Deadly Archery

[Corvo]

Glorelendil upthread reminded us of the existence hidden aspects in the design of the game.
I was re-checking the Rivendell rules for Famous Weapons, and (re)discovered that only Elven weapons don't have access to Superior-Fell.

Note that only elven weapons have access Superior Keen and Foe-Slaying option, for the highest chance of a wounding hit in the game. Yet not any option for better armour penetration (beyond basic Fell, that is).

Just saying.

(Likewise dwarvish weapons can have Superior Keen and Superior Fell -against any opponent-, but not Foe-Slaying, while mannish ones can be Foe-Slaying and Superior Fell -but just against bane opponents-...)

[Deadmanwalking]

Okay, just for a visual comparison, here's a Woodman Archer, a Hobbit Archer, a Barding Archer, and the Elf Archer mentioned in my last post (using hound of Mirkwood to simulate a version of Deadly Aim that makes foes Weary for Protection tests only):

Woodman Sample (26 XP)
Body: 4(6), Heart: 5(5)
Virtues & Rewards: Shepherds_bow
Hacks:
Weapon: Fell, Grievous Great Bow: 4
Stance: Defensive/Rearward
vs. Attercop
Average Rounds: 0.73
Average Hope: 0.22
vs. Black Uruk
Average Rounds: 1.49
Average Hope: 0.47
vs. Great Orc
Average Rounds: 10.63
Average Hope: 2.24

Hobbit Sample (30 XP)
Body: 4(6), Heart: 5(5)
Virtues & Rewards: Fair_shot, Bow_of_the_north_downs
Hacks:
Weapon: Fell, Grievous Bow: 4
Stance: Defensive/Rearward
vs. Attercop
Average Rounds: 0.84
Average Hope: 0.28
vs. Black Uruk
Average Rounds: 1.7
Average Hope: 0.44
vs. Great Orc
Average Rounds: 15.56
Average Hope: 2.7

Note: The Hobbit does a lot better vs. the Black Uruk and Attercop by simply not using Called Shot. Actually, everyone does better vs.the Attercop not using Called Shot, but mostly they do worse vs. the Uruk. The Hobbit does better (to the tune of 1.53 rounds and .04 Hope).

Barding Sample (30 XP)
Body: 5(8), Heart: 5(5)
Virtues & Rewards: Fierce_shot, Dalish_longbow
Hacks:
Weapon: Fell, Grievous Great Bow: 4
Stance: Defensive/Rearward
vs. Attercop
Average Rounds: 0.75
Average Hope: 0.23
vs. Black Uruk
Average Rounds: 1.35
Average Hope: 0.49
vs. Great Orc
Average Rounds: 10.15
Average Hope: 2.31

Elf Sample (30 XP)
Body: 5(8), Heart: 4(4)
Virtues & Rewards: Hound_of_mirkwood, Woodland_bow
Hacks:
Weapon: Fell, Grievous Bow: 4
Stance: Defensive/Rearward
vs. Attercop
Average Rounds: 0.33
Average Hope: 0.23
vs. Black Uruk
Average Rounds: 0.95
Average Hope: 0.55
vs. Great Orc
Average Rounds: 11.97
Average Hope: 2.86

The Barding is a bit better than the woodman offensively, but only a bit, and the Woodman (assuming he has a Hound) is so much better defensively (something this particular calculator ignores) it's silly (just check out Glorelendil's Combat Calculator if you don't believe me...Hounds are great).

The elf, meanwhile, is flat-out better offensively vs. weaker adversaries...but quite a bit worse vs. strong ones than anyone but the Hobbit. And needs to be making Called Shots all the time even to manage that.

Defensively...he has a point more Parry than the Barding, but 1 less Endurance and Hope. Versus the Woodman he often has up to 3 less Parry, and misses out on the Hound's defensive advantages, as well as having three less Hope, but does have 1 more Endurance. So...that's a lot worse than the Woodman, and on-par with the Barding. They're also worse defensively than the Hobbit, but are just miles better offensively.

Actually..let's look at the official Elf, shall we?

