| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Soldiers...are negatively useful oddly enough. Sharpshooter gives you reduced penalties when you full attack but you can't full attack with sniper rifles.
Neither Operative nor Soldier are very good with them, honestly.
Sharpshooter is built more for longarms, not sniper rifles.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
The main point of sniper rifles is to not fight fair. Eventually, you're taking shots from as much as a mile away. That forces your target to find cover and stay there. It doesn't matter that it's one shot per round if it will take them more than a dozen rounds to reach you or to get out of your effective range. They don't know when you've moved, so your party can advance on their position. The only class features that work well with sniper rifles are ones that let you shoot through/around total cover, and an operative talent to make debuffing trick attacks with them (making them useful at short range as well). We will probably get specializations for snipers in the future, but for now, grab Far Shot.
All non-thrown ranged weapons use Dex to hit.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I said operative melee weapons use dex to hit..
Yeah I am well aware of sniping from distance mate.. That still doesn't talk about being too far away from combat, or the fact noone wants to sit around a table while the one player takes 6 rounds of combat before anyone else, and having the enemies on full alert..
Everyone in the group could be snipers, and then they all get to have fun. Plenty of groups will like to be able to advance with a sniper covering them as they do. Hidden sniper is a great way to provide support to an unarmed group making a risky meeting. If your group doesn't like the idea of someone firing from hundreds of feet away, then... yeah, a sniper rifle is a bad choice for the group? Other groups will have uses for it, though.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It is fairly standard for sniper rifles. Their advantage is really long range. However most encounters are usually on one map which is only about 150' across. A sniper would have to be off map to get advantage of even the 250 range increment.
Now a NPC sniper "off-map" could throw some consistent damage and pin down the players (much like real snipers)
If players have time to set up the encounter with a real sniper nest then they are useful
|
|
I saw this too. I was looking to build a sniper, but noticed that the two classes that start off proficient with the things don't do well with them. Operatives can't apply their combat tricks because they aren't small arms (so you can't 'sneak attack' them (or whatever the term is, don't have the book in front of me) and the soldier sniping style, as mentioned, is more useful if you have a weapon that can make multiple attacks a round.
I'm starting to think the best sniper build would be to make a mystic or technomancer and buff the crap out of yourself and just buy the sniper weapon proficiency.
I guess there is that one operative trick that lets you debuff with a sniper rifle. . . And they DO have a lot of base damage (10d10 for the best one.)
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I haven't done a build yet, but am tempted to have a go at a sniper rifle technomancer, taking advantage of Spellshot.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
I haven't done a build yet, but am tempted to have a go at a sniper rifle technomancer, taking advantage of Spellshot.
Power Word: Headshot
Do sniper rifles require any particularly demanding investments for, say, a soldier?Could you just do a standard longarms build that also is capable of using a sniper rifle when the range would be useful?
I can't see snipers being at all useful in the SFS Scenario play, or even the AP.
Just about every encounter is relatively intimate, and at fairly close engagement ranges - the maps are still at the same scale the mostly melee oriented Pathfinder ones were, I suppose it keeps melee relevant, and thats hard to do when your enemy is set up a mile away putting rounds on target.
Build a decent urban-oriented CQB and you should be fine.
Do sniper rifles require any particularly demanding investments for, say, a soldier?Could you just do a standard longarms build that also is capable of using a sniper rifle when the range would be useful?
A LOAD of Dosh. Starfinder really doesn't handle wanting multiple at-level weapons particularly well. As weapons scale a lot, lot more with dosh investment than Pathfinder (Where you could have a few low level weapons with only a minimal loss in power)
As an aside: I am disappointed that Artillery Lasers and Missile Launchers have such a tiny range. How the hades do you actually shoot down a plane with a missile launcher if you can't actually reach them with the missile?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I said operative melee weapons use dex to hit..
Yeah I am well aware of sniping from distance mate.. That still doesn't talk about being too far away from combat, or the fact noone wants to sit around a table while the one player takes 6 rounds of combat before anyone else, and having the enemies on full alert..
It's almost like snipers work in two man groups with one spotting and one shooting, and not in large parties where they directly engage the enemy in a firefight.
Yes, sniper weapons aren't great PC options, but I'm glad they exist. Just like archaic weapons.
