Deadly Archery

[Insect King]

I am polite and friendly, and I was so until some of you decided to wave-away the questioning newbie as a nuisance.

That's not a view I agree with looking at your comments/posts. It appears that people didn't agree with you and for the most part were polite in pointing out why. The first negative comment you made was as follows:

Don't worry about it too much, it's just another of TOR's bizarre rules that have no real purpose other than fill pages.

No, TOR has rules that are bizarre and fill up pages -- I'm looking at Travel rules for one.

Which can only antagonise fans of the game; even ones that discuss rule additions and alterations. You then moved on to make other comments such as the following:

Awww, what a nice straw man and you made it all for me. Thanks.

Yes, someone created a whole new version of my argument and then attacked that.

I think the magic item rules are ridiculous. Just make magic items you think are appropriate to the game, let the PCs find them as part of their adventures. Don't make them roll dice to see if they find it. It's so arbitrary and useless.

And they are. If you create a magic item for a character, just give it to them in game and don't make them roll for it.

You can still keep playing your game any boring, frustrating and arse-backwards way you want, but I'm still going to run games where players aren't relentlessly punished or taxed just to play the game's story. I prefer they have fun.

The rules are not sacred, they are a means to entertainment. When the rules get in the way of my game they go.

Thank you for not allowing me to play The One Ring by the gracious refusal you disdainfully uttered from your position of self-appointed magnanimity.

This is from me trying to get a cogent answer from someone who patronises and derides others. If anyone doesn't want to answer my question, just don't answer.

None of these were in response to anything of equal rudeness or nastiness, and for the most part they were in response to pretty constructive comments. Othertimes you just made the statements in general - ie, no response to anyone in particular and/or as a first post in a thread.

You can cherry pick all you like but I was courteous when I started posting here but if people deliberately talk down to me, I react to that.

I do notice that the people engaged in these discussions were quick to hit the report button numerous time but haven't opined their own views of the problem. You engaged but no one else.

Personally, I think the vast majority of the posts here in response to you have been exceptionally pleasant and polite and when you've been nasty they have asked you to tone it down, my post included. Othertimes, with perhaps one or two exceptions (pithy one liners that others have made) they've also been incredibly patient; beyond what I think your above (quoted) posts deserve. Granted we all have to read posts in the best possible tone as communicating online is difficult, that old "talking through a keyhole" metaphor, but some of your above posts are simply blatant attacks, unwarrated by what others stated. Quite frankly, grouping them up into the above list made them really look bad and, for me, showed a continued negative style of posting across multiple threads.

I was patient but I don't abide petulance. Don't act like a dick and you don't get treated like one.

Though, after all that is said, shall we start again with a clean slate? I think everyone here would like to do so.

Excellent. I think we all agree that this whole tangent has become an immensely boring waste of time.

Cheers,

Chris.

[Insect King]

So, if no hindrances are applied, the archer doesn't get a +2 to his roll (which might be interpreted if put as a "bonus").

It is a Reward in itself. Deadly Archery isn't needed for it to work, as with other Rewards.

Yeah, but they're mechanically the same: a -2 TN drop works the same as a conditional +2 bonus to a combat check. You deduct the one and add the other.

I prefer to augment to chances to roll a 6 (and therefore, to succeed with a Called Shot), than to re-roll bad dice rollings. For example, if an archer was trying a Called Shot and rolled no 6s, but also no 1s, your rule wouldn't be of help. Mine would.

The single reroll is fine but the player can just take a Mastery Die or Dour-handed or some other quality in bows instead, and that's a whole new die. When I create a feature like this for a game I want it to give the player an edge or benefit he didn't have before, balance it with what that culture has, and hopefully make it do something different than what other features have done before.

I prefer to augment to chances to roll a 6 (and therefore, to succeed with a Called Shot), than to re-roll bad dice rollings. For example, if an archer was trying a Called Shot and rolled no 6s, but also no 1s, your rule wouldn't be of help. Mine would.

Not saying that yours is worse or the like, only that considering what I'd like to achieve (because of my likings, nothing else), mine works best for me.

But yours is better if you want to make elven archers overall a bit better with "normal" shots during combat.

I don't think yours is bad but both are risky. My one does allow more dice to be rolled which would increase the chance of more 6s being rolled subsquently. Perhaps a point of Hope needs to be spent.

Cheers,

Chris.

[zedturtle]

Yeah, but they're mechanically the same: a -2 TN drop works the same as a conditional +2 bonus to a combat check. You deduct the one and add the other.

