Bow Strength

[Therigar]

This has been puzzeling to me for a while. I notice that if I make a character, no matter what the character class, that bow damage is less if I have under 10 STR.

Now, please keep in mind that I have been playing D&D for right around 30 years. I remember when STR affected the damage of bows regardless of character class. So, the current practice of only giving STR bonuses to rangers (and now to those crazy enough to spend the feats for it) has always seemed inappropriate to me.

In addition, we know that ranged combat is grossly outclassed by every form of melee. This has been the subject of many posts bemoaning the weakness of ranged rangers.

What I would suggest is that DDO change the way STR applies to bow damage and also the way that the bow strength feat is implimented.

First, apply STR modifiers to damage for all character classes. In the grand scheme of things it is a trivial amount of damage compared to the damage of melee weapons.

Second, change bow strength as a feat to a multiplier of STR damage. At L5 give a 1.5 multiplier. Then increase the multiplier by .5 every 5 character levels. Maximum multiplier is 3 at L20*.

On the surface a damage bonus of 3 times STR bonus seems excessive. However, I don't think it is far out of line if we remember the attack speed, base damage and crit range of bows. When compared to dual wielded khopeshes on an equal STR character the damage potential is still less.

* I would finally suggest that the prerequisites for bow strength be changed to allow non-rangers to take the feat at L5 if they have point blank shot and rapid shot. These are equivalent to the ranger skills at that level. Allow rangers, who get bow strength at L1, a x 2 modifier at L1 to represent their focus on bows (giving them 2 @ L1, 2.5 @ L5, 3 @ L10, 3.5 @ L15 and 4 @ L20).

[Therigar]

I tossed this out and let it sit for a very long time. Since then we have had many discussions in the various forums about the issues with range-based character builds.

Was I the only one who thought that increasing the STR bonus for bow users was a good idea? Or, did nobody read this thread? Or, was it that nobody understood the idea?

BTW, the changes should also apply to thrown weapons and crossbows. The rationale for crossbows is that the stronger characters are able to use more powerful weapons -- a bit of a misrepresentation since crossbows could be cranked down to pull. Still, it balances out the field significantly.

Finally, I might not apply the bonus to repeating crossbows since the actual historical model is significantly weaker than other bows.

[Visty]

in dnd normal bows dont add their str to damage, thats why they dont do that here either
in dnd you had to enhance your bow, here you have to take a feat which can be taken by everyone

[Letrii]

A composite bow adds Str in D&D, why doesn't it here?

[Thrudh]

This has been puzzeling to me for a while. I notice that if I make a character, no matter what the character class, that bow damage is less if I have under 10 STR.

Now, please keep in mind that I have been playing D&D for right around 30 years. I remember when STR affected the damage of bows regardless of character class. So, the current practice of only giving STR bonuses to rangers (and now to those crazy enough to spend the feats for it) has always seemed inappropriate to me.

In addition, we know that ranged combat is grossly outclassed by every form of melee. This has been the subject of many posts bemoaning the weakness of ranged rangers.

What I would suggest is that DDO change the way STR applies to bow damage and also the way that the bow strength feat is implimented.

First, apply STR modifiers to damage for all character classes. In the grand scheme of things it is a trivial amount of damage compared to the damage of melee weapons.

Second, change bow strength as a feat to a multiplier of STR damage. At L5 give a 1.5 multiplier. Then increase the multiplier by .5 every 5 character levels. Maximum multiplier is 3 at L20*.

On the surface a damage bonus of 3 times STR bonus seems excessive. However, I don't think it is far out of line if we remember the attack speed, base damage and crit range of bows. When compared to dual wielded khopeshes on an equal STR character the damage potential is still less.

* I would finally suggest that the prerequisites for bow strength be changed to allow non-rangers to take the feat at L5 if they have point blank shot and rapid shot. These are equivalent to the ranger skills at that level. Allow rangers, who get bow strength at L1, a x 2 modifier at L1 to represent their focus on bows (giving them 2 @ L1, 2.5 @ L5, 3 @ L10, 3.5 @ L15 and 4 @ L20).