Elf Sample (30 XP)
Body: 5(8), Heart: 4(4)
Virtues & Rewards: Deadly_archery, Woodland_bow
Hacks:
Weapon: Fell, Grievous Bow: 4
Stance: Defensive/Rearward
vs. Attercop
Average Rounds: 0.31 (-59% vs. no Woodland Bow)
Average Hope: 0.24
vs. Black Uruk
Average Rounds: 1.09 (-44% vs. no Woodland Bow)
Average Hope: 0.65
vs. Great Orc
Average Rounds: 15.63 (-6% vs. no Woodland Bow)
Average Hope: 3.93

Huh. Interesting. So...the changes we're suggesting are not the reason the Elf does better on the Attercop and Black Uruk. At all. Indeed, they make little difference there...that's all down to the Woodland Bow, which is really, really good statistically vs. single, small foes (I'm skeptical that it's quite that valuable in actual play).

The changes only help a lot vs. things that actually take time to kill, like the Great Orc.

[Glorelendil]

...that's all down to the Woodland Bow, which is really, really good statistically vs. single, small foes (I'm skeptical that it's quite that valuable in actual play).

There are two sides to that. First, as Angel points out, weak enemies rarely come by themselves. Particularly with the weakest ones, there will often be two per hero. But remember that if it's more than two per hero, you can't go into Rearward anyway (most of the time.) So, yeah, the Woodland bow won't be quite as impressive if the elf's "share" is two goblins/wolves/attercops/etc. (Black Uruks, on the other hand, are more likely to show up at a 1:1 ratio.)

On the other hand, since you mention the Woodman's defenses (and don't forget the Hobbit!), killing things in Round 0 is an excellent example of "the best defense is a good offense". You don't need Parry if it's dead.

EDIT:

So...the changes we're suggesting are not the reason the Elf does better on the Attercop and Black Uruk. At all.

How did you conclude this? I just ran an elf doing Called Shots with 1d6 turned off, then turned it on:

Elf (16 XP)
Body: 6(9), Heart: 4(4)
Virtues & Rewards: Woodland_bow
Hacks: Minus_1d6_protection
Weapon: Fell Bow: 4
Stance: Defensive/Rearward
vs. Attercop
Average Rounds: 0.81 (-23%)
Average Hope: 0.24
vs. Black Uruk
Average Rounds: 1.36 (-31%)
Average Hope: 0.53
vs. Great Orc
Average Rounds: 11.77 (-32%)
Average Hope: 2.75

The % drop on Black Uruks was as big as the drop vs. Great Orcs, and even against Attercops I wouldn't call 23% insignificant. The deltas are only small if you look at the absolute value in rounds.

I also ran it without Called Shot, adding Keen, and then the differences were 6%, 14%, and 28%. But kill times were longer overall, so there would be no reason to do that once you had a Fell bow and skill of 4.

[Deadmanwalking]

There are two sides to that. First, as Angel points out, weak enemies rarely come by themselves. Particularly with the weakest ones, there will often be two per hero. But remember that if it's more than two per hero, you can't go into Rearward anyway (most of the time.) So, yeah, the Woodland bow won't be quite as impressive if the elf's "share" is two goblins/wolves/attercops/etc. (Black Uruks, on the other hand, are more likely to show up at a 1:1 ratio.)

On the other hand, since you mention the Woodman's defenses (and don't forget the Hobbit!), killing things in Round 0 is an excellent example of "the best defense is a good offense". You don't need Parry if it's dead.

Yeah, I'm not saying at all that Woodland Bow is bad. It's not, it's clearly quite good, I just don't think it's as valuable in actual play as it is vs. a single foe in this calculator.

EDIT:

So...the changes we're suggesting are not the reason the Elf does better on the Attercop and Black Uruk. At all.

How did you conclude this? I just ran an elf doing Called Shots with 1d6 turned off, then turned it on:

Elf (16 XP)
Body: 6(9), Heart: 4(4)
Virtues & Rewards: Woodland_bow
Hacks: Minus_1d6_protection
Weapon: Fell Bow: 4
Stance: Defensive/Rearward
vs. Attercop
Average Rounds: 0.81 (-23%)
Average Hope: 0.24
vs. Black Uruk
Average Rounds: 1.36 (-31%)
Average Hope: 0.53
vs. Great Orc
Average Rounds: 11.77 (-32%)
Average Hope: 2.75

The % drop on Black Uruks was as big as the drop vs. Great Orcs, and even against Attercops I wouldn't call 23% insignificant. The deltas are only small if you look at the absolute value in rounds.

