.

You've even admitted that the times this feat would be useful is like what 5-6 fights over 6 levels? I'm not sure what your fights per level are like, but in PFS you're likely to have 9 fights per level. by level 6 that is about 45 fights you've done. Having a feat that is useful in 1/9th of your fights seems like a weak feat, as many have mentioned before. If you are changing this too, and they level after like 2 fights then 5 fights out of 10 is half and it's gained much use, because of another thing you're doing in your game that is different from most people's game. Nothing wrong with that, but it really can change the dynamic and power level of stuff.

But you come here asking if something is too good. Are told no by everyone, and then refuses to listen to anything anyone is saying, and keep trying to champion and convince us it's all too good.


[

Balkoth wrote:
stuff

Sometimes you just need a giant middle finger to the archer to keep encounters more interesting.

I play a Bolt Ace in the current campaign I'm in, and I've been in multiple encounters now where using my crossbow has been practically useless due to Deflect Arrows ALONE. That's not even including times where cover, concealment, and so on caused problems for my effectiveness, of which I would say is every encounter.

The first time it was made useless was when I would've critically one-shot the boss (which I know the GM made either the boss or its mount have Deflect Arrows to prevent the encounter being trivialized, and I know Deflect Arrows, by RAW, doesn't work unless the attack is made at you, and not just your square, since the Deflect Arrows was given to his mount). While I was a little disappointed (like my other player who was a Cleric back in 3.X and rolled 4 20s in a row to turn an undead BBEG into dust, but was ruled to cut his HP in half), I wasn't useless, since there were other minions I had to deal with that were converging on the party wizard, minions who don't have Deflect Arrows. All it does is require prioritizing other targets, and then leaving the party to deal with the ones they can't feasibly deal with.

For PBM, all that means is he can wade into melee and not be afraid of getting killed for actually sticking to his gun(s) instead of being forced to switch to melee weapons that he clearly sucks nuts at. Also, I have just as much HP (and more AC) as the actual "tanks" of my party as a Bolt Ace. But, what I do lack is the ability to heal myself when I get hit, since I'm a Bolt Ace, and not a Ranger (who, as far as I know, don't get Cure spells anyway), whereas my front liners actually can heal themselves with Fervor, Lay On Hands, and so on. They can take the hits, and still function. The ranger? Not so much. All PBM means is you can swarm him (if he's an apparent enough threat) without having to feel like you're singling him out (or him getting that understanding from your actions).

If it doesn't provoke, then don't bother grabbing the feats. The feats only give a +2 bonus anyway (though the Greater feats usually give an extra +2, and offer some secondary effect, such as extra provocations, which means it's better than Weapon Focii by a large margin). Also, not all enemies have crap intelligence, and certain classes (such as Brawler) ignore the Intelligence requirement. There's also the Dirty Fighting feat, which lets you likewise ignore the Intelligence and Combat Expertise requirements, but that's in another sourcebook than what's approved.

The Adaptive Property is perhaps one of his biggest DPR gains, simply because he doesn't have to pay to acquire a new bow when his Strength increases, or if he's hit with Strength Damage/Drain (and therefore can't use his current bow effectively). Quite frankly, I'm shocked the Paizo devs haven't nerfed it to be a +1 Bonus (or more) for how absolutely necessary that property is for a given dedicated archer, and how streamline it is compared to other items that were nerfed for similar reasons (because everybody would take it for how good it was for the given price it had).

Yes, but even if he full attacks from an adjacent square, at least the BBEG can still full attack back.

Spellcasters are the most powerful entity in existence available to the PCs. Quite frankly, the things a spellcaster can do would make your Archer PC a pebble in the road in comparison. And that's just using Core Rulebook material. The other sourcebooks are just icing on an already sugar-loaded cake.

Clustered Shots isn't any worse than Pummeling Style (which the Monk with Flurry of Blows should be taking). If the Archer is running around with his bow having the highest enhancement bonus possible, the feat doesn't do a whole lot for them, in the same vein that a Monk with a fully-enhanced AoMF doesn't really need Pummeling Style.