I think Bow strength should be a single feat... I don't think it should given away for free to all characters...

3x strength bonus is way too much... Manyshot right now is the best DPS in the game (for a very limited time)... Give a ranger with a 30 STR an extra +20 damage per arrow (shooting 5 arrows at a time)? That's pretty big...

[drac317]

I think Bow strength should be a single feat... I don't think it should given away for free to all characters...

3x strength bonus is way too much... Manyshot right now is the best DPS in the game (for a very limited time)... Give a ranger with a 30 STR an extra +20 damage per arrow (shooting 5 arrows at a time)? That's pretty big...

i agree but its only 4 arrows

[Emili]

This has been puzzeling to me for a while. I notice that if I make a character, no matter what the character class, that bow damage is less if I have under 10 STR.

Strange

Now, please keep in mind that I have been playing D&D for right around 30 years. I remember when STR affected the damage of bows regardless of character class. So, the current practice of only giving STR bonuses to rangers (and now to those crazy enough to spend the feats for it) has always seemed inappropriate to me.

Only with composites

In addition, we know that ranged combat is grossly outclassed by every form of melee. This has been the subject of many posts bemoaning the weakness of ranged rangers.

I'd imagine a finesse SnB would be close

What I would suggest is that DDO change the way STR applies to bow damage and also the way that the bow strength feat is implimented.

First, apply STR modifiers to damage for all character classes. In the grand scheme of things it is a trivial amount of damage compared to the damage of melee weapons.

Will junk all returning thrown weapons as a melee's ranged choice

Second, change bow strength as a feat to a multiplier of STR damage. At L5 give a 1.5 multiplier. Then increase the multiplier by .5 every 5 character levels. Maximum multiplier is 3 at L20*.

Hmmm free power attack on bows although 43 rof a min... but wait, 43 shots a min at level 20 on a raid buffed fighter becomes about 90-120 every shot each and criticals of 270-360 before any procs or manyshots potential 1440. Str rangers, and barbs even more...

On the surface a damage bonus of 3 times STR bonus seems excessive. However, I don't think it is far out of line if we remember the attack speed, base damage and crit range of bows. When compared to dual wielded khopeshes on an equal STR character the damage potential is still less.

We all should roll up some ranged berzerkers and get some ranged acilarity items...

* I would finally suggest that the prerequisites for bow strength be changed to allow non-rangers to take the feat at L5 if they have point blank shot and rapid shot. These are equivalent to the ranger skills at that level. Allow rangers, who get bow strength at L1, a x 2 modifier at L1 to represent their focus on bows (giving them 2 @ L1, 2.5 @ L5, 3 @ L10, 3.5 @ L15 and 4 @ L20).

Just a few thoughts...

[drac317]

btw low str has subtracted from your dmg since 3rd ed.

[Therigar]

Not sure about the meaning in some of the answers.

a. Low STR subtracts from bow damage. I'm pretty sure this is a fact. Not really sure if it is important if it was introduced in 3d edition or when, particularly, it came about. I'm pretty old and occassionally senile. The point is that low STR subtracts for all characters. Consequently high STR should add for all characters.

b. Failure to add due to PnP rules is a reason I suppose but DDO deviates from PnP in other areas. My suggestion is that it do so here. The reason is that bow damage is significantly less than melee damage making bow based characters a liability in most content. Forum posts regarding how bow builds suck illustrates this.

c. I'm not convinced that thrown weapons should be superior to bows. From a purely historical context properly trained bow users were superior to every other form of ranged combatant until the advent of guns. Although D&D is a fantasy game its fantasy roots are in historical stories and events.

d. Nonetheless, my second post suggests expanding the STR multiplier to all forms of ranged combat. The caveat is the repeating crossbow which might be too powerful because it does have a high rate of fire but was historically weaker than every other type of bow. (Historically the repeating crossbow is so weak that its maximum range is scarcly more than ~50 meters.)

e. I'm not sure that 43 rof and 90-120 damage (270-360 crit) is significantly out of line with dual wielding khopeshes. If it is then ratchet the multipliers back a bit. The point is to provide range focused characters with a damage role in a group.

