Bow Strength For Non-Rangers

[ArkoHighStar]

Basically they need to just drop the feat altogether and fix composite bows, to make them work as per d20 rules

Longbow, Composite
You need at least two hands to use a bow, regardless of its size. You can use a composite longbow while mounted. All composite bows are made with a particular strength rating (that is, each requires a minimum Strength modifier to use with proficiency). If your Strength bonus is less than the strength rating of the composite bow, you can’t effectively use it, so you take a -2 penalty on attacks with it. The default composite longbow requires a Strength modifier of +0 or higher to use with proficiency. A composite longbow can be made with a high strength rating to take advantage of an above-average Strength score; this feature allows you to add your Strength bonus to damage, up to the maximum bonus indicated for the bow. Each point of Strength bonus granted by the bow adds 100 gp to its cost.

[Bekki]

You cannot be serious?

Bow Str is a made up ability... step back and look at DnD - bow str in DDO is what a composite bow does in DnD... Any class in DnD can use a composite bow while in DDO they cannot use bow str.

You confuse things like aura, song or evasion with a made up class ability - which should really have been an actual feat from the start instead. T

The archery style feats are just that "Feats" - any class can take them... except for Bow Str, which pretty much locks in the fact that one must take a level of ranger to be a powerful archer... thus it limits building not enhances it... it forces multi-class not optionalizes it. How about we make Power Attack a barbarian only ability... or exotic weapon proficency a fighter only ability? Ranger as a class is actually overpowered in DDO, Maybe they should adhere to the ranger following a single combat style - either archery or twf - rather then both?

DnD 3.5 allows true multi-class as a viable option... DDO discourages it. DnD 3.5 actually discourages things like 14 ranger/1 monk/1 rogue with penalties (because they realize the power potential of front loads)... DDO encourages it.

AD&D ... was a class based game, abilities and multi-class restrictions ensured less - I want to do it all attitudes. 3.5 strays away from that making more of a building block game, 4.0 will do even moreso.

That is correct actually,

In Pen and paper D&D there is no Bow Strength as a Class based Feat Specific to the Ranger...
But before everyone gets to Wrapped around the Axles on this understand...
Bow strength does not really DO that Much in reality...
the only thing Bow strength does I believe is allow a Ranger to Apply their Str. bonus to ANY bow save the Crossbow or repeating Crossbow.

The Composite Bow is the only thing close to this feat in pen & paper
and is usable by all classes able to use a bow.

Also In Pen and Paper D&D when you get level two as a ranger
You have to CHOOSE between Archery Spec (Rapid Shot) and TWF as your Combat Style.

In DDO you actually get both Rapid Shot and TWF and
only at level 6 do you actually choose your Specialty.

IE: Arcane archer or Tempest Ranger.

And most of the feats required for these a Ranger gets for free.
Though yes, there are other feats and prereqs for both Tempest
and Arcane Archer that you DO have to take manually.

The Rangers in DDO have seen quite a bit of love in Recent mods.
Although this love has be warranted in my opinion;

Because in years past the Ranger Class HAS been a much maligned class...

I think relaxing one Feat for a ranger (especially one the Made up...)
and making it available to Other classes like the Fighter and barbarian,
is not a bad idea IMHO.

Take the fighter...
Their whole Class is based in excellence of Arms,

And the barbarian
is based almost as much in Outdoor skills
and knowledge as the ranger is...

And given the time to Review the Specs and Requirements for this Ability
I think it can come to be truly beneficial to all classes...

[Giantsbane]

Comment withdrawn.

[frugal_gourmet]

Basically they need to just drop the feat altogether and fix composite bows, to make them work as per d20 rules

Disagree. Would be frustrating under the current system.

I'm happier with "Bow Strength" as a feat.

[Yaga_Nub]

What if they just added the bow str. feat to all magical comp. bows?

They've show they can add Precise Shot so just do the same thing with other bows. Or maybe just one raid bow.

[Grenfell]

I'm cool with this. The pre-reqs seem a bit stiff, but Bow Strength as a feat makes sense.

Now, when can we get Evasion as a feat with whatever pre-reqs? (Dodge, Mobility, combat Expertise as pre-reqs maybe?)

/gren

[Rheebus]

Hmm... There are 5 bazzilion Tempest rangers out there and like 4 that actually shoot arrows regularly. Any attempt to improve/increase the ranged aspect of this game is welcome in my book. Diversity helps the game in the long run.

