Quote:
Originally Posted by kure
Back to original question,
In low point campaign with no supernatural aid, dedicated Archer is near useless most time,
and even in ideal condition is not optimal choice.
Before combat,
Lots of post mentioned sneaking, climbing trees and even hunting animals as part of archer role. But all of this feats have nothing to do with archer or bow.
This kind of scouting can be done by anyone in party, so no credit to archer.
In combat,
archer do damage only based on thrust, and hit once per 3 attack of melee.
So even if he could manage 2 hits before melee begin (6+ rounds of running, 30+ yards spotting distance),
past 3rd round of melee combat, melee warriors contribution become more and more better.
Or another point of view, one melee warrior will produce damage as 3 archers.
|
Sorry Kure,
much of the previous discussion has pointed out certain basic assumptions that allows an archer to thrive in Near-Realistic Low-Tech Settings that are contrary to the points you have raised.
Also consider how much of a point budget. At ST11 DX12, 100cp, a character can easily a lot a budget of 4cp on archery, and the rest of the Basic Skills that comes with being a Soldier or a Warrior
Survival
Stealth
Running
Hiking
Climbing
Packing
Swimming
Navigation
Soldier/Warrior
Observation
*tacking
Animal Handling
Even with a 45 to 30 cp budget for just skills, a "realistic" combatant with archer proficiency is still very "kick ass" compared to a more specialized character.
The difference in character creation of Fantasy vs Realistic is that in more realistic situation well rounded skill sets are more the norm because of the more problems that are not "hand waved" in the manner of play. This is reflected in the sample skill set pointed out.
Here is another point of summary.