Can you play a poptart sniper? Using a jetpack to fly up over total cover, take a shot, then free fall back into total cover as a non-action?
Do sniper rifles require any particularly demanding investments for, say, a soldier?Could you just do a standard longarms build that also is capable of using a sniper rifle when the range would be useful?A LOAD of Dosh. Starfinder really doesn't handle wanting multiple at-level weapons particularly well. As weapons scale a lot, lot more with dosh investment than Pathfinder (Where you could have a few low level weapons with only a minimal loss in power)
As an aside: I am disappointed that Artillery Lasers and Missile Launchers have such a tiny range. How the hades do you actually shoot down a plane with a missile launcher if you can't actually reach them with the missile?
I guess, but sellback is only 10% right? If a sniper rifle drops, I see no reason to let a soldier keep it on the off chance you need the range.
As for the jetpack thing, sniper rifles have ~1/10th the range if you don't use a move action to aim them. Strategy would be better with most longarms.
Also I noticed that Prone no longer adds penalties to Ranged Attack's. So technically the sniper could spend their move action laying prone on top of the building to take out a target.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I can't see snipers being at all useful in the SFS Scenario play, or even the AP.
Just about every encounter is relatively intimate, and at fairly close engagement ranges - the maps are still at the same scale the mostly melee oriented Pathfinder ones were, I suppose it keeps melee relevant, and thats hard to do when your enemy is set up a mile away putting rounds on target.
Build a decent urban-oriented CQB and you should be fine.
I'm surprised to see you say this, Shifty, although I recognize this was a thread necro.
I have been in several scenarios where I thought "this would be a great time to have a sniper rifle." I distinctly remember having to run hundreds of feet down a canyon against oncoming sniper fire, taking range penalties on my longarm as I fired back. If I had been a sniper, I could have just sat back and returned fire.
In another scenario recently I had to make a perilous drop down a steep cliff-face to get within range of the foe; if I had been a sniper I could have sat at the top of the cliff and fired down while the rest of the party risked their necks to get closer.
I also recently played a multi-table special where a sniper could have sat still in the boss fight and picked people off while the rest of the party had to dimension door, fly, or otherwise move themselves across the map to engage the foe.
It won't come up in every society scenario, nor every encounter of every AP, but being able to put a sniper rifle to decent use seems like it has some major advantages. I'm probably going to start having my Soldiers carry one, and I am thinking of getting one for my Operative as well.
|
While the majority of scenarios will not be appropriate for the sniper part of a sniper weapon, it can still be about as useful as a longarm every other time.
Building a sniping oriented character might not be the best choice. That said, having a sniper is likely never going to hurt.
If you aim to build a sniping oriented character, don't get your hopes up for sniping all too often. As long as you don't get your hopes up, they can be quite fun. (I have a level 10 sniper in society.)
So I'm not sure if I'm missing a few things here! First of all what's bothering me about starfinder is them removing the bonus to hit when prone with some ranged weapons (like Pathfinders crossbows).
Removing the what? What bonus is this?
While the majority of scenarios will not be appropriate for the sniper part of a sniper weapon, it can still be about as useful as a longarm every other time.
Building a sniping oriented character might not be the best choice. That said, having a sniper is likely never going to hurt.
If you aim to build a sniping oriented character, don't get your hopes up for sniping all too often. As long as you don't get your hopes up, they can be quite fun. (I have a level 10 sniper in society.)
Yes and no. I'm going to bring up some things here that you probably know more about than I do, but I want your thoughts and I also want readers to see them.
Almost all the sniper rifles have the unwieldy property. One of the advantages of a long-arm over a sniper rifle is that the long-arm can have a bipod or the like attached to it to reduce the multiple attack penalty by 2 or so; you won't be able to do that with most sniper rifles. I'm also not sure that sniper rifles keep up with long-arms in raw damage output or special properties.
Edit: at a glance, damage output from a single round of a sniper rifle looks pretty competitive with a long-arm, but that still leaves the double attack issue
I have been in several scenarios where I thought "this would be a great time to have a sniper rifle." I distinctly remember having to run hundreds of feet down a canyon against oncoming sniper fire, taking range penalties on my longarm as I fired back. If I had been a sniper, I could have just sat back and returned fire.
