Do you think it is good that the ranger has to be a minimum distance from the enemy to use a bow?

ArchivedUser

^ this was brought up way back either in this thread or another with the same purpose.
For every really fast accurate archer there is an equally fast and accurate swordsman. You really can't compare the potential "best" of one side without accounting for the potential "best" of the other.

Two insane and awesome masters versus each other or two complete dweebs versus each other, same effect.

ArchivedUser

nagash said:

have you never seen touch of ash? it's a close range spell that you have to touch someone at close range. the spell increases the ageing process until you turn to ashes. spells like this should be in ashes.

Vampiric Touch and Icy Grasp are two other close-contact spells I recall from my D&D days. Other spells like Burning Hands had a bit of range, but only a meter or so, if I am not mistaken.

Magic is very versatile when it comes to range, and it would be interesting to see that reflected with spells of differing ranged in AoC. It would also make combat a lot more strategic for mages.

AutumnLeaf said:

Well for mages it's pretty easy to come up with some close range spells, but rangers could even have enchanted arrows that they can simply stab into an enemy close range.

And yet... the force behind an arrow released from full-draw is vastly greater than the force of an arrow delivered via a clumsy stab. Arrows are not at all designed to be effective hand-held weapons. T'would be better for an archer to quick-draw a dagger or short sword for melee combat.

finndo said:

after watching his videos, I recommend searching for Shadiversity and watching his video about lars...  I like shad's video's and hope that Ashes has someone like him providing info about their designs... hint hint (not needing to be him, but someone with his knowledge and ability to research even after making an opinion about something)

I just recently discovered Shadiversity. He definitely produces quality content, and I love when he nerd-rages over the errors others make regarding the proper use of medieval weapons.

ArchivedUser

nagash said:

have you never seen touch of ash? it's a close range spell that you have to touch someone at close range. the spell increases the ageing process until you turn to ashes. spells like this should be in ashes.

Vampiric Touch and Icy Grasp are two other close-contact spells I recall from my D&D days. Other spells like Burning Hands had a bit of range, but only a meter or so, if I am not mistaken.

Magic is very versatile when it comes to range, and it would be interesting to see that reflected with spells of differing ranged in AoC. It would also make combat a lot more strategic for mages.

AutumnLeaf said:

Well for mages it's pretty easy to come up with some close range spells, but rangers could even have enchanted arrows that they can simply stab into an enemy close range.

And yet... the force behind an arrow released from full-draw is vastly greater than the force of an arrow delivered via a clumsy stab. Arrows are not at all designed to be effective hand-held weapons. T'would be better for an archer to quick-draw a dagger or short sword for melee combat.

finndo said:

after watching his videos, I recommend searching for Shadiversity and watching his video about lars...  I like shad's video's and hope that Ashes has someone like him providing info about their designs... hint hint (not needing to be him, but someone with his knowledge and ability to research even after making an opinion about something)

I just recently discovered Shadiversity. He definitely produces quality content, and I love when he nerd-rages over other people's errors regarding the proper use of medieval weapons.

ArchivedUser

I think drawing a bow should be able to be interrupted perhaps? So perhaps you can shoot from point-blank, but getting hit could interrupt your bow draw and even lose the arrow you were trying to draw. I think that this makes the most sense.

ArchivedUser

YES!

But give them a melee snare as well as a jump back of sorts.

ArchivedUser

Nefelia said:

nagash said:

have you never seen touch of ash? it's a close range spell that you have to touch someone at close range. the spell increases the ageing process until you turn to ashes. spells like this should be in ashes.

Vampiric Touch and Icy Grasp are two other close-contact spells I recall from my D&D days. Other spells like Burning Hands had a bit of range, but only a meter or so, if I am not mistaken.

Magic is very versatile when it comes to range, and it would be interesting to see that reflected with spells of differing ranged in AoC. It would also make combat a lot more strategic for mages.

AutumnLeaf said:

Well for mages it's pretty easy to come up with some close range spells, but rangers could even have enchanted arrows that they can simply stab into an enemy close range.

And yet... the force behind an arrow released from full-draw is vastly greater than the force of an arrow delivered via a clumsy stab. Arrows are not at all designed to be effective hand-held weapons. T'would be better for an archer to quick-draw a dagger or short sword for melee combat.

finndo said:

after watching his videos, I recommend searching for Shadiversity and watching his video about lars...  I like shad's video's and hope that Ashes has someone like him providing info about their designs... hint hint (not needing to be him, but someone with his knowledge and ability to research even after making an opinion about something)

I just recently discovered Shadiversity. He definitely produces quality content, and I love when he nerd-rages over other people's errors regarding the proper use of medieval weapons.

I did say enchanted arrows and it was mainly an idea focused on rangers themselves not the option of switching a weapon quickly.

ArchivedUser

Yes... but do you know what is better than using an enchanted arrow for stabby-stabs? An enchanted dagger or short sword. 

You could still use an arrow to stab, but it should be significantly less effective than a proper melee weapon.

So, rather than denying archers the ability to perform their attacks within their minimum range, maybe give them a significant (50% or so) penalty to their damage?

ArchivedUser

Voted yes. While not to far away, a bow should not and can not deal much dmg when within knife-range for sure :P