I also ran it without Called Shot, adding Keen, and then the differences were 6%, 14%, and 28%. But kill times were longer overall, so there would be no reason to do that once you had a Fell bow and skill of 4.

That's not exactly what I was saying. -1d6 is indeed a big boost even above what Woodland Bow does, and making them Weary (on Protection tests only) a smaller (but still significant) one...but leaving the Woodland Bow out of it, neither is sufficient to make them notably better than the Barding or Woodman stats. Indeed, without the Wodland Bow, both put them in right about the same range of numbers...while Woodland Bow on its own is what makes them way better statistically vs. the Attercop and Black Uruk.

So...my point isn't that they aren't large improvements, my point is that they aren't the reason why, when you compare a Barding and an Elf side by side, the Elf is doing so much better against Attercops and Black Uruks. They look so good in that comparison almost entirely because of the Woodland Bow. The other stuff helps, but way less (see the percentage changes from a woodland Bow alone in my last post).

I did one previous test that led me to believe this wasn't the case, but given how universal it is in the tests I'm now doing, I'm pretty sure I just screwed that one up.

[Glorelendil]

Be sure to spend some time picking through combat logs before putting TOO much faith in the numbers. There might still be bugs.

[Deadmanwalking]

Be sure to spend some time picking through combat logs before putting TOO much faith in the numbers. There might still be bugs.

Oh, sure. I'm just noting that it definitely weighs Woodland Bow way more highly vs. everything but the Great Orc than it does, say, -1d6 Protection.

[Angelalex242]

More to the point...

Do we have a problem with the elf being a little better? They ARE supposed to be the best shots of free people. Just like I'd expect Dwarves to rule with axes.

[Deadmanwalking]

More to the point...

Do we have a problem with the elf being a little better? They ARE supposed to be the best shots of free people. Just like I'd expect Dwarves to rule with axes.

Eh...being notably better vs. most things you fight is sort of a problem, yeah. Dwarves are precisely as good as Beornings with axes vs. everything but Orcs (which they're admittedly better against).

But on the other hand, per this simulator, they're already there (at the price of being worse vs. really tough stuff). I don't think that's entirely true, but until we actually figure out the value of a Woodland Bow in play it seems worth talking about.

My thought at the moment, assuming that Woodland Bow puts them roughly on par with other archers vs. weaker targets, is to have the following version of Deadly Archery:

Deadly Archery
...their small knives... would have been of no use against the arrows of the Elves that could hit a bird’s eye in the dark.

Most members of your kin possess a natural talent for hitting the mark when using their bows. You seem to
possess that quality yourself, as your arrows find their target with uncanny precision.

When making an attack roll using a bow, the difficulty of your attack is unaffected by any complications or hindrances, like shooting at medium or long range, in the darkness, or aiming at a very small target.

Additionally, when you score a piercing blow against a foe with four or more Protection dice or who possesses the Great Size ability, your foe must subtract one die from their Protection roll, as you successfully aim through the tiny chinks in even the best armor or weak points in even the thickest hide.

Note: I considered having it kick in at 3 dice, but that seems a little too widely applicable. 4 dice is decently rare, but always nice when it comes up. And then there's the ignoring penalties bit...

EDIT: Edited to be a bit better, since it now kicks in on Great Size as well.

[Angelalex242]

I might add it's not possible for an elf to have 6 body and 4 heart. He at best has 5(8) body and 4 heart (and 5 wits), or he has 6(9) body, 2 heart, 6 wits. That might also be unfairly weighting it in favor of the elf.

Likewise, the Barding should have 6(9) body, 6 heart...2 wits, if he's going that route.

[Deadmanwalking]

I might add it's not possible for an elf to have 6 body and 4 heart. He at best has 5(8) body and 4 heart (and 5 wits), or he has 6(9) body, 2 heart, 6 wits. That might also be unfairly weighting it in favor of the elf.

Likewise, the Barding should have 6(9) body, 6 heart...2 wits, if he's going that route.

My scores have all been with both having Body 5(8). I could make it 6 for both...but don't think that'd change anything meaningfully.

Also...I think Heart only kicks in if a Virtue kicks it in, so it, too, doesn't make a huge difference.