The Rheeb

[Mhykke]

Hmm... There are 5 bazzilion Tempest rangers out there and like 4 that actually shoot arrows regularly. Any attempt to improve/increase the ranged aspect of this game is welcome in my book. Diversity helps the game in the long run.

The Rheeb

What's diverse about 95% of archers in game being level 20 rangers?

[Yaga_Nub]

What's diverse about 95% of archers in game being level 20 rangers?

95% of 5 means there was a lack of diversity in the first place. If we can get that number to 20 then that means that there is one whole archer that is not a ranger.

[Mhykke]

95% of 5 means there was a lack of diversity in the first place. If we can get that number to 20 then that means that there is one whole archer that is not a ranger.

And that 1 quit due to lack of content!

[Angelus_dead]

The pre-reqs seem a bit stiff, but Bow Strength as a feat makes sense.

It made sense last week, when it would have functioned to bring a ranger-exclusive feature to other classes.

But now that the ranger capstone has gimped archery for anyone without 20 ranger levels, the improvement of a Bow Strength feat is negated.

[moorewr]

95% of 5 means there was a lack of diversity in the first place. If we can get that number to 20 then that means that there is one whole archer that is not a ranger.

Actually, I know lots of people with non-ranger ranged builds.. but these builds have almost all gone into deep freeze over the last six months.. and that will only worsen now...

[Vorn]

Let's just go all 4E and make dex add to the damage vice str.


I think it would take some really well designed quests or encounters (like flying dragons strafing, or beholders that were smart enough to float up out of melee range, or enemies that are really far away) to make me even think about using a bow other than on top pillars in the titan. Most of the other creatures that are out of melee range seem to be minor annoyances that can be ignored or dealt with by spell or thrown weapons. The real advantage to ranged weapons ought, imho, be situations in which it is worth it/necessary to actually range.

[Gunga]

What's diverse about 95% of archers in game being level 20 rangers?

OMG.

What's diverse about 95% of rangers being tempest?

What's diverse about 95% of rogues not being pure class?

Whats diverse about 95% monks never seeing level 3?

What's diverse about 95% of sorcs being level 20? Wizards, Clerics, Barbs...

What a diverse "What's diverse about" list.

[moorewr]

OMG.

What's diverse about 95% of rangers being tempest?

What's diverse about 95% of rogues not being pure class?

Whats diverse about 95% monks never seeing level 3?

What's diverse about 95% of sorcs being level 20? Wizards, Clerics, Barbs...

What a diverse "What's diverse about" list.

"Those are mistakes, Otto!"

[Mhykke]

OMG.

What's diverse about 95% of rangers being tempest?

Well, nothing. And that shows how powerful a 10% attack speed increase in a combat style can be. Now the devs want to add in a 25% attack speed increase to a different combat style. It doesn't take a psychic to predict the results.

What's diverse about 95% of rogues not being pure class?

Sooo, you're saying that there's so much diversity with rogues that in the end it turns out to be non diverse. Interesting.

Whats diverse about 95% monks never seeing level 3?

Yep, and that's an issue with incentives for monks to stay pure. That's completely different than what we're talking about here, which is a disincentive for an archer to be anything but 1 particular class, and then 20 levels of it.

What's diverse about 95% of sorcs being level 20? Wizards, Clerics, Barbs...

Barbs, I'd disagree. I've seen plenty of barbs with fighter and rogue levels. I've seen a decent bit of Cleric monks out there, or cleric fighters for battle clerics. Wizards, I've seen a handful of battle wizards, but I agree that most wizards and sorcs are pure.

But let's compare all of those classes to what an archer would get at level 20. 25% increase in attack speed. The archer has even more of an incentive to stay pure than any of those other classes. How many clerics, wizards, or sorcs would multiclass if they got a 25% spell point bump at 20? How many barbs if they got a 25% str bonus, or 25% damage bonus, or 25% melee speed attack bonus at 20 would multiclass? I think it's safe to say that we'd even see less diversity than we do now if those were the cases. If you think that all those others are nondiverse now, then what happens when an incentive that's even greater than the ones that exist for those classes gets introduced?

[Deathseeker]

It made sense last week, when it would have functioned to bring a ranger-exclusive feature to other classes.

But now that the ranger capstone has gimped archery for anyone without 20 ranger levels, the improvement of a Bow Strength feat is negated.