If I'm understanding Falenthal correctly, there is a significant difference... Hindrance the actual game term represents either a +2 to TN (Moderately Hindered) or +4 (Severely Hindered). As he points out, a +2 bonus to your total would apply even if no Hindrance was applied, whereas affecting the Hindrance effects would only apply if there's a Hindrance in the first place.

In my experience, Hindrance does not come up as often as it might should, and the existing language of the rule points strongly at this being a consideration.

[Angelalex242]

If I may bring this topic back on, well, topic...

Is there a chance we're viewing the virtue wrong, and it was never meant for primary archers? What if it's meant for melee characters who only ever get 1 dice of bow to hit things occasionally as if they were dedicated archers?

[Glorelendil]

If I may bring this topic back on, well, topic...

Is there a chance we're viewing the virtue wrong, and it was never meant for primary archers? What if it's meant for melee characters who only ever get 1 dice of bow to hit things occasionally as if they were dedicated archers?

So...invest a Wisdom point so that on opening volleys you can sometimes hit if you spend a point of Hope? Likely never getting anything more than a normal success, with Injury 14?

I didn't think Deadly Archery could get worse. I was wrong.

[Deadmanwalking]

Just occured to me that, if Woodland Bow meddles with every effect that increases the Injury, Damage, etc of an elven archer, why not change the Woodland Bow's effect? After all, its effect is not canonical or based in any quote.

The problem with this is that Elves of Lorien have access to Deadly Archery as well. With a Greatbow, which are on par with Woodland Bows in most ways. So any Deadly Archery version that really powers up anything greatbows are already good at (especially Injury) are gonna get seriously unbalanced really quick.

[Angelalex242]

I found a way to make it worse. Go me.

Heh. And if it's a King's Envoy build, it's a +2 bonus. Yay. Those 6/2/6 guys (or 5/2/7 guys) really just make it pointless.

[Glorelendil]

Heh. And if it's a King's Envoy build, it's a +2 bonus. Yay. Those 6/2/6 guys (or 5/2/7 guys) really just make it pointless.

I think the #1 sin in game design is choice traps (a.k.a. false choices), but I'm open minded about virtues that key off of attributes. It's only when all other choices become "bad" that it's a problem. I'm even ok with certain Virtues turning other Attributes into false choices (meaning, if you take Virtue X you really must max out Attribute Y) as long as Virtue X itself isn't a false choice.

So, yeah, if you're all excited about Deadly Archery, you've got bigger issues to wor...oops, I mean...don't take King's Envoy.

[Angelalex242]

King's Envoy excarbates the problem the most. King's Envoy with +3 favored body for 6 (9). What does he care about the +2 in the first place? And that's the highest damage rating he can get. Save himself a virtue and buy other stuff. +9'll do it, most of the time. Particularly for dedicated archers.

As a different idea: Deadly archery lets you shoot arrows from any stance. This lets primary archers not put their bows down when they run out of friends. Nobody wants to go from his 5 dice bow to his 1 dice sword.

[Falenthal]

Just occured to me that, if Woodland Bow meddles with every effect that increases the Injury, Damage, etc of an elven archer, why not change the Woodland Bow's effect? After all, its effect is not canonical or based in any quote.

The problem with this is that Elves of Lorien have access to Deadly Archery as well. With a Greatbow, which are on par with Woodland Bows in most ways. So any Deadly Archery version that really powers up anything greatbows are already good at (especially Injury) are gonna get seriously unbalanced really quick.

That's right, but that will happen with any effect of Deadly Archery. Therefore, I think that the effect of Deadly Archery should'nt relate to Damage or Injury, and limited in its applicability (i.e. no overall bonus to hit).

By the RAW, Mirkwood Elves get a better benefit than Lórien Elves: when they use a point of Hope, being Bow a Favourite skill, they get a higher bonus to hit (Favourite Body + Heart vs. Basic Body + Heart). This is compensated by the fact that Lórien Elves do have a higher Damage and Injury. We could argue that, being based on Hope expenditure, and knowing that Lórien Elves have Virtues that allow them to recover more Hope than Mirkwood Elves, the RAW Deadly Archery will be used more often by Lórien Elves than by Mirkwood Elves (who also have Elven Magic to spend their scarce Hope points). So, as you see, I feel it's difficult or impossible to design a Deadly Archery Virtue that isn't a bit more useful for one Culture than for the other.

That's why I proposed an advantatge to hit with a Called Shot, but not to its effects. The Great Bow of Lórien won't help here at all. The new Woodland Bow could help under some circumstances (making the TN lower, but not helping with rolling a Tengwar either). As a Bow is weaker than a Great Bow if the Called Shot is succesful, this kind of compensates.