You're kidding, right? 1D8+3 is all they're doing at the level they're at? My level 3 Bolt Ace does 1D10+1 (and that's including Point Blank Shot). Hell, even our Paladin with a Longsword does 1D8+4 without Power Attack (which, by next level would bump it up to 1D8+8). If that's all they're doing, then they're doing it wrong.

Which the feat was designed to do. Mobility, on the other hand, makes it so that when you provoke from moving, you're less likely to be hit. It wasn't designed to avoid attacks of opportunity entirely like PBM was. In addition, Point Blank Master has extensive and selective requirements. Rangers and Fighters (and maybe Slayers, but per RAW not really) are some of the only classes that can take that feat. Everybody else? They either have to find another option (Air blessing from Warpriests is one example, I think), or deal with being crappy at ranged combat. Which is why most everybody who does play an archer is usually Fighter or Ranger.

If you're still absolutely concerned about the ranger having it, you can just adhoc ban the feat and replace it with something else. My suggestion is Empty Quiver Style, so he can use his Bow as a Melee Weapon. I will warn you, it does allow him the same benefits of his Ranged Options with his Melee Options. (Deadly Aim, Rapid Shot, Manyshot, Point Blank Shot? All can be used with his Bow when making Melee Attacks.) But, he still can't shoot in melee, which is what you're so uptight about.


Balkoth wrote:


GM 7thGate wrote:
I wouldn't worry so much about harder counters; getting disarmed or tripped is bad, usually worse than getting hit (which is a hint that maybe some enemies should try to do that if appropriate) but not completely incapacitating most of the time.

Unfortunately both of those feats require 13+ Int, unless you're meaning "Just do it baseline since the archer can't AoO." Which I suppose could work. He still has 25 CMD, though, second only to the monk.

I did mean to consider doing it baseline. One of the things a lot of people don't do enough of is look for situations where combat maneuvers are appropriate even if you're not explicitly trained in them. Whenever I can take a combat maneuver without provoking, either because I have reach, am fighting an opponent with a bow, or am next to a spellcaster that doesn't have a weapon drawn, I usually consider if combat maneuvers are appropriate. Sometimes they are, sometimes they aren't, but its good to keep options open.

The fact he has a good CMD does mitigate this, but he also has a good AC, so you do have some trouble attacking him physically anyway.

The Exchange

Back to your question, have you looked at environmental modifiers. If they are outside something as simple as a very windy day could add a -2 to ranged attack rolls and perception checks while not having any noticeable impact on everyone else. (sure everyone gets the -2 perception but that impacts the bad guys as well, so everyone's still on even footing.)

As was mentioned previously. DR/Slashing is the ultimate Archer beater. There is no way to get a slashing arrow. If you're afraid of also crippling someone else that may not have a slashing weapon... well after the first time they should wisen up and get one. The next time they encounter something they are ready, the archer still has to deal with it every time it shows up. (obviously not every encounter, but maybe for a few encounters in a row as a certain theme is played out, then something new every so often afterwards.

And you really should apply soft cover from creatures. As was mentioned before you're give every ranged combatant a free feat, but you don't give the same bonus to melee. You may tweak what qualifies as there are some options that simply don't make since such as the X vs + debacle (basically 1 creature can be flanked by 4 at the corners and there is no cover from any of the 4 empty side squares, that same creature flanked on the 4 sides has soft cover from everywhere unless the ranged attack is from a directly adjacent corner.)

Finally, just use more fights with a good mix of melee and ranged creatures. it's simple but the melee can prevent the melee players from just rushed the ranged creatures while the ranged creatures focus on the ranged fighter. just because the guy HAS PBM doesn't mean he's going to be using it if you're not running up to him to melee!

And always remember that even if he can shot without provoking, he still can't take AoO himself, so if a character is right next to him, they can still do actions that would provoke from a melee fighter, but would not provoke from the ranged fighter.

1 to 50 of 145 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Advice / Concerned About Archer Player Taking Point Blank Master All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.