Jump to content
hivemind

Bows Suck

Recommended Posts

Having played a guy who was designed to be an archer all year, I'm gonna weigh in on bows.

 

THEY SUCK!

 

They cost as much as melee weapons, but miss more often, are more uncontrolled, are FAR more monetarily expensive, hit with less frequency (lower rate of fire), and leave the wielder far more vulnerable than melee.

 

They have moments where they're great, but in a year of playing an archer, I've fired arrows at something precisely once.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to imagine that part of the reason you fired at something once is due to your $10 arrows.

 

Assuming you have someone to keep the melee away, and let's also go out on a limb to assume you have a box of 50 completely disposeable arrows, do they still suck?

 

Of course, if we compare a bow to a spear at a ten foot range, the spear is a better choice. Can you do the movie scene, where you fire at a real high angle and hit someone a hundred yards away? What if you had three archers doing the same?

 

edit: What if we tried shitty, ugly, unwanted spacket archery for a weekend?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're comparing totally hypothetical never-gonna-happen situations. Boffer arrows will NEVER hit anything 300 feet away. You are EXTREMELY lucky to hit something 30 feet away. Because of the heavy arrows with large, wind-resistant heads and low draw weights of the bows we use, they have no range, and the arrows move very slowly, and hence are easy to dodge.

 

Even with a bag of 50 disposable arrows, I'm still only ever going to get one shot off against an agile opponent. Then he's in my grill and I'm at a huge disadvantage.

 

All I'm saying is that by the current cost and progression of missile training, it's clearly designed to be a 1-to-1 counterpart to melee, and they're nowhere near comparable. The melee weapon is the better choice in every realistic situation I can think of.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

do we have one tree for bows and another for throwing? I can't remember.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes. Throwing is capped at 2 points of damage, and is it's own skill.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
edit: What if we tried shitty, ugly, unwanted spacket archery for a weekend?

 

 

 

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO.

 

 

Really I don't know what to do to make bows better, cheaper skills is about it. Other than that, I think the only changes to make them better would be the person using them. No offense or anything, I just don't see any other option on usage of a bow then its costs. rate of fire cannot be improved without time stops or spacket bows.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I loved having a bow with merc. thought it was a huge advantage to a group. but that being said if you are not in a group that will protect you, you're dead. and fast.

 

I wouldnt be opposed to reducing the cost, but I wouldnt do it by much.

 

Archers are deadly when put with a group that can protect them. the typical standoff and slow movement into battle never happens. or the bad guys get picked off fast.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's true, but it's only useful in specific situations - as opposed to melee which is useful all the time. Yet archery costs the same.

 

I was talking with Dan, Jim, Fe and Dave M. on Tuesday night, and I suggested the cost for archery moving to 1-1-2-3 from 2-3-4-5.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we cheapen it to "Desuck" it, I'd say 1-2-3-4. That's still 20 XP cheaper.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We might see a few more people at least try it out at that point. But you know me - bold changes...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is there any particular reason to keep it on an escalating scale? I'm not sure I like the idea of the first level being only 1 point, it may make it too easy to dabble and still be pretty effective against things like oozes and monstrous creatures. How about 2-2-2-2? That's making it a more even progression while cutting the total cost from 14 to 8.

 

Incidentally, it drops the total point cost of buying the whole physical tree to 52 points, which is just about the same cost as mastering a tree and maxing your power (51 points). That'll even things up if we decide to do the archmage/weapon master stuff, which is an idea I still like.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The escalating scale is for consistency, but as it's not as consistently useful as the other skills (Body, melee damage, etc.) I could see this idea working.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would be in support of the 2-2-2-2 if we must.

 

Making the skill cheaper won't change your mind about them sucking though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Making the skill cheaper won't change your mind about them sucking though.

 

Maybe not, but it makes it possible for players to spend a few points for situational use without sacrificing so many points they suffer in their main role.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I shoot a lot. I hit for 3's.

 

Probably 60% of my arrows hit. I almost never hit outside of 25 feet. The only time it's worth using the bow for me is when I want to get one hit in early, to control a field of fire with a *small* threat, or to tell the difference between a were-wolf and a kasvak in the field at night. Otherwise unless I'm behind the shield wall shooting stationary targets my bow is largely useless.

 

For the points I spent I damage/kill 800% more targets with melee attacks. The bow technology is really hard to use and totally falls on it's face compared to pole-arms and swords. Lowering the cost might encourage people to try it since they are spending less for something less effective.

 

I am also interested in making the physical conglomeration/tree cost closer to what the magic trees cost. That is directly related to a personal goal of my PC, but I still think it is fair ad reasonable to declare a Weapons Master if we are considering Archmages or whatever we'll call them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think lowering the cost would make the skill more attractive.

 

I'd suggest perhaps uping the power of legal bows maybe to help compensate for the fact that they do lose so much power quickly because of the way arrows must be constructed to keep them safe. Not by much.. I'm just saying 40# instead of 35#. But at the same time I understand why the limit is where it is. Anything much more than 35#'s at closer range will probably hurt/sting a lot more and has the possibility of being a large safety hazard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The easy answer would be to require GM permission for higher-rated bows, as you could shoot much farther, but I just don't trust random newbie "Sephirothxxx69" to not kill someone with a bow and poorly constructed boffer arrows.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The easy answer would be to require GM permission for higher-rated bows, as you could shoot much farther, but I just don't trust random newbie "Sephirothxxx69" to not kill someone with a bow and poorly constructed boffer arrows.

 

Ask JC how far and how straight he can shoot a well-constructed LARP arrow on my 37# bow.

 

Then see how far and how well *I* can shoot a well-constructed LARP arrow on my 37# bow.

 

One of us would be an actual in-game threat to the person being aimed at. One of us would not.

 

That said, does anyone really want to get into the business of deciding that YOU can use THIS weapon, but YOU have to use THAT one? Doesn't that sound like a miserable pain in the ass?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ask hive how well he can fight with that huge spear.

Ask teeny tyna how well she could fight with it. (No offense, but you're the smallest LARPer I can think of)

 

I see your point though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I did some reading at the library in some Bowyer's Bible. There is a brief chapter on arrow physics. Then more advertising from the 70s. Increasing the drag of fletching (specifically making the surface area of straight fletching bigger) makes up for exotic heads in terms of straight flight. The trade-off is that the speed drops off *slightly* faster. At the weights we shoot at it is negligible. Anyone know how to get big fletching?

 

Currently I agree. Bows are hard to make effective. Especially compared to just packing around a long spear. Then I can use the same points for my sword damage and I get versatility both for short weapons indoors and spears in the field.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Anyone know how to get big fletching?

I intuitively understood that, which is why I bought arrows with 5" shield-cut fletchings. The other option would be flu-flu arrows.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm now looking into flu-flu arrows. Flight arrows seem to be less tuned to our needs. I needs to do some testing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I intend to order a set of 4 Flu-Flus with rubber blunt heads. They are going to be aluminum shafts, with 6 feather right handed helical fletchings. I'll place the order tomorrow afternoon in case anyone wants to get in on shared shipping.

 

I'll hold off if anyone can find a better price.

 

 

Costs:

4 arrows= 16.99

4 rubber blunts = 5.99

UPS ground shipping = 8.99

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Put me in 4 arrows and 4 blunts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Taking this to PMs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×