I am disappointed to say I know the exact scenario you mention and barring that one, there is scant other opportunities to employ the weapons at anywhere near their full range increments.
The design of SFS scenarios is much more 'Pathfinder with zap guns', where ranges are still geared up in a way to keep melee looking useful, and somehow we're always on foot over vast terrain (except when an encounter occurs and suddenly were only 30 feet away), despite being a game set in a tech era.
|
|
For one, there is a line of snipers that are not unwieldy.
Two, by setting up a bipod you have to stay in place. If the combat is at all dynamic, and the enemies move around you have to spend time moving and stabilizing the bipod. The isn't terrible overall, but a factor.
If you are making one shot your to-hit is higher. You can also lower it by 2 to do more damage with Deadly Aim. As it is the same minus as a bipoded full-attack, the mathematical damage probably isn't as high. Though, if you manage to actually pull off sniping (i.e. hiding->firing->hiding) your to-hit goes back up. Again, the math probably supports full-attacking. But, as the damage on snipers pull ahead of longarms, sniping still isn't too bad.
Lastly, you get the flavor fun of playing a sharpshooter/sniper and are still doing enough damage to feel like you are contributing. And, if you don't have any melee in your group (which is dangerous), you are likely one of the highest damage dealers.
Also, as a sidenote, if you are hiding, firing vs EAC, and not using Deadly Aim, your to-hit is pretty decent. So much so that a resident Technomancer might just choose you as a good candidate for Supercharge Weapon, thus giving a greater feel of the "headshot". Also, you are hypothetically pretty far back making an even more enticing partner to the Technomancer.
I have been in several scenarios where I thought "this would be a great time to have a sniper rifle." I distinctly remember having to run hundreds of feet down a canyon against oncoming sniper fire, taking range penalties on my longarm as I fired back. If I had been a sniper, I could have just sat back and returned fire.
I am disappointed to say I know the exact scenario you mention and barring that one, there is scant other opportunities to employ the weapons at anywhere near their full range increments.
The design of SFS scenarios is much more 'Pathfinder with zap guns', where ranges are still geared up in a way to keep melee looking useful, and somehow we're always on foot over vast terrain (except when an encounter occurs and suddenly were only 30 feet away), despite being a game set in a tech era.
I can think of a special where a sniper rifle would have allowed a PC to sit in one spot for the whole boss fight while the rest of the party had to move all over the place. I also played a scenario where the party has to drop down a sheer cliff into a pool of water in order to fight the boss; a sniper could have just sat at the top of the cliff.
I'm not saying there are that many opportunities to use the full sniper range necessarily; just that there are opportunities to use a sniper rifle beyond the range of long-arms and the like.
For one, there is a line of snipers that are not unwieldy.
Two, by setting up a bipod you have to stay in place. If the combat is at all dynamic, and the enemies move around you have to spend time moving and stabilizing the bipod. The isn't terrible overall, but a factor.
If you are making one shot your to-hit is higher. You can also lower it by 2 to do more damage with Deadly Aim. As it is the same minus as a bipoded full-attack, the mathematical damage probably isn't as high. Though, if you manage to actually pull off sniping (i.e. hiding->firing->hiding) your to-hit goes back up. Again, the math probably supports full-attacking. But, as the damage on snipers pull ahead of longarms, sniping still isn't too bad.
Lastly, you get the flavor fun of playing a sharpshooter/sniper and are still doing enough damage to feel like you are contributing. And, if you don't have any melee in your group (which is dangerous), you are likely one of the highest damage dealers.
Also, as a sidenote, if you are hiding, firing vs EAC, and not using Deadly Aim, your to-hit is pretty decent. So much so that a resident Technomancer might just choose you as a good candidate for Supercharge Weapon, thus giving a greater feel of the "headshot". Also, you are hypothetically pretty far back making an even more enticing partner to the Technomancer.
Everything you say is true, but I'm not sure about the bipod part.
Also as a move action, you can stabilize your weapon by resting an extended bipod on a solid surface or using the bipod as a forward grip. When you fire the stabilized weapon, reduce the total penalty you take for making a full attack and due to range according to the bipod’s type.