Right now the damage role for range focused characters is cause damage, draw aggro and kite until the group is angry at you or you die. On very rare occassions it is perch in an inaccessible location, cause damage, draw aggro and stay unassailable until you kill the mob or some other objective is achieved (in the last case this is followed by running away or watching someone else kill the mob).

It seems to me that the game would be better off if range based characters could not be built. But, that isn't a likely resolution. Leaving the status quo only creates issues in groups -- often between new players and veterans (see the forums for VIP vs P2P and veteran vs newb conflicts). The alternative seems to be creation of a mechanism that makes range focused characters useful contributors. If their role were cause damage, draw aggro, survive the attacks, kill the mob -- the role of the many melee based characters -- then we would not have issues.

In any case, I'm glad that a few of you actually took time to read the post and offer comments. I think that there is the germ of a solution in there if it could be ferreted out and refined.

[Letrii]

The only reason I can think of for deviating from PnP with bow damage is implementing Str bonus cap from various varieties of composite bows.

[Waukeen]

do characters come with less than 10 str?

if so why the bow?

just seems silly to me

[Junts]

Low str affecting bow damage makes total sense.

While the feat is a little illogical, str in general applying (eg, how far you can draw) makes total sense, and a 4 str enfeebled mage can't pull the bow to full draw, consequently the arrow has less momentum

totally logical.

[Therigar]

Low str affecting bow damage makes total sense.

While the feat is a little illogical, str in general applying (eg, how far you can draw) makes total sense, and a 4 str enfeebled mage can't pull the bow to full draw, consequently the arrow has less momentum

totally logical.

In reality bows come in different draw weights and people of varying strength are all able to pull bows to their full draw if they select the appropriate weight. The difference is in the power imparted to the arrow.

I'm sure that there are studies that show the different effectiveness based on actual draw weight. The myth of the composite bow is just that. Bows with equal draw weights impart the same (or nearly the same) power to the arrow. Modern compound bows use pulleys to decrease the draw weight while still imparting greater power due to mechanical advantage. The English longbow was more powerful than any known composite bows.

The notion that less STR means less power is correct. More STR means more power is also correct. Thus STR should affect damage regardless, whether negatively for low STR or positively for high STR. The image of a weak character pulling a bow to only partial draw is inaccurate.

The only way this logic makes any sense is if all bows are made to a specific draw weight in all circumstances. If that is the case then low STR prohibits full draw and causes less damage but higher STR has no effect (other than perhaps snapping the bow in half). While I concede that the setting is a fantasy one such a situation makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. The bow itself would be manufactured to meet the character's individual STR.

Oh well, it is a game and not reality. After all, khopesh which in reality is a much inferior weapon to the longsword is the king of melee weapons. I suppose that there is no way to enable range based characters to become useful members of society.

Time to start restricting groups again to eliminate rangers. F2P has brought a new crop of people that thing ranger means archer. If the game designers aren't inclined to find a solution to the inferiority of ranged combat then the only thing left is to prohibit them from grouping with us.

Doesn't seem like a very good solution to me. I'd have thought we could do better.

[Uska]

btw low str has subtracted from your dmg since 3rd ed.

umm not for ranged ever

[JSiN69]