A_D, I think you are right but looking at it as a glass half empty. If they do the right thing and somehow address the capstone (or provide an offset to the other classes) then this is a good change as well.

There are two problems right now...lvl 20 ranger is required to be a ranged build, and even without that lvl 1 of ranger is required.

This at least addresses the latter. Im gonna be optimistic that they will also address the former so its a complete fix. Doing one without the other is a waste...

[Murderface]

can we also add ....

Barbarian rage for non-barbarians
Bard song for non-bards
Trap disable for non-rogues
Pali auras for non-palis?


Class skill are the reason we choose those classes. You want bow strength? Milticlass one level in ranger. I personally don't think this should be changed. This is a class based game, not a skill/feat based game.

as far as i am concerned archers are not rangers there are or used to be alot of ranged fighters
a fighter should be able to pick a feat or an item or a bow that can use there str to back it up
dnd isnt about making every class the same its about customizing your class, classes to do what u want it to do


you could just add mighty as a bow enchantment +1 to +* might of gub or holy bow with mighty in it

so we in fact get to use some at the max i would say +10 str damage

or you could have a item that gives u bow str say gloves or whatever to take up a gear slot is a major sacrifice
i dont like that you actualy have to have a focus in it but w.e thats ok

[Aesop]

A_D, I think you are right but looking at it as a glass half full. If they do the right thing and somehow address the capstone (or provide an offset to the other classes) then this is a good change as well.

There are two problems right now...lvl 20 ranger is required to be a ranged build, and even without that lvl 1 of ranger is required.

This at least addresses the latter. Im gonna be optimistic that they will also address the former so its a complete fix. Doing one without the other is a waste...

The Only way I'd see a 25% Competance Bonus as a Ranger Capstone being an ok thing is if

1. Base RoA (Rate of Attack) is increased significantly
2. Rapid Shot is made a +15% Competance Bonus to RoA
3. they implement Improved Rapid Shot that bumps it up to 25% Competance Bonus to RoA.

rangers get to save a Feat selection and still get the effect then.


on actual topic I like that they are finally making Bow Strength an option for more than just Rangers.

I feel the Cost is a little high however.

I'd say the Prerequisites should be

+4 BAB, 13+ Strength, Point Blank Shot

that's all

call the feat Over Draw

then Implement this


Improved Over Draw
Prerequisites: BAB +12, Over Draw, Power Attack
Benefit: stance This feat functions much like the Power Attack feat but applies to Combat with Long Bows and Short Bows (and their Composite counterparts)
Special: Fighters may Select this as a Bonus Feat. Rangers may ignore the Over Draw Prerequisite.



Aesop

[Gunga]

Sorry Mhykke. How could I have missed this thorough response?

Well, nothing. And that shows how powerful a 10% attack speed increase in a combat style can be. Now the devs want to add in a 25% attack speed increase to a different combat style. It doesn't take a psychic to predict the results.

Yet you prefer to multiclass. Interesting.

Yep, and that's an issue with incentives for monks to stay pure. That's completely different than what we're talking about here, which is a disincentive for an archer to be anything but 1 particular class, and then 20 levels of it.

This issue is either diametrically opposed to or exactly the same as. Pick a side and argue it, counselor.

But let's compare all of those classes to what an archer would get at level 20. 25% increase in attack speed. The archer has even more of an incentive to stay pure than any of those other classes. How many clerics, wizards, or sorcs would multiclass if they got a 25% spell point bump at 20? How many barbs if they got a 25% str bonus, or 25% damage bonus, or 25% melee speed attack bonus at 20 would multiclass? I think it's safe to say that we'd even see less diversity than we do now if those were the cases. If you think that all those others are nondiverse now, then what happens when an incentive that's even greater than the ones that exist for those classes gets introduced?

As of right now ranged combat is laughable. Before mention of this capstone, there was no ranged game in town AT ALL. With this new capstone, there is at least 1 good reason to specialize in ranged combat (read: level your gimp ass elven ranger you started 9 months ago). I don't give a **** about what class can ultimately claim to be the king of ranged combat, but Rangers do seem the obvious choice for the first ranged combat boost.

As far as your 25% analogy above, there is nothing in the game that needs as much help as ranged combat. Nothing. If you're so worried about diversity, than you can rest assured that XX% of ranged alacrity really has very little impact when compared to the diversity of the player population.

But that's just me.