This isn't explained very well, but if you're gripping the bipod I would think you could still move. You just can't use that hand for anything else without spending the move action to regrip the bipod over again. I have played it this way and seen other people play it this way; i.e. grab the bipod when entering a dungeon and keep it gripped throughout
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
This isn't explained very well, but if you're gripping the bipod I would think you could still move. You just can't use that hand for anything else without spending the move action to regrip the bipod over again. I have played it this way and seen other people play it this way; i.e. grab the bipod when entering a dungeon and keep it gripped throughout
The item would not have a move action requirement at all if you could wake up, spend a move action to grip it and then stay there all day.
This isn't explained very well, but if you're gripping the bipod I would think you could still move. You just can't use that hand for anything else without spending the move action to regrip the bipod over again. I have played it this way and seen other people play it this way; i.e. grab the bipod when entering a dungeon and keep it gripped throughoutThe item would not have a move action requirement at all if you could wake up, spend a move action to grip it and then stay there all day.
I disagree. Having both of your hands occupied is pretty inconvenient, and most likely impossible to do for an entire day, let alone an entire "dungeon."
Although there are species with multiple arms... but having two of them "permanently" occupied is still inconvenient.
RAW I don't know how else you can interpret it, though, since spending a move action to grip the bipod would be a waste if you had to do it over again every round and couldn't actually benefit from the listed benefit of gripping the bipod! (because it takes a full-round action). I'm not sure why they would put the option in there otherwise.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I disagree. Having both of your hands occupied is pretty inconvenient, and most likely impossible to do for an entire day, let alone an entire "dungeon."
A rifle (the thing you're going to use it with anyway) occupies both of your hands anyway. So having both of your hands occupied anyway is a total non cost.
RAW I don't know how else you can interpret it, though, since spending a move action to grip the bipod would be a waste if you had to do it over again every round and couldn't actually benefit from the listed benefit of gripping the bipod! (because it takes a full-round action). I'm not sure why they would put the option in there otherwise.
It's a bipod. its a move action to set it up, and then it does its thing. If you move somewhere else you have to set it up again. That gives you some cost for a lot of benefit, fits the text, and most importantly works with what a bipod is.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Admittedly it's a bit of an oddball, but I'd like to present that a technomancer sniper is a fun, viable, build. The numbers suggest you'll never be at the top of the DPS charts - although if you can consistently cast supercharge weapon on yourself for a two-round buff->aim->shoot pattern, it's not that bad. But taking things like Distant Spell and Spellshot can make you pretty versatile from range.
Sure, dropping a space-lightning bolt or space-fireball from 500-1000 ft away is nice and all, but even beyond the obvious damage spells, there's fun options like fog cloud (and the other X Cloud variations,) irradiate, microbot assault, and so on. Even things like Holographic Image technically have a listed area, so is something you can cast through spellshot! (Although that already is castable at 400+40/lvl ft so...shrug.)
A rifle (the thing you're going to use it with anyway) occupies both of your hands anyway. So having both of your hands occupied anyway is a total non cost.
I disagree. Having both of your hands occupied is pretty inconvenient, and most likely impossible to do for an entire day, let alone an entire "dungeon."
Not quite. Unless I'm missing something, there's nothing in the rules that says it is a "move action" to grab your rifle with both hands after holding it with one hand. So you can hold it in one hand to interact with a datapad, a console, a door, a serum, a spell ampoule, etc. and then fire it twice as a full-round action if a combat springs onto you. If you interacted with any of those things after spending a move action to grip your bipod, you would have to spend a move action again to re-grip the bipod.
RAW I don't know how else you can interpret it, though, since spending a move action to grip the bipod would be a waste if you had to do it over again every round and couldn't actually benefit from the listed benefit of gripping the bipod! (because it takes a full-round action). I'm not sure why they would put the option in there otherwise.It's a bipod. its a move action to set it up, and then it does its thing. If you move somewhere else you have to set it up again. That gives you some cost for a lot of benefit, fits the text, and most importantly works with what a bipod is.
If they had not said that you could use the bipod "as a forward grip" by spending a move action, I would agree with you.
EDIT: There are rules about using an action. They are cheaper than the "grip the bipod" rule.