Being able to impart strength onto a melee attack is a given. You hold the weapon in your hand and the more strength you have the harder you can hit something. With a bow strength is used to draw the weapon, no matter what the draw weight is you have to be strong enough to draw it back. Also bows are made with custom draw lengths for people with longer or shorter arms, still no difference in velocity or impact unless your using one that is to long or short for you. Strength is also a contributing factor in aiming, because once you have the bow drawn you have to hold that weight back until you are on target. If you don't have the strength to, your sites will begin to violently shake and no matter how much dexterity you have you will not get on target. I used to be an avid bow hunter(until I got sick of stick jabbing), and in no way did the strength I posses have any impact with the damage imparted by the arrow. Once the arrow leaves the bow you cannot make it do any more damage no matter how strong you are. Now if the arrow was in my hand that would be a different story all together. Real life aside on to the topic at hand.
But I do get what Therigar is is trying to say about ranged focused builds not being able to cause as much damage as they possibly could. Ranged combat in this game is LARGELY ineffective and it's primarily due to the lack of damage at higher levels. At lower levels the damage from a bow is pretty much equal to or slightly below most weapons. At mid game there is a distinct difference in the amount of damage caused by a bow compared to melee weapons. If my character has been using bows since level one I think there should be some kind of bonus I can receive just for focussing on the weapon for so long, no matter what class I am. Yes rangers should have a distinct advantage with a bow over any other class, but there should also be something for players in other classes to give them an incentive to use the weapon.There are more rangers using TWF than bows, in fact some don't even carry them.
Therigar's idea is not perfect but there is something that can be moulded from it. It's a good base to start with. With the amount of people that try to make a ranged combatant there should be something that can be done to make them more useful for a group.

[Jay203]

if you wish to make changes to bow str for the better, you must add in addition changes
such as making rangers choosing their fighting style (twf or ranged) or you're just simply making rangers even more overpowered

[Lleren]

I would love to see ranged combat be a more viable character path. I think in the process Manyshot would have to be changed completely.

I have tried the high numbers of ranged combatant party. With 1/3 to 1/2 of the party members being ranged users and medium to long sight distances most mobs do not reach the party. With a long enough sight distance the mobs never even try to approach the party.

Do those "ranged friendly" parties take longer to clear a dungeon? Yes, yes they do. Time being the only resource those parties take more of, other then arrows. Time being the most important resource for many players.


Disclaimer: Highest level ranged party I have tried was level 8-9, higher level data may vary greatly. Most of these parties where on normal difficulty, and in quests with atypicaly long sight distances. For example Kobold Assault, Irestone Inlet, Stormcleave Outpost, explorer areas and similar.

[Letrii]

umm not for ranged ever

PHB 3.5

If you have a penalty for low Strength, apply it to damage rolls when you use a longbow. If you have a bonus for high Strength, you can apply it to damage rolls when you use a composite longbow (see below) but not a regular longbow.

If you have a penalty for low Strength, apply it to damage rolls when you use a shortbow. If you have a bonus for high Strength, you can apply it to damage rolls when you use a composite shortbow (see below) but not a regular shortbow.

[honkuimushi]

The low strength affecting bow damage has been around as long as 3rd edition and was a common house rule in 2nd as well. The basic idea has already been described. A regular bow has a certain draw weight and a person with low strength wouldn't be able to draw the bow to it's full capacity and the arrow will have less velocity, and thus less damage. Though if we really wanted to follow that logic to it's full extent you should also get a penalty to hit because you will lose penetrating power and you should have a shorter range.

Now in 2nd edition, or at least the house rules I always used, you could add up to 2 points of damage from Strength to normal bows. It was assumed that you could find a bow with a heavier draw for about that same price and availability for strengths up to 18. But once you got into percentile strength, that was so rare and so powerful that you had to use special materials, techniques, and maybe even magic.

Now I think that makes more sense. But the elimination of percentile strength and allowing half-orcs to have a 20 at creation kind of erased the boundries. And having characters at low levels adding 1 or 2 points of damage to a bowshot if they have a 16 or better strength is a little different from giving everyone with a 12 a +1, 14, a +2, 16 a +3 and 18 a +4. And that half-orc could have a +5. At low levels, that can look overwhealming.

Now, I don't think that it really was. The MAD required for that would probably have been enough of a balance. But I think that the developers of 3rd edition we being a bit overcautious about ranged combat.

[Arianrhod]

c. I'm not convinced that thrown weapons should be superior to bows. From a purely historical context properly trained bow users were superior to every other form of ranged combatant until the advent of guns. Although D&D is a fantasy game its fantasy roots are in historical stories and events.

"Properly trained" in DDO translates to "having the right feats". Anyone in DDO who wants to excel at ranged combat does take bow feats, and it does make them better at ranged combat than those who just pick up throwing weapons and toss them at stuff.