Changing how you hold a weapon is a swift action. You are only considered to have as many hands as your race has actual functional hands or similar appendages (two for most races, but four in the case of kasathas and some other characters). Even if you could hold two weapons in the same hand, you can’t use the hand to wield both weapons. For example, a human with a power battleglove on one hand can still make ranged attacks with a longarm, but he can’t make melee attacks (and thus does not threaten any spaces) while doing so. As a swift action, the human can switch to hold his longarm with only one hand, allowing him to make attacks with the battleglove, but while doing so he can’t make longarm attacks.
I do think the intention of the bipod is "pay a heavier cost whenever you grip the weapon with two hands, and get a reduced multi-attack penalty with it"
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Not quite. Unless I'm missing something,
you're missing a lot. Namely the big picture.
In pursuit of a mathematicians answer that allows you a +2 to hit at functionally no cost you've broken down the "is there a cost to the bipod" into an arbitrary binary yes/no.
This is a terrible way of examining unclear rules.
Comparing the benefit the item gives you (+2 to attack , the equivalent of two feats) with the alleged cost (not being able to hold your cell phone) for the rather cheap pile of credits gets you a VASTLY disproportionate benefit for the costs and downside.
If they had not said that you could use the bipod "as a forward grip" by spending a move action, I would agree with you.
Where are the rules for a forward grip?
I do think the intention of the bipod is "pay a heavier cost whenever you grip the weapon with two hands, and get a reduced multi-attack penalty with it"
There is no point at all of mentioning an action you take in combat (the move action) if you can take it out of combat and then never have to take it in combat, or if you have to track every time your character unwedgies their space suit.
Requiring a move action to set the bipod (or plant your stance for a forward grip or what have you) gives ranged combat a much needed boost and an interactive, more balanced choice that fits the rules better.
Not quite. Unless I'm missing something,you're missing a lot. Namely the big picture.
In pursuit of a mathematicians answer that allows you a +2 to hit at functionally no cost you've broken down the "is there a cost to the bipod" into an arbitrary binary yes/no.
This is a terrible way of examining unclear rules.
Comparing the benefit the item gives you (+2 to attack , the equivalent of two feats) with the alleged cost (not being able to hold your cell phone) for the rather cheap pile of credits gets you a VASTLY disproportionate benefit for the costs and downside.
I'm not sure it is so disproportionate. For one, I can't find any of the "two feats" you're referring to. The closest thing I can find is the multi-weapon fighting feat, which allows someone wielding multiple small arms to reduce their multi-attack penalty by 1.
To me, this is an indication that it behaves as I described, because there is no equivalent feat for Longarms. Longarms have advantages over small arms. Among other things if you have longarm proficiency (which costs a feat for something like half or more of the classes in the game) you can spend one of your longarm attachment slots to get a reduction in your multi-attack penalty. If you don't want to pay the longarm proficiency tax you can take multi-weapon fighting instead and get a similar benefit.
If they had not said that you could use the bipod "as a forward grip" by spending a move action, I would agree with you.Where are the rules for a forward grip?
There are none that I could find on aonsrd.com. It is not an item or an action in the game; just a phrase meaning "grip the weapon on its forward end".
I do think the intention of the bipod is "pay a heavier cost whenever you grip the weapon with two hands, and get a reduced multi-attack penalty with it"There is no point at all of mentioning an action you take in combat (the move action) if you can take it out of combat and then never have to take it in combat, or if you have to track every time your character unwedgies their space suit.
Requiring a move action to set the bipod (or plant your stance for a forward grip or what have you) gives ranged combat a much needed boost and an interactive, more balanced choice that fits the rules better.
Can you explain to me what "as a move action, you can stabilize your weapon by ... using the bipod as a forward grip" means? It says nothing about adopting a stance. Why is that sentence there, in your opinion?
I'm not sure it is so disproportionate.
I am.
Plus hit is the hardest thing there is to come by in this system. You can't get magic weapons, you can't get masterwork weapon. Taking points off of a full attack is a level 7ish ability.
Getting something twice as good for couch cushion money at no action economy cost is bonkers.
One of your four weapon rails is less cost than the couch cushion money.
For one, I can't find any of the "two feats" you're referring to. The closest thing I can find is the multi-weapon fighting feat, which allows someone wielding multiple small arms to reduce their multi-attack penalty by 1.
Weapon focus is a feat, grants a plus one to attack. Multi weapon fighting is a feat, adds plus one to full attacks.. sometimes.
To me, this is an indication that it behaves as I described, because there is no equivalent feat for Longarms.
This absolutely doesn't follow. At all.
Multiweapon fighting exists because
1) You can fight with two small arms. Two long arms, not so much
2) Small arms and operative weapons are terrible in this system, the feat exists to give an underpowered form of combat a boost or niche
3) keeping up with two different smallarms is not the same as keeping up with one longarm.
Longarms have advantages over small arms. Among other things if you have longarm proficiency (which costs a feat for something like half or more of the classes in the game) you can spend one of your longarm attachment slots to get a reduction in your multi-attack penalty. If you don't want to pay the longarm proficiency tax you can take multi-weapon fighting instead and get a similar benefit.
So because longarms have advantages over smallarms we need to give the longarms the one advantage we gave to small arms....
Wow. No. That does not follow.
There are none that I could find on aonsrd.com. It is not an item or an action in the game; just a phrase meaning "grip the weapon on its forward end".
So your argument is that it can work like an item who's workings we don't know....?
That doesn't make an argument.
Can you explain to me what "as a move action, you can stabilize your weapon by ... using the bipod as a forward grip" means? It says nothing about adopting a stance. Why is that sentence there, in your opinion?
In case you're in outer space or somewhere you really don't have somewhere to rest a bipod on.
There is no point at all of mentioning an action you take in combat (the move action) if you can take it out of combat and then never have to take it in combat, or if you have to track every time your character unwedgies their space suit. <---- this really needs addressing.
If you don't need to use a move action the only time you track move actions... then why would it say it takes a move action, at all?
In so far as I expect to see table variation on this being on all the time i would expect it to be somewhere between no and oh hell no.
So I wish we could get clarification on the bipod. The part that says I can use it as a forward grip would, to me imply that I can move and keep the weapon stabilized. This is just something that happens to be a thing in real life. It is just another ambiguity in the rules they right, or just laziness.
I think there should have been 2 different bonuses for utilizing the bipod. You get a special bonus for mounting it and the another, lesser bonus to using it as a forward grip. I mean mechanically it makes more sense.
Mount: Move action - You mount the weapon on a rock, wall or similar surface, You reduce penalties for range increments and full attack by 2. Leaving your square, taking cover, any other action that would make sense (causing you to move the weapon from the spot) and you lose this bonus.
Forward Grip: Move action - You use the bipod as a forward grip allowing for movement but a lesser bonus. You can move at half your speed and keeping the weapon stabilized granting a +1 bonus to full attacks.
My next problem with the item is they should be 2 separate items. The fact that I can't have a forward grip always deployed is absurd.
@BigNorseWolf - you could literally wake up and hold the grip all day through a dungeon. Nothing in the game is set up to show the fatigue for that. Just like in pathfinder you could literally fight every second of everyday (assuming you can keep healing) there is no fatigue.
I usually leave it up to the GM. I may see about adopting this in games.
@BigNorseWolf - you could literally wake up and hold the grip all day through a dungeon.
Its not a matter of fatigue. Its a matter of should I read a vague rule which can be read other ways, that particular way?
And the rule is vague. Telling me you can use it like a forward grip doesn't tell me anything when the forward grip doesn't exist. I don't know if it was edited out cut for space or what, but that reference simply doesn't help. Yes, I know what it does on a gun, but that doesn't translate into what the mechanical effects on the character should be.
A constant +2 to hit, which is what that reading gives you, is way out of line for the items price.
What did you think of my proposed changes? Again that was just right off the top of my head. Thats where the problem lies, with it being 1 ite,. When I see it can be mounted I imagine 2 legs that can be put down. Then a fore grip being different.
What did you think of my proposed changes? Again that was just right off the top of my head. Thats where the problem lies, with it being 1 ite,. When I see it can be mounted I imagine 2 legs that can be put down. Then a fore grip being different.
besides taking cover not being an action they seem pretty good. But almost all of my starfindering is in SFS so I can interpret the rules but can't homebrew a forward grip working like that.
The lack of printed rules for them also makes deriving other rules for them (like how often you need to use that move action with a bipod) a total no go.
I think Sharpshooter can work with bows too, right?
Of course. Bows are